Unknown Pleasures

The title of one of my favourite (and iconic) albums is Unknown Pleasures by Joy Division. The title probably comes from Marcel Proust’s Remembrance of Things Past. I have (honestly) tried to read it, but it is a long novel in seven volumes known both for its length and its theme of involuntary memory, the most famous example being the episode of the madeleine. The narrator begins by noting, For a long time, I went to bed early. He comments on the way sleep seems to alter one’s surroundings, and the way habit makes one indifferent to them. As a neuroscience trainer, I love the idea of getting less sleep.

Listen to the silence, let it ring on. Eyes, dark grey lenses frightened of the sun. We would have a fine time living in the night, Left to blind destruction, Waiting for our sight. – Transmission (Joy Division)

Pleasure is usually describes as the broad class of mental states that humans and other animals experience as positive, enjoyable, or worth seeking. It includes more specific mental states such as happiness, entertainment, enjoyment, ecstasy, and euphoria. In psychology, the pleasure principle describes pleasure as a positive feedback mechanism, motivating the organism to recreate in the future the situation which it has just found pleasurable. According to this theory, organisms are similarly motivated to avoid situations that have caused pain in the past. And then punk came along and I was inspired to know more.

Joy Division were formed in Salford, Greater Manchester in 1976 during the first wave of punk rock. Bernard Sumner and Peter Hook had separately attended the legendary Sex Pistols show at the Manchester Lesser Free Trade Hall on 4 June 1976, and both embraced that group’s simplicity, speed and aggression. In fact according to legend every one of the 200 people there formed a band. Ian Curtis, who Sumner and Hook already knew, applied and, without having to audition, was taken on.

In 1979 I bought this amazing album I went that year so see them play live at West Runton Pavilion (North Norfolk) and met with Ian Curtis . I loved him and what Jon Savage described their music as, a definitive Northern Gothic statement: guilt-ridden, romantic, claustrophobic. His life is brought to many people’s attention in the stunning film Control.Curtis, who suffered from epilepsy and depression, committed suicide on 18 May 1980, on the eve of Joy Division’s first North American tour, resulting in the band’s dissolution and the subsequent formation of New Order.

The cover of the Unknown Pleasures album stimulated my love of Astronomy, Pulsars and the Universe (I still have the T shirt).The cover of their 1979 debut album is probably more well known than the album or band themselves. Famed cover art designer Peter Saville is credited with designing the cover, but as the myth goes it shows a series of radio frequency periods from the first pulsar discovered.I was studying brain science at the time and using complex mathematics like Fourier analysis to decode the data of action potential in nerve transmission. I thought the image on the cover (and it is largely cited correctly) as depicting the first pulsar discovered (CP 1919). In fact it’s not the first isolated plot of that pulsar, which was made in 1967. That honour goes to Jocelyn Bell Burnell from the Mullard Radio Astronomy Observatory in Cambridge, whom I was very lucky to meet when my father introduced (as head of medical research) in Cambridge.

Radio pulsars are neutron stars, huge, spinning ‘nuclei’ that contain some 1057 protons and neutrons. The large clump of nuclear matter, which has a mass about equal to that of the sun, is compressed into a sphere with a radius on the order of 10 kilometers. Consequently, the density of the star is enormous, slightly greater than the density of ordinary nuclear matter, which is itself some 10 trillion times denser than a lead brick. Currents of protons and electrons moving within the star generate a magnetic field. As the star rotates, a radio beacon, ignited by the combined effect of the magnetic field and the rotation, emanates from it and sweeps periodically through the surrounding space, rather like a lighthouse beam. Once per revolution the beacon cuts past the earth, giving rise to the beeping detected by radio telescopes.

Peter Saville, who had previously designed posters for Manchester’s Factory club in 1978, designed the cover of the album. Saville reversed the image from black-on-white to white-on-black and printed it on textured card for the original version of the album. The image itself according to Scientific American writer Jen Christiansen was by Harold D. Craft, Jr., was a graduate student at Cornell University in the early 70s, working with cosmic data a the massive Arecibo Radio Observatory in Puerto Rico. You can read Christiansen’s account of her investigation, and listen to her interviews with Craft at Scientific American. He and his colleagues were experimenting with some of the first digital measurements of radio waves from pulsars (collapsed stars that flash like lighthouses), using radar equipment at the observatory. By chance, Craft ended up writing the computer program that would produce this iconic image.

Unknown Pleasures’ cover was computer generated.

Craft said he had no idea that his image was being widely used on the cover of a famous record. “I went to the record store and, son of a gun, there it was. So I bought an album, and then there was a poster that [they] had of it, so I bought one of those too, just for no particular reason, except that it’s my image, and I ought to have a copy of it.”

