Specific notes:

- After cautioning the audience at the beginning of the presentation about long monologues as a means of communicating, I wrapped up the presentation with a long monologue.

- Our direction was soft on a couple of the exercises. This resulted in a kind of sponginess in the middle of the two-hour session, with drawn-out explanations by Antonio and me, less focus by the teams, and a rushed ‘third act’ in the last 15 mins.

- As any improviser can tell you, you have to work on pieces of the process at a time. You cannot drop everything you know on your audience all at once. In my explanation of what we call ‘the orchestral model’ of business communication, and the concept we call ‘quantum narrative,’ I got into more detail than the audience was able to absorb in such a short window. ‘Too clever by half,”as they say in Blighty. ‘Ten pounds of potatoes in a five pound bag,” as they say in Boise.

- The teamwork that usually happens during our workshops was not so much apparent in this one. Things stayed more individualized, and less knit-together than we would like.

- The tempo at which we conducted the session was inconsistent. If I had been conducting a piece of music, it would have been in about 20 different time signatures, with me conducting at least part of the performance with my back to the orchestra. Missing cues. Dynamics roller-coastery instead of scenic.

These notes are related to our business objective for the workshop, which was to explain GameChangers and give attendees a sampling of what we do with our clients. At achieving this objective, we give ourselves a 50%. We were only about half as effective as we believe we’re capable of being.

So why are we not upset?

Two reasons: One is that because our process lets us see so clearly where the issues are, we have already taken steps to remedy them before the next open workshop.

The other, bigger, reason is that the outcomes of the session have been extraordinary, better than the outcomes of many workshops where our performance was actually  much better than it was Tuesday. A lot of credit for this goes to the people who were in attendance. One of the points we make in these introductions to GameChangers is to distinguish between objectives of the game, and the outcomes of the game, and wow, has that been our experience since Tuesday.

These are some of the outcomes:

- Our friend Ron Finley, the ‘renegade urban gardener’ connected with our friends Jenna and Adam from TakePart, who were in attendance. TakePart is the digital division of Participant Media. They are going to do a story about Ron.

- Erin Reilly, the creative director of USC’s Annenberg Innovation Lab, spoke yesterday to her faculty committee about having us do a one-day workshop there in March.

- Marcy and Strath Hamilton of Tri-Coast Studios, which is producing a lot of e-books, met a Ruby on  Rails coder named Patrick Maddox, who was in attendance Tuesday.  They’ve been looking for a coder. Now they’re talking to Patrick.

- T.H. Culhane and David Groder, who are working on a robotics education program funded by the U.S. Naval Research Dept., are making a presentation today (Wednesday) at Washington High School in Los Angeles, and are being joined by Ron Finley, who is a Washington High graduate. This is happening as a result of them connecting on Tuesday night.

- T.H. and Groder will soon get introduced by GameChangers associate Jamal Williams, who was in town from D.C. for the Tuesday workshop, to Nii Simmonds, the ‘Nubian Cheetah,’ a Ghanian-born D.C. resident and former investment banker who funds a program called Afrobotics, a robotics competition for African schoolchildren.

- Kevin Wall, who is producing the opening ceremonies and concert for the 2014 World Cup in Rio, was in attendance. Kevin learned for the first time that Fernando Godoy, who used to be an intern in at one of Kevin’s companies, is today a successful internet entrepreneur in Sao Paulo and is a partner in Spirit of Football 2014. Kevin and Fernando are going to meet the next time Kevin is in Brazil.

- Tri-Coast Productions and GameChangers are meeting this coming Monday to discuss two projects–a GameChangers ebook and a video series that would be produced and performed by people from our network of world-class improvisers.

- Andy Sternberg has since Tuesday introduced us to two friends of his whom he believes will be interested in our work.

- We were able to continue a conversation with Nicholle McClelland Betelier, a marketing officer from IdeaLab, that began at a yoga retreat in December.

