Why Trust is the Killer App

I’ve been listening to NPR in the morning, following the news about international politics, and these points keep being made over and over:

• In (international) relationships, trust is important and vital to getting anything done.
• The kind of reception leaders get make all the difference in what they are willing to do or not do for the other Country.
• The view of the relationship from the outside- the (media) perception- does not always reflect what’s going on behind closed doors.
• What other people see, through the media or with their own eyes effects their perception of a whole Country and their citizens.

Does any of this sound familiar?  (Let me take a moment now and tell you if this “trust” thing doesn’t resonate with you, please go out an purchase “Trust Agents” by my friends, Chris Brogan and Julien Smith immediately.)

The talk about trust, building strong relationships, and what happens when that trust equation fails is a thread that seems to be running through more and more news reports, or I’m finally paying attention and have a new filter through which to view this news.  So if you thought Chris and Julien’s book about the importance of trust and relationships was important for business, what could the same perspective do for relationships not only between individuals, but between nations?

Before you write this off as silly, think what the lack of trust does.  When a Country doesn’t follow through on it’s promises, relationships suffer.  When Israel and the Palestinians seem to go out of their way to provoke each other, it starts to sound like the fourth grade boys teasing each other on the playground, begging for a fight.  Unfortunately, this fight involves serious weapons and the loss of life, not a bloody nose and being sent to the principal’s office.  (I guess the US gets to play Principal in trying to get these kids to place nicely with each other and respect each other’s boundaries, but we call it Peace Talks and unfortunately, you can’t call their parents at home to make them behave.)

And just like in your relationships with friends and family, helping others goes a long way to building trust and constructive relationships.  In a news report this morning on the BBC, a reporter spoke to a Pakistani official who said that when the people saw Americans and American helicopters coming to help them after the devastating earthquake, moving concrete and rescuing people, their perception of the US and Americans in general started to change.  Treating people in other countries like neighbors, instead of as “the other”, as “foreign”, but instead as just people goes a long way to changing hearts and minds about what an “American” is or stands for.

The coverage of international politics sounds more and more like a middle school playground, or a daytime soap opera, where trust and drama and small provocations have similar effects as they do on an actual playground, just painted with a much broader brush.  And just like on the playground, trust is a currency that facilitates relationships, and a lack of trust makes relationships way more complicated.

Trust, I tell my kids, is the one thing that can’t be easily fixed or replaced when it’s broken.  It’s fragile.  When you have it, it can create value- people will do you favors, cut you deals, and treat you well, whether we’re talking neighbors, businesses, or Countries.  When trust is in short supply, people start acting suspiciously.  They look out for themselves first, and others second.  There’s less emphasis on what’s mutually beneficial, but on a competitive advantage- winning rather than compromise.  The dynamics of the relationship totally change, and friction builds up- there’s more checkpoints, more regulation, more checking the score- and all of this friction slows up the process of actually getting things done.

As I look for fundamental concepts that are universally important at every level of human interaction, Trust ranks up there as one of the most important fundamentals we need in order to make progress of any sort.  A lack of trust signals problems that are hard to resolve, since trust requires faith and taking risks that others are worthy of that investment.  Fear that others will not follow through, that they will lie and break our fundamental trust keeps us frozen in time and place, and keeps us from acting.

Rick LaVoie talks about disappointment as being one of the most powerful emotions- the emotional nuclear weapon, we should use only rarely, if ever, with people in our lives.  It makes us feel shame and injures us to the core.  Our fear that trust will be broken is our defense against that disappointment, and the anticipation of disappointment, of having invested trust unwisely causes people to do irrational things, even aggressive, provocative things to strike first and to avoid getting hurt.

If we can remember these things for our personal relationships, if we can apply Chris and Julien’s advice in our business relationships, there’s a chance we can even make things better on a bigger scale as well.

What do you think?  Is this crazy? Or is trust the fundamental currency we all trade in, even when we think it’s all about dollars and cents?