Unknown Pleasures was recorded at Strawberry Studios in Stockport, England between 1 and 17 April 1979, with Martin Hannett producing. Describing Hannett’s production techniques, Hook said,that Hannett was only as good as the material he had to work with, “We gave him great songs, and like a top chef, he added some salt and pepper and some herbs and served up the dish. But he needed our ingredients.”

The experience of pleasure is subjective and different individuals will experience different kinds and amounts of pleasure in the same situation. Many pleasurable experiences are associated with satisfying basic biological drives, such as eating, exercise, hygiene or sex. For real pleasure, try listening again to Unknown Pleasures again, now.

Dance, dance, dance, dance, dance, to the radio.

Be Amazing Every Day.

The Ostrich Problem


Question: Why do Ostriches stick their head in the sand? Answer: They don’t.

There will be plenty of people over the Christmas and New Year period whom will not check their online bank balance, despite wanting to be in control of their money. If your bank balance is going into the red, you wouldn’t be the first to deliberately avoid a statement and scientists now think they know why. Interestingly they call it (wrongly) the Ostrich Problem.

The much maligned common ostrich (Struthio camelus) is a species of large flightless birds native to Africa. It is distinctive in its appearance, with a long neck and legs, and can run at up to about 70 km/h (19 m/s; 43 mph), the fastest land speed of any bird. Despite holding the title of the largest living birds; they stand 7 to 9 feet tall when fully grown and their heads are relatively small. This is important because from a distance, ostriches nibbling at food on the ground may appear to have their heads in the dirt.

The expression bury your head in the sand apparently comes from the supposed habit of ostriches hiding their heads when faced with an attack by predators. The story was first recorded by the Roman writer Pliny the Elder. But the more likely root of this claim has to do with ostriches’ nests. Male ostriches dig a size able hole up to 6 to 8 feet wide and 2 to 3 feet deep, which is plenty big for their puny heads—in which to stow the eggs. During the incubation period, both parent ostrich take turns rotating the eggs with their beaks, a task that requires them to submerge their heads into the nest, thereby creating the illusion that their heads are buried in the sand.

An interesting take on this story (without much support, however) is that ostriches are not smart and believe that if they can’t see their attackers then the attackers can’t see them. Of all the many forms of protest over the years, this head-in-the-sand action is the most inspiring. In beaches and in sand piles across the world in 2014 protestors buried their heads to draw attention to the inaction of world leaders on climate change and the outright denial by many about the existence and extent of the problem.

We tend to bury our heads in the sand because we feel guilty when confronted with reality, say psychologists led by Dr Thomas Webb at the University of Sheffield. The study, published in the Social and Personality Psychology Compass journal, suggests that people are actively motivated to avoid information. Dr Webb says that promoting lasting changes in behaviour is one of the most significant challenges facing science and society. His four-year project, which ends in 2015, seeks to understand why people avoid monitoring their goal progress and, by so doing, find ways to promote monitoring and help people to achieve goals. Dr Webb also cites a 2012 survey which found that only 10 per cent of people who worry about their finances daily check their bank balance at least once a month.This active ignoring of information about one’s current standing relative to one’s goals is part of popular culture, yet current scientific perspectives assume that people will actively monitor and seek information on their progress. They call this the ‘Ostrich Problem’ ignoring the obvious biological and physiological errors.

Despite evidence that self monitoring can be good for us (classically stepping on the scales when trying to lose weight) there are times when individuals intentionally avoid such information.The researchers think people ignore what is going on around them to avoid negative feelings, often of guilt, that accompany being presented with reality. Dr Webb said: ‘The Ostrich Problem is the idea that there are times when people would rather not know how they’re doing.’ Avoiding monitoring may allow people to escape from negative feelings associated with an accurate appraisal of progress. The socalled Ostrich Problem includes situations in which people receive relevant information but intentionally fail to evaluate the implications for their goal progress – in other words, they reject the information. It concluded that the Ostrich Problem is now part of popular culture, giving rise to the terms bury your head in the sand and ignorance is bliss. Just remember the wonderful quotation from Martin Niemoeller,

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me — and there was no-one left to speak for me.

The need for creative and committed leadership, sustained over the long haul, has never been greater. There is not just a need to get others to pull their heads out of the sand but for each of us to wonder about the warm dark places we burrow into.

Heads up!

Be Amazing Every Day.

Webb, T. L., Chang, B., & Benn, Y. (2013). “The ostrich problem”: Motivated avoidance or rejection of information on goal progress. Social and Personality Psychology Compass7(11), 794-807. DOI: 10.1111/spc3.12071 onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/spc3.12071/pdf

The Economic Future. Brilliant

The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel.

The powerful opening line of William Gibson’s debut masterpiece Neuromancer definitively sets the tone for what was and perhaps remains, the single most influential science fiction novel in shaping the public consciousness.