- A crypto-hipster named Som showed up uninivited, and asked some of the best questions and offered some of the most thoughtful comments of the evening. Thank you, Som, whoever and wherever you are! Please stay in touch!

- My favorite outcome of the evening came about thanks to a ‘gift’ from David Groder. At the very end of the session, after my long-winded closing monologue, Groder asked if we could go around the room and have everyone introduce themselves. All 25 people introduced themselves and described the work they’re doing. It was really remarkable, not only because it completely subverted the normal order of things—introductions at the end instead of the beginning!—but also because the people in attendance are doing brilliant things in the world. Attendees are working in robotics, social media, community development, urban gardening, fashion, cause-related marketing, transmedia storytelling, architecture, criminal law, venture capital, entertainment, academia, e-books, tech, watercraft stabilization, app development, etc. etc. etc. Introductions at the end became a very enjoyable kind of reveal. Almost everyone stayed and talked for half-an-hour or more after the session, and I believe most of that conversation would not have happened if not for David’s gift to the scene.

Never get objectives confused with outcomes. Objectives are what we use to assess and improve our performance. Outcomes happen as a result of having performed. Objectives are finite. Outcomes are unlimited. Objectives create focus. Outcomes generate value.

Post-event conversations were the most productive part of the evening

-

A ’scene’ can be a single meeting or a years-long campaign. It can address an immediate crisis or seek lasting change in an organization’s culture. Whatever the reason for your scene, you always have the ability to apply game structure to it.

In addition to defining game structure, we help our clients sort out productive games from the unproductive ones. It should come as no surprise to anyone that there are a lot of unproductive games getting played out there. They can be unproductive for a lot of reasons. Here’s a big one: Games that treat Objectives and Outcomes as the same thing are not good games.

Objectives are structure. Outcomes are performance. These are two very different things. Here’s an example we sometimes use in our workshops to illustrate this point:

What is the Objective of the game of basketball? It’s to put the ball in the hoop. This objective has not changed since Dr. James Naismith nailed a peach basket to the balcony of the gymnasium at Springfield College in 1891. Other elements of the game, the E the R and the G, have evolved dramatically, the O has not. It is remarkable for its unchangedness.

The Objective: same as it ever was

Now…what are the Outcomes of the game of basketball?  Let your mind play with that question for awhile, and see what kind of responses pop up. Here are just a few that I myself have experienced: the Ireland (Indiana) Spuds high school basketball team; Hoosiers; my first pair of Chuck Taylor white canvas high tops; numb fingers from playing in 30-degree weather at recess; the fact that I first learned about Crispus Attucks because Oscar Robertson played for Crispus Attucks High School; Marv Albert’s arrest and subsequent rehabilitation; LeBron James leaving Cleveland; Dude Perfect; Magic and Bird; Rick Mount; George McGinnis; Wilt vs Russell; a rubber band that I wore on my wrist for a year; the Chuck Taylor black leather high tops that Corey Feldman wore in my film, The Lipstick Camera; the Chuck Taylor brand; the relationship between Spike Lee and Michael Jordan; Bobby Knight; Extreme HORSE with my friend Tim; hoops with my sons and their friends; coaching at the Y; the 2002 and 2003 Loyola Cubs CIF Championships; my friendship with Jamaal Wilkes; Ernie Barnes’ paintings…you get the idea…while there’s only one Objective, there are many possible Outcomes. And that’s just me. Your Outcomes are different from mine. Outcomes are an ever-expending set of possibilities.

This same dichotomy between Objectives and Outcomes is applicable to any game structure for your business. The Objective is the constant; the Outcomes are the infinite unknowns, where all the possibilities and all the upside reside.

Focus on your Objective, yes, by all means, absolutely! From a process standpoint, it is the most important thing, the target, the point of the exercise, it can even be your motivation. It is not, however, where the action is. Not where growth and extension occur.  If the only action you’re open to is achieving your Objective, you’re missing most of the possibilities of the game.