Tags: apps, business, chris brogan, foreign relations, Israel, julien smith, NPR, Pakistan, relationships, trust, trust agents

The Digital Generation Gap

Last week, the Archer Group in Wilmington held a Trust Summit at duPont’s Theater N, featuring presentations by Mitch Joel, Julien Smith and Chris Brogan, some of my favorite people ever.  One of the stories Mitch told keeps coming to mind again and again.  It can best be summed up by saying “There’s no going back, only moving forward.”  As businesses are coming to terms with what digital communications channels are doing to business, we have to keep in mind that we can’t rewind time back to what we’re used to and comfortable with-  times have changed and there’s simply no going back.

To this point, I”m reading a great book by the vastly under-appreciated Seymour Papert entitled The Connected Family: Bridging the Digital Generation Gap.   It seems to me  that the phrase “Digital Generation Gap” describes  the core problem businesses are having these days- the digital generation gap and its disruption of business as usual is causing all sorts of problems and pain.

People are simple creatures at heart.  We are built to try to make our lives as easy and simple as possible.  Occam’s razor rules the day.  We want what we want when we want it.  We respond to positive reinforcement, and stop doing the stuff that’s difficult, unless we see a light at the end of the tunnel, and know the path will yield results.  We can get this wrong from time to time, of course, but the more assurance we have of success up front, the more patient we’re willing to be.

Take the case of the flashing twelve on the VCR, or get used to a new cell phone.  These are tasks that can be done or ignored in large part, if you can use work arounds, but in each case, the benefit of getting the small task done makes other things possible.  Program the time on the VCR or DVD player, and you can record shows when you’re not home.  Get used to the software of your new phone, and you can take advantage of more features.  Children and young people have grown up in a world where they readily adapt to the rules and structure of these new systems, but I would bet most families have some members who have instead decided technology is just too complicated for them and it’s easier to maintain the old ways, until they can no longer avoid it.

My mother in law, for example, wanted CD’s for Christmas, and I bought her an ipod touch instead.  She can have all her music available all the time now, and no need to worry about carrying around all those CD’s, but she still worries that she can somehow break it or otherwise make a mistake.  She teaches classes online, but computers seem complicated, they seem to break for no rational reason (yes, she is on an old Windows machine) and they’ve made her feel silly and dumb, and so she resists doing anything new.  She can see the advantages, but the thought of learning yet another new way to do things doesn’t excite her as much as scare her from trying. Trying to convince businesses to try a social media strategy for building more business feels the same way.  What’s worked in the past feels comfortable, and while they may have gradually adapted to things like email marketing, asking them to try something like Facebook or Twitter, and the whole method of engagement they’ve been using gets turned on its head- it’s scary, and there’s no guarantees that it will be successful for them, regardless of the number of case studies coming out.

We have a whole generation of people in management and decision making authority who see the world around them changing, with no real stability in sight.  They’ve been through the betamax to VCR changes.  They’ve gotten rid of all their old 8-tracks and cassettes and adopted CD’s and maybe even digital music and photography.  But they worry that what’s great today is going to be outmoded or out of fashion tomorrow, just when they finally feel comfortable with what they know and are doing.  And they’re right- things will continue to change.  The flood water is rising, and while you might be waiting for the river to crest and recede, I think we all have to get in a boat and start paddling together, because staying still isn’t the answer- you’ll drown and fall farther behind.

I’ve grown up with computers changing rapidly around me, and my kids are even more used to living in a rapidly evolving world than I am.  They still are more eager to experiment and take risks than I am.  I keep hoping to develop some sort of flow and pattern to my work to become more efficient, but that is coming more and more from adaptation than stagnation.  I need those reminders from time to time that just because I always “do it this way” does not mean there’s not a better and faster way to do it coming up tomorrow.  This sense of constant change is definitely anxiety-provoking, but denial isn’t helping.  Like sharks, we need to keep swimming (and experimenting) to stay alive.

