« Why fireworks and brands don't go together | Main | Fearless »
Thursday
Jul022009

Being right or wrong is irrelavant. . .

JUST START CONDUCTING THE DOGGONE EXPERIMENTS (which by the way folks. . . takes some guts).

In my previous blog post I talked about being fearless, which isn't easy. Being fearless means trying something new, travelling the road less travelled, doing what others won't do, and even putting your ideas and thoughts out there for others to ponder (which leaves your theories open to criticism, to be dismissed or even outright lambasted). Many people don't like to be criticized, or told their ideas are bogus, or they're wrong - which is understandable - but at the end of the day, this does you no favors. You can only grow and flourish by knowing that what you believe is good, bad, sound, or weak and then improving upon it. And that means putting yourself out there.

Now an excellent example in fearlessness is Chris Anderson (editor of wired magazine and author of the bestseller the Longtail). He is about to release his second book called FREE - The future of a radical price, which posits the idea that in today's digital marketplace, the most effective price is no price at all. Now Malcolm Gladwell (best selling author of the Tipping Point, Blink and Outliers) swoops in with a review in the New Yorker and says Chris's whole premise is flawed and that the whole idea of free is actually failing as we speak. Then Seth Godin counters and says Malcolm Gladwell is wrong and states that regardless or what you think about free it's happening and is changing the world right now, as we know it. 

Now from my perspective whether Chris, Malcolm or Seth is wrong or right is besides the point. The more relevant issue at hand is that these gents understand being fearless. And they understand being fearless requires proposing new experiments, proto-typing your ideas and postulating your arguments (right or wrong) in our current brave new world.  Most or many people are simply not willing to be brave enough to do this - because people don't want to be wrong or don't want to be seen as having made a mistake and proposed the wrong theory or approach.  But as the old cliche saying goes. . . nothing ventured nothing gained.

Now the plain reality my friends is that we are human beings, susceptible to not always being correct. Its a reality. The only answer is if you happen to be wrong, ok fine, take your licks and then get right back in the ring. This is the only way.

Now if you are serious about wanting to successfully build a 21st century brand, I suggest you get fearless quick and start conducting you own new experiments now.

Reader Comments (4)

True. I've been writing for over a decade, but I used a pseudonym(s) the whole time, partially out of cowardice (the other part was about feeling mor free to be honest without the worry of backlash from family/friends when I let "cats out of the bag"). About a year ago, I started writing (sometimes) with my own name (at least my rel intitials). What I hadn't realized was how much the pen names had protected me from readers tearing my sh*t up (some with legitimate criticism, others b/c they misinterpreted what I was saying or just enjoyed the sport of it) b/c they couldn't contact my imaginary "nom de plume" person. When I put myself "out there" with real name, it was all gravy, love/love, until I broached a touchy subject (amongst many women of color), "HATERS".
http://clutchmagonline.com/lifeculture/feature/haters/

So, I got mad negative feedback, right? In a way I had never experienced before.....and when people don't like WHAT you have to say, they sometimes attack where it hurts (HOW you said it--i.e. you're a krappy writer). A lot of it hurt my feelings. I felt like defending myself. Explaining to some readers how they had got it all wrong. But when the bruised ego healed, I was able to step back and actually get better b/c of it. I was able to see which criticisms had merit and which were about the readers' own inability to deal with their core issues. And, best of all, I realized where I had FAILED to communicate well. That, ESPECIALLY with sensitive topics where some people would be resistant to the message, if I wanted to be heard, I would need to be much craftier with language. It became a creative challenge that has informed how I approach other, more important subjects and has made me ( I think) a better communicator.

Definitiely not so caught up in being "right" anymore. I do try to think through my ideas, but I also try to use language that leaves some room for disagreement, that leaves room for a dialogue.
November 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterAlison Claire
Hey Alison,

I proposed two years ago on another platform that "thinking outside the box was dead" and I got many a response that I was way off. I was actually taken aback because I never been "attacked" like that before. I put my ego aside and reviewed the responses to the best of my ability from a neutral position. It helped me out alot. Toughened me up. Keep doin' your "bidness" and keep pushin'. You're doing phenomenal stuff!
November 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterRasul Sha'ir
Random....did you know that Malcolm Gladwell is Colin Powell's COUSIN? I knew dude was part 'Black' (i know 'peeps' when I see em), but I didn't know about the Colin thing. Trippy!

p.s. i caught that "Think at the Intersection" post of yours a while back & TOTALLY DUG IT. Thought you were so right on the money with that analogy.
November 16, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterAlison Claire
I did actually. Don't remember from where I heard it, though.
November 16, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterRasul Sha'ir

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.