The game is put the ball in the basket. The possibility is Oscar Robertson.

"High Aspirations" by Ernie Barnes

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.

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.

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.

There are two issues with focusing exclusively on our goals.  The first is that the people with whom we share our scenes usually have different goals from ours.   The interviewer’s goal is different from the interviewee’s.  A customer is not interested in helping the salesperson meet a sales quota.  A jealous boss might have the goal of turning an up-and-comer into a down-and-outer.  It’s been known to happen.  Focusing only on our desired outcomes can result in a tug-of-war for control of a scene, severely limiting the scene’s progress and potential.  Not good.

The second, and bigger, issue with being exclusively goal-oriented in our scenes, is that we diminish our potential for breakthrough moves.  Breakthroughs reveal unexpected avenues for productivity.  Breakthroughs can only happen if we are willing to let go of our expectations about what a scene needs to achieve.   And what is a goal but an expectation for a scene?

We can give a scene an excellent reason for being (e.g. ‘Review the sales pipeline.’) without locking into an outcome (’Add ten new prospects.’)  This ‘un-goaled’ scene should be like a baseball game in the movie The Sandlot.  Those kids don’t play to keep score.  They play because playing the game causes things to happen that would not happen otherwise.  It breaks through their everyday existence, and as a consequence their lives become remarkable.  The same can happen with our own brand, it can become remarkable if we let go of our preconceived notions about what our scenes need to be.

When the goal is in our head, it has, in effect, already happened, and what we’re doing in our scenes is trying to re-live history, a very personal and private history that our scene partners likely do not share.  When we let a scene define its own goals, we give ourselves and our scene partners the potential to make history together.   Creating a shared history is what branding is all about.

2.  Give a gift to someone who’s not expecting it.   Helping people look good is a GameChangers trademark.  One way to do it is to give gifts.  A gift does not have to be big, or cost any money, and it does not have to be noticed or acknowledged by anyone, even the recipient.  In some ways it’s better if its not.  A gift can be a small kindness that results in a smile, or it can be a grand gesture that results in a whole new career path.   It can be knowing someone’s name who doesn’t expect you to know it, or writing the line of code that makes a teammate a hero to the team and earns them a fat bonus.   It does not matter.  The most important quality of the gift is that it’s unexpected.

Such gifts are the threads of which a business culture is woven.

3.  Avoid the go-to move.   Whether we’re athletes or advertisers, most of us have a go-to move, something we can rely on to make us shine in every scene we’re in.  For a baseball pitcher, it might be the fastball.  For an advertiser it might be ‘CEO as Spokesperson’ spots.  For a manager good at ‘putting out fires,’ it might be starting fires to put out. The problem with relying on a go-to move is that when we make the same move in every scene, it diminishes our potential to grow and improve.

One way to improve our game is to start making moves we don’t usually make.  We give ourselves permission to make moves we don’t usually make by eliminating the moves we usually do make.  If your strength is talking, spend a scene listening.  If you’re known as a leader, follow for a change.  If you’re known for being analytical, express an emotion.  By limiting your reliance on your go-go-move, you’ll add to your self-awareness, build your repertoire and expand your potential.

Knowing who you are is the first step toward becoming who you can be.

Some of the clean-up work is so vast in scope, the banking industry shitstorm that shows so sign of abating , for example, or our crippling dependence on fossil fuels, that nothing short of a federal government strategy can begin to dig us out of it.

Every one of us, however, can find ways to support the clean-up work on a personal and practical level.  Cleaning house presents us with opportunities.   A chance to evaluate inventory, and eliminate waste.  It can be the impetus for a much-needed remodeling.

Here’s a GameChangers checklist for what to Toss and what to Keep as we clean up and remodel an economy that has been Skulled and Boned into the pathetic shape it’s in today:

TOSS:  Status games.  Business meetings and processes that are all about establishing who’s boss, who’s the Decider, about who has the last word or about stroking someone’s ego, should be sent to the dumpster.