The other part of the Digital Generation Gap that causes problems is the sense of community that grows through hazing.  There aren’t any more sure things and guarantees like there used to be- if you followed the rules, you would get rewarded later on- pain first, profit second. (Seth Godin discusses this brilliantly in Linchpin.)  We want people to do it the way we had to, so it’s hard and they appreciate the journey we had to go through, we tell ourselves.  Yet I never took any of the “pain from the depression” stories my grandparents told very seriously, and their struggle didn’t help me all that much- just because they couldn’t call their neighbors or watch TV, what did that mean to me as a child or young adult?  Somehow if I didn’t use the phone, I would have better moral fiber?  I didn’t believe it then, and I know my kids don’t believe it now when I tell them similar stories about my childhood.

Someone asked me recently if the podcasts we were doing for medical resident education was providing them “cliff notes” to knowledge.  Is it letting them off easy?  Why should it be any easier for them than it was for us?  In the end, I am more concerned that my doctor knows the right thing to do and why than how they learned it, but I also understand there’s a richness of experience that comes not from just reading a review of a book, but actually reading the whole thing.  I think the short cuts, if you want to call them that, are really about making the on-ramps to knowledge and experience easier, so you have time (hopefully) to reflect and gain deeper knowledge once you are engaged with the possibilities.

And as I write those words, I think about how this is basically the model for marketing and advertising.  We try to gain people’s attention and tease them with the prospect of our product or service, to let them see how our offering solves problems or makes their life easier, not more difficult.  We all want short cuts and friendly user experiences, so people can get to the heart of the matter- whether that’s advancing knowledge, buying a product, engaging our experience and expertise for money.  We can’t all be expert at everything, so we look for short cuts and anything that will ease our journey.  No one has to reinvent the wheel from scratch- we start out by sitting on a mountain of knowledge,  and our job is to contribute to that as best we can for our kids.

We may all carry the pain of our hazing- of the problems and experiences that made us the people we are today, but that’s no reason to make sure everyone else has to experience the same thing over and over again, ad infinitum.  We’ll close the digital generation gap in part by remembering how fun it can be to try something new, make mistakes and get on with it.  We learn most by experimenting, and more and more of life requires us to be adaptive rather than stagnant.  It doesn’t always mean it will be cheap.  It doesn’t guarantee success.  There’s risk involved.  But in the end, we learn more by moving forward than standing still, hoping it will stop raining.

(And don’t forget to check out Chip and Dan Heath’s new book about change, called Switch.  One of the best reads so far this year.)

Tags: adaptation, archer group, change, chris brogan, digital generation gap, experimenting, julien smith, linchpin, seth godin, Seymour Papert, six pixels of separation, social media, switch, trust agents

Personal Branding

At the very first Podcamp Boston, CC Chapman and Mitch Joel did a great presentation on Personal Branding that altered the way I approached my web projects.  Instead of always staying in the background, I learned how important it was to own your blog and podcast, add your personality into the mix, and give your projects a human face and voice.  This is still excellent advice, for businesses or individuals.  Without a sense of personality, of humanity to our writing and work, we lose the most compelling aspect of it, and what people want the most- connections and affinity with others. (I’ll save the diatribe on Maslow’s Heirarchy of human needs for another post.)

There’s a small downside to personal branding, though.  When some web personalities become really successful, like Robert Scoble and Guy Kawasaki, they become not just a personal brand but a brand unto themselves.  They become a product.  And people expect different things out of products than they do people.