KEEP:  Teamwork.  Meetings and processes that focus on ideas and objectives, in which players support one another and seek agreement instead of dominance, are needed across the business spectrum to rebuild this mess.

TOSS:   Cosmetic transactions.  When money is made by slicing up and repackaging debt without anything tangible getting produced in the process, the product is bad meat that would make even Bluto Blutarsky sick to eat it.  Get rid of the notion that manipulating data is a contribution to your community.  It’s not.

KEEP:  Emotional transactions.   Transactions that connect data to meaningful, emotionally resonant activity like education, energy independence, health care, or even getting people to sing or laugh, belong back up on the mantle.

TOSS:  Excess Consumption.  Having something may be a symbol of achievement, but it is no achievement.  Lots of people have things they did not earn.  Lots of people take more than they need.  Lots of people eat too much.   It’s time to take our focus elsewhere.

KEEP:  Production.  What one builds with what one has is a far better measurement of achievement than what one has.  What you build, not what you own, is how you make your mark in this new world.

TOSS:  Specific outcomes.  Locking into a specific outcome for a process will deny you and your team all the possibilities afforded by the endless matrices of the Networked World.  Burn your expectations and assumptions before they burn you.

KEEP:  Predictable results.  Business success demands a reliable, consistent performance in the marketplace, just as it always has.  the difference is that brands built for the new economy will focus on getting results, not outcomes.  Focusing on results instead of outcomes gives you and your brand exponentially more opportunities for success.

TOSS:  Preaching.  This housecleaning exposes the crooked preachers, biased pundits and smiling Ponzi schemers of the world.  Their word is not gospel, and the gospel is not their word.  Word.

KEEP:  Conversation.  Conversations, especially with people who see a situation from a different perspective than our own, result in the kinds of new ideas it will take to fix the new problems we face together.  From juicy conversations, juicy possibilities flow.

TOSS:  Rigidity.   How could we have kept it around so long?   It’s so ugly.  So poorly designed.  So stiff and uncomfortable.  Get rid of it!

KEEP:  Fluidity.  Ahh.  It fits every situation so perfectly.  It’s relaxing.  We’re so free to move.  Can’t live without it!

TOSS:  Scripting.  The script, along with the hoary concept of the scripted brand narrative, ran out of gas with the  ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ and ‘Mission Accomplished’ scenarios scripted by the Bush-Cheney team.  No script can keep pace with the fast flow of events in the Networked economy.

KEEP:  Improvisation.  In the Networked economy successful brand strategies don’t stick to a script, they align with themes.  By inviting players and audience alike to improvise (e.g. act entrepreneurially) on those themes, brands can build a consistently compelling narrative.

TOSS:  Dogma.  Believing that’s there’s only one way to look at a situation or solve a problem, or insisting that everyone on your team see the world the way you do, is deadly to the process and eliminates a lot of the potential for solving the problem.

KEEP:  Faith.  Every scene you’re in has the potential for greatness.  Believe it.  See it.  Live it.

The gamechanger in this narrative is Bob Cilman, who initiated the productive game that has given such huge gifts to its players. (And they to it.) The improvisation in Young@Heart points the way for anyone looking to initiate productive games in their own lives, or their own lines of work:

“Location, location, location” has become “Community, community, community.” In the Industrial Age, location was everything. It was important to be physically adjacent to the highway. In the Networked World, everyone has access to the highway. One day you’re a couple of kids from China wearing Houston Rockets jerseys and lip-syncing hip-hop, the next day you’re stars. So the question is, what do you build? Cilman laid the foundation for a worldwide community by simply giving elderly people around Northampton, Massachusetts, something worthwhile and important to do. Little by little, this community interfaced with larger communities–the Northampton Arts Council where Cilman became the director in 1989, Talkng Heads fans, David Byrne, the music and film communities. Young@Heart has performed with Cambodian choirs, hip-hop dancers, and, in a revue entitled Flaming Saddles, a gay men’s chorus. Their location did not did not matter nearly as much as the remarkable community they built there.

Design games, not outcomes. In the Industrial Age, games were often designed by reverse-engineering outcomes. Doing this in the Networked World is just plain idiotic.  Why narrow the window of opportunity to a single outcome when networks offer so many possibilities for positive outcomes?  Commitment to a good game opens the window of opportunity to many different positive outcomes. Let’s imagine that instead of committing to the ‘rockin’ seniors’ game, Bob Cilman had instead reversed engineered a game to achieve a particular outcome: Let’s say that outcome was meeting one of his heroes, David Byrne of the Talking Heads. The narrative may have resulted in Bob Cilman meeting David Byrne, true, because Bob Cilman is a determined guy, and he probably could have made that happen. But look at all the other positive things–the tours of Europe, the albums, the DVD, the music videos, the donations, the film at Sundance, the enduring friendships–that never would have transpired if they’d locked into a single outcome. In fact, since it’s almost a certainty that none of the seniors had any personal interest in meeting David Byrne, the game probably would have lost energy and commitment from its players early on.

A theme is the glue of the game. Cilman identified a theme, ‘music as the spirit of youth,’ that has fueled the Young@Heart game for 26 years. When you have identified a compelling theme to underpin your game, communities organize, ideas become action, decisions become easy, crises become manageable. When, in the course of making the documentary, several tragedies befell the group, they never lost their determination to carry on. The spirit of youth is resilient in the face of tragedy.

Commit to the moment. No one is more in the moment than a 93 year old woman performing The Clash’s Should I Stay Or Should I Go?. No one is more aware than a group of seniors belting out James Brown’s I Feel Good that tomorrow is not promised to us. (I feel good now. Tomorrow? Who knows?) What’s promised us is now. The Young@Heart singers are in their 70s, 80s and 90s. Many are feeble. Some are near death. But all of them are as alive as a human being can be when they’re pouring everything they’ve got into a song.

Do what you love. Breakthrough could happen in a day. It might take a lifetime. Bob Cilman and his senior singers were playing this game for a long time before world outside Northampton took notice. There is absolutely no way of knowing. The first quality of a productive game is that you love playing along. Love the process and the product will come.

Bob Cilman has made a difference in people’s lives. His journey has been rewarding and fun. It all came about because he never deviated from the game, or from his reasons for initiating it. In an interview on the web site PopSyndicate, Cilman says, “We’re not there to make people feel good, we’re there to make people work on something that will make other people feel like – Wow! I’ve been inspired by what you do, that’s a whole different process.”

A gamechanger identifies and plays a productive game. Focuses on preparation more than planning. Is more concerned with getting results than in producing specific outcomes. Seddiqui could not be playing this game if he hadn’t prepared. And he could not have imagined a particular outcome. (Note that his ‘50/50/50 objective’ for the game is different from its ‘business outcomes’.) What Seddiqui trusted was that he was initiating a game that would produce results, and cause positive things to happen. New relationships would form. There’d be new experiences had. Skills learned. Insights gained. Possibilities awakened.

He is not sitting at home living the inevitable bad economy cliche, sending out job applications and getting rejected. Instead he created a game that generates acceptance in massive doses. David Seddiqui is creating a narrative in which he gets 50 job offers–and he’s going to accept all of them! Good story.

In Living the Map, Daniel Seddiqui is sending a three great big, important messages to the world:

1) All work is honorable. We should not judge a person by what it is they do, but by how they do it. Respect the work, respect the worker.

2) So what if you have 50 different jobs in your life? That’s a goal. Working in one place, at one job forever is drudgery. This is one generation telling another that it can stick the gold watch up its ass.

3) There’s work, lots of it, that needs doing. But you’ve got get out and find it, player. It is not going to find you.