Products are supposed to be available on demand, whenever we want them.  For example, I am in the process of replacing the “twitter van”- my old Toyota Sienna minivan with over 197,000 miles on it, with something new.  The old girl is just sad looking at this point, and my husband has declared enough is enough, so I am updating my “personal brand” with a new car.  We’ve been shopping for cars for some time, but I was disappointed to find out the brand and model we wanted were sold out of 2009’s so I have to wait for a 2010.  Dealers were surprisingly blasé about selling me a car.  I would have expected them to be a bit more enthusiastic about the prospect, but only one dealership did any sort of work to really see when the models would be available, see what they could order, and give me a great deal.  When I took this offer to another dealership closer to my home to see if hey would match it, they seemed incredulous that any of this was possible.  Yet, here I sit, with the VIN number of the car in hand, awaiting its delivery in the next few days.  The bottom line in terms of branding is that I expected with this brand that the Company as a whole should be happy that I want a car from them, that they should have them ready for me unless I want something really unusual, just as if I were buying a bottle of ketchup.   And as a brand, I expect they should be willing to do at least a little to make sure I don’t go off and decide to get the large purchase elsewhere.

But when people become brands, they can never be exactly like a car or a bottle of ketchup.  They can produce great books, like Trust Agents or Six Pixels of Separation, (both written by friends of mine), that act as products or souvenirs of the people and their ideas.  But the people themselves don’t scale the same way.  They still have lives and families and friends; they need to sleep and eat and have private time.  But some of this gets murky once personal branding and actually branding start to merge.

Think about this in terms of celebrity.  I think it really started with the Beatles.  The band became more than just records and music.  They became icons, they became lunchboxes and action figures and now even video games, many years after their initial fame for just being musicians and song writers.  Now you see the merchandising of fame and celebrity being as important as what ever someone did to become famous in the first place, but what gets lost in the hype are the people themselves.  A quick trip to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame will bring this all into relief, as you see how many people get chewed up by the fame machine, and see the few that have managed to survive it.

We don’t always consider how weird and difficult a childhood someone like Michael Jackson or Lindsay Lohan have had.  We don’t think or look at them empathetically, as people.  We look at them as side shows, as entertainment, and when they seem to crack up, we say “Well, they asked for it, what did they expect?”  On some level, they just did what they did best, acting or signing or writing or whatever.  The rest became the business of being a celebrity, which has its privileges and up sides, but has just as many down sides as people take random pot shots at you, or think you have some magic you can lend them, or give them a big break so they can be just like you, or whatever.

Celebrity, the height of personal branding, breeds a certain amount of expectation and neediness in others.  We expect our celebrities to be the bottle of ketchup we can get a fix of whenever we need.  We expect them to keep on delighting us with every new project and we’re more than happy to express crushing disappointment when our appetites aren’t fed.  And the media, professional and amateur, seems only to happy to find something to criticise at every turn.  We think “Oh, what a big head they have now that they’re big shots.”     Or “Well, you don’t seem to remember that you used to be just like us before you got lucky.”  Or “Why should I feel sorry for them?  They have it easy.”  Or “Well, they’re snobby now- I can’t even seem to talk to them anymore- I guess we aren’t really friends.”

All of this is ridiculous, of course.  All that’s happened is that a greater number of people constantly want the personal attention and adoration of the person whose “made it”, and that the person can’t scale like their product can.  All this drama is happening on the side of the audience, not from the person on the pedestal, and the person can’t do much other than watch it happen, because the cat is out of the bag, and there’s little hope of getting it back in.

I don’t think there’s any easy answers here.  I think part of it is for all of us to realize that personal branding is a great thing, but once you reach the product stage, there are hidden traps along with the benefits.  And I think this is meant as a wake up call for all of us who have friends with strong personal brands, to remember that our friends still need the same love and support and attention they always got from us, even if it doesn’t always come back reciprocally- they are trying to scale, but they’re finding themselves trying to be people in a product loving world.  And that seems like a busy but pretty lonely place to be.

Tags: CC Chapman, lindsay lohan, maslow's heirarchy, michael jackson, Mitch Joel, personal branding, rock and roll hall of fame, seth godin, six pixels of separation, trust agents

Examples of Good Disclosure

When it comes to the new FTC regulations regarding disclosure in advertising, the best way to learn what to do is to read the examples given in the Guidelines themselves, or to see examples of how disclosure is done well, so you can model your disclosure accordingly.

Blogging/Magazine Article Example

One great example is a piece that Kristin Brandt from the Manic Mommies podcast did in a recent article for Real Simple Magazine.  For “teaching” purposes, I’l excerpt some examples here, with permission of the author.  Kristin was reviewing different sets of headphones, several of which she has acquired in association with her podcast, Manic Mommies.

Here’s what I’ve discovered – there is no one perfect solution. Instead, I’ve found a couple favorite headsets which, together, make the (almost) perfect solution for me:

Apple In-Ear Headphones with Remote and Mic ($79)

I’m certainly not the first person to complain about the earbuds which come with my iPhone (my biggest issue is they wouldn’t stay in my ear). But I liked the combination of a headset which I could use to listen to podcasts and music, as well as talk on the phone. So, upon the recommendation of some of my Facebook friends, I purchased a pair of Apple In-Ear Headphones, which come with three sets of ear cups, meaning I could select the size which worked best for me (and stayed in my ear).

I don’t really use the remote function of the headset, so if I had to do it again, I might chose the JBL ROXY In-Ear Headphones with Microphone which has the same listening/speaking capability at half the cost.

In this first paragraph, Kristin talks about what she purchased and who recommended them to her.  She probably did not have to say her Facebook friends recommended these to her, and she was not legally obligated to do so, but it works with the narrative perfectly, and sets up the other sources of the products below.  This is probably a case of more disclosure than perfectly necessary, but it also sets her up as a credible source, because she is talking about where she gets her information before trying a product.  Next paragraph:

iFrogz Ear Pollution Toxix ($19.99)

Sometimes, like when I’m exercising or editing our podcast, I just want a simple pair of headphones. I have a ton of “free” headphones kicking around the house, but most slip off my head and have terrible sound quality.

When I was sent two pairs of Toxix headphones to try, I actually thought they were for the kids. But after using them while on the treadmill, I came to appreciate these deceptively cute pair of headphones. They are well designed to stay on your head, even if you are bouncing around, they are tough enough to throw into my laptop case and at just under $20 I don’t worry about letting the kids use them. My kids have co-opted the headsets we received, which gives me an excuse to buy a pink pair for myself.

This is a great example, where Kristin says she was sent two pairs of headphones to try, and liked them enough she’s willing to buy a pair herself.  While she might want to say who sent her the headphones, she has disclosed that she did not purchase them herself- this is an example of a good disclosure that lets the reader know what the writer has received and they can figure out the credibility of the writer accordingly.  Example Three:

Jabra Halo ($129)

I’ll admit that I’ve dreamed of being able to cut the cord, and listen to my iPhone without a headset cable getting in my way (how many times have I dipped a cable into paint or caught it on something). Which is why I was so excited when we received the Jabra Halo Stereo Bluetooth headset at Manic Mommies HQ. After charging the headset, I was able to pair my iPhone to the headset and was soon listening to tunes sans wires. It was awesome.

I did have one issue with the headphones – the volume control is, well, difficult to control. Sliding your finger up and down the side of one of the ear pieces is supposed to control the volume. But I found it was very touchy and, in the end, I didn’t seem to be able to control the volume much. They also cost more than I would normally pay for a pair of headphones, so I can understand how they may not be right for everyone.

Again, Kristin discloses that they got this headset through Manic Mommies HQ- clearly a promotional item sent to them, in hopes they would review it.  Kristin then does a great review of the pros and cons of the item.  We know she did not purchase the item herself, and her review seems honest and straightforward.  This should please both the person promoting the headset and the FTC because the review is based on the experiences of an actual user, with disclosure as to what sort of exchange or quid pro quo (ie. sample headset) was involved, so any consumer could figure out the believability of the review.

Podcasting example

Another great example of disclosure can be found on almost any episode of Marketing Over Coffee.  Chris Penn and John Wall regularly not only thank their sponsors, but when talking about their use of Blue Sky’s email service, or Hubspot’s various products or ventures,  they mention that they have also been sponsors of the show.  No one is left with any unclear or misleading impression of what Chis and John’s interest in promoting the sponsors might be, and when they talk about the products and services, they are doing it as genuine customers of the services they discuss.  As long as Chris and John disclose the name of the sponsors, and whatever products they get to use or play with, if provided for free or as part of a larger sponsorship or product placement, they satisfy all the FTC requirements well.

Chris does Marketing over Coffee on his own; it’s not part of his job at the Student Loan Network.  But you’ll notice if Chris talks about his day job, it’s an example of what they do during the day.  This could be seen as a promotion or testimonial about the day job, however, this is not a communication covered by the new FTC regulations.  Why?  Because the Student Loan Network is not and has not paid Chris to talk about their products on Marketing Over Coffee- there is no quid pro quo regarding Chris’s possible endorsement on Marketing over Coffee and its blog.  Therefore, no disclosure is necessary.  Chris is clearly interested in having us all use the great services the Student Loan Network provides, because it’s what he does, but this is not a paid endorsement, so it is not subject to a fine if Chris talks about his day job and forgets to mention the name of his company at the time.

Current Example- This Post

The information given above has not been paid for by anyone nor written in exchange for any product or service- it is a non-commercial transaction.   I don’t even have any affiliate ads other than a link to my Amazon Store on the “Building Blocks” page of this site, so I will tell you that all the content I produce here is done free of any sponsorship whatsoever at this point.  If you decide to buy a book I like from my Amazon store, they will give me a few pennies as a bounty on the sale, so to speak, but it’s usually less than a dollar per book- equivalent to a postage stamp.

I have, on occassion, received an item in the mail and have disclosed where it came from when I have reviewed the same and will continue to do so.

Now, while I do not formally have to disclose that I happen to know and like John, Chris and Kristin and consider them all friends, it’s probably  something that makes these examples more valuable to you, the reader.  And this is what is at the heart of the FTC’s new guidelines- they want to make sure consumers and readers of reviews, endorsements and testimonials understand what they can realistically expect and make sure they aren’t getting ripped off.  They have to have information to know how biased the reviewer may or may not be; they have to have information in order to judge the trustworthiness of the reviewer before the rule of Caveat Emptor or “Buyer Beware” takes over.

I wouldn’t have to disclose any relationship with anyone in these examples, because this is a non-commercial transaction, at best taking place within the Trust Economy, as Chris Brogan and Julien Smith might say.  It’s outside the regulation of the FTC, since there isn’t an exchange or expectation of a quid pro quo.

I hope these examples help- please keep asking questions in the comments, and I’ll try to help you sort out what may or may not be covered.  Again, the regulations go into effect December 1, 2009, and we’ll learn more and more about what’s okay and what’s not as more and more cases in the gray area are brought up.

And the bottom line is: when in doubt, disclose.  These are good rules, helping everyone be straightforward and honest about their opinions and biases for the public.  There’s nothing onerous and evil about any of this.  And if we’re lucky, blatant spam on social networks might ease up a bit, too.  Here’s hoping.

Tags: chris brigan, christopher Penn, FTC, john wall, julien smith, kristin brandt, manic mommies, Marketing over coffee, regulations, trust agents

Life as a Game

Chris Brogan had an interesting blog post about Levelling Up, or how to get your business game or life to the next stage, the next challenge, just like in a video game.  As I read the post, I realized my comments were enough for a full blog posts, so you may want to read Chris’s post first before reading further.

3 Things I Try To Remember when Life is a Game

1. Accepting Failure as part of success.  When we think about life or business as a game, it can help frame your mindset about not taking everything too seriously, and reminding you that making mistakes and getting do-overs are possible.  Having kids who sometimes seem afraid to be wrong or to fail despite having plenty of gaming experience, makes me think that I need to emphasize these points to them, so they may become a little braver at stepping out of their own comfort zone and stretch themselves a bit in order to progress, rather than paying it safe all the time.  Failure leads to learning, and while the quick and non-catastrophic failures in video games, followed by small and frequent rewards, is exactly what makes them so addicting and rewarding, we need to transfer more of this experimental attitude into our daily lives.

2. Pacing. Not everybody plays a game at the same speed.  There are those that try to master it in one day, others who take detailed notes and create guide maps and walk-throughs for others, those that ask for help, seek cheats and short cuts, and those that slowly persevere, doing it their own way, solving each puzzle on their own, no matter how frustrating.  Going at your own pace, the one you are comfortable with, is perfectly fine.  You don’t have to go or do the same things as everyone else- there are multiple pathways to victory, and each has its own virtues.  It can be hard to maintain your own sense of pace when others seem to be doing more, going faster, maybe even reaping rich rewards.  But your pace has its own benefits, and if you are constantly comparing yourself to others, it’s easy to lose a sense of where you are going.

For example, I’ve signed up to walk the Philly Half-Marathon.  This is a big fitness goal for me, and I have a training schedule I’m trying to stick to, and often walk with a few friends.  Their pace can be quicker than mine, but I am confident that by taking my time, worrying about putting one foot in front of the other, working up in distance and then worrying about time, is what feels right to me and will get me to the finish line just as well as people who are worried about time and pace from the very beginning.  The focus is different, the path is different, but we’ll each walk that 13.1 miles and get to the end under our own power, despite having taken differently paced journeys to the goal.

3. Cheats and Shortcuts can be helpful- ask for help.  My kids frequently want to buy “cheatbooks” or code books, that contain secrets within games they own, to make things easier along the path.  I regularly object to these, in part because taking short cuts to finish a game that costs $50 seems like shortening the lifespan of this investment considerably.  But sometimes, we all need help.   There’s a puzzle we don’t understand; we lack some experience that would shed light on our problems; we’re frustrated and clearly getting in our own way on the path to success.

It can be difficult to ask for help, from friends, families, teachers, mentors- it can make you feel inadequate.  We can’t rely on others to rescue us all the time, but when you’re stuck, reaching out for help isn’t a sign of weakness, but a sign of strength and self-insight.  When I feel boxed into a corner in my thoughts, often a quick call or email to someone like Chris Penn or CC Chapman can help me put a new spin on my problems, and at least take a look at them from a fresh perspective.  Even calling my mom or dad can help tremendously- if it’s a kid issue, they certainly have more experience than I do when it comes to raising teens, and will laugh at me and with me about the crazy stuff we go through.

Knowing when to call for help, and when you are relying on help is often tricky.  In school, it was easier to ask for help, and the deadlines and project specifications are often much more precise than in real life.  Heck, my kids get rubrics for everything, but I have yet to see a rubric for being the perfect mom, or creating a successful business.  Part of this is because no matter how many How To books you read, success is defined internally as much as it is externally.  No one else can set your path for success, because what that means is different for everyone.

That’s the biggest obstacle to using game theory in real life, actually.  Life does not come with a “You’ve Won!” graphic and a place to enter your initials.  The rewards and punishments creep up on you from time to time, they’re not always predictable or evenly spaced.  They can be cumulative, from decisions made long ago, by you, or even by your family.  Randomness plays a big factor- are you in the right place at the right time?  Can you recognize opportunity when it comes knocking?  Have you overlooked valuable opportunities because you thought they seemed small and insignificant at the time?

Life is a much more open-ended game, where the journey is as important as the ending.  It’s all about how you use your experience and your assets to level up, if you want, or stay at the same level, looking for mastery before racing ahead.  For me, while I can envy those getting to their destination before I do, moving at my own pace, at my own comfort level, has had its own benefits.  While you can’t forget to challenge yourself to extend your skills and to grow, more important is that you do it when you’re ready and prepared for the challenges ahead, and give it all you got.

What do you think?  When do you accelerate or decelerate your pace?  How do you get to your goals?  What does success look like to you?

Tags: chris brogan, game theory, julien smith, pacing, trust agents