Neuromancer was published 30 years ago this year (1984). Gibson was predicting our rather grim future and popularised the idea of cyberspace (a consensual hallucination experienced daily by billions). He described a (internet) network that can be jacked into, while in the real world characters flit from Tokyo to theSprawl, an urban agglomeration running down the east coast of the USNeuromancer gave us not onlycyberspace, but also the matrix and dub music (a sensuous mosaic cooked from vast libraries of digitalised pop). The cities along the Eastern seaboard from Boston and Atlanta have yet to merge into a single megalopolitan Sprawl but it is only a matter of time. Starbucks has become Beautiful Girl, a franchised coffee shop seen on nearly every street corner. Microsoft was founded before the novel’s publication, but Gibson’s microsofts, small computer chips that insert directly into the brain, may well represent the company’s ultimate goal.

There is a character in BBC’s The Fast Show, who was an over enthusiastic Manchester teenager. He believed everything was‘Brilliant!. He marches around many diverse locations biggingthings up with boundless energy. Amongst the things Brilliant thinks are brilliant are: shelves, gravity, the Mafia, holes, yesterday, Ronnie Corbett, sequels, holidays, echoes, several different types of natural disaster, paint, kids, pavements, the sky, mothers, microwaves, old people, sex, the Romans, shepherds, Jesus and golf.

Something else that is brilliant is the power of predicting the future. One of the buzz words of the moment is Nowcasting. It has recently become popular in economics and uses standard measures to assess the state of an economy, e.g. GDP, which are only determined after a long delay and are even then subject to subsequent revisions. While weather forecasters know weather conditions today and only have to predict the weather tomorrow, economists have to forecast the present and even the recent past.

It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future. – Yogi Berra

Billions of dollars are spent on experts who claim they can forecast what’s around the corner, in business, finance and economics. Most of them get it wrong. Data analysts forecast demand for new products, or the impact of a discount or special offer. Scenario planners produce broad-based narratives with the aim of provoking fresh thinking about what might happen. Nowcasters look at Twitter or Google to track epidemics like Ebola, in real time. Intelligence agencies look for clues about where the next geopolitical crisis will emerge and banks, finance ministries, consultants and international agencies release regular prophecies covering dozens, even hundreds, of macroeconomic variables.

Real breakthroughs have been achieved in certain areas, especially where rich datasets have become available e.g. weather forecasting, online retailing and supply-chain management. Yet when it comes to the headline-grabbing business of geopolitical or macroeconomic forecasting, it is not clear that we are any better at the fundamental task that the industry claims to fulfil – seeing into the future. Philip Tetlock at the University of Pennsylvania has found most forecasters do only slightly better than chance.Chimps randomly throwing darts at the possible outcomes would have done almost as well as the experts,” is how one political scientist summarised the findings to the New York Times.

Forecasting with the power of a Gibson novel may be possible when you have clarity and imagination. Some people (called by the popular press as Superforecasters ) may be able to predict geopolitical events with an accuracy far outstripping chance. The most helpful advice on how to become a Superforecaster (or a predictive science fiction writer) can be derived from using some clear rules:

  • COMPARE & CONTRAST. Comparisons are important: use relevant comparisons as a starting point. Turn up the contrast and use false colour.
  • WATCH, LOOK & LEARN. Historical trends can help (but cannot predict future trends accurately). There is a look at history unless you have a strong reason to expect change. Ethnographic understanding is needed at the highest level.
  • META DATA. Average opinions matter; experts disagree, so find out what they think and pick a midpoint. Big data and understanding of statistical analysis.
  • DO THE MATHS. If possible use the most powerful model-based predictions available. The numbers are the starting point for understanding.
  • UN-BIAS VISION. Predictable biases exist and can be allowed for. Don’t let your hopes influence your forecasts, for example; don’t stubbornly cling to old forecasts in the face of news.

Night city was like an experiment in social Darwinism designed by a bored researcher who kept his thumb permanently on the fast forward button.

Predictive capabilities frequently serve as a metric for judging the worth of near-term science fiction. In many ways, Gibson’s prognosticative capabilities continue to impress thirty years later. Certainly, he misses the mark on some counts. He amusingly chooses the megabyte to represent units of big data. His world invokes powerful computer terminal fixtures and sleek cybernetic implants, but omits the intermediary stage of handheld technology like smartphones. He has changed the world through the sheer power of his dream and vision. Even though Gibson imagines such a ferociously revolutionary world from the 1980’s, he tempers this dream that could easily be that of ecstatic revelation with the knowledge that, as with all things, there will be some winners and some losers.

Need to make a major decision about your future or predict a trend? Want to write the next Neuromancer? Embrace uncertainty and identify your biases. Of course, if you are a Superforecaster already, you probably saw that advice coming.

Be Amazing Every Day.

7 Ways to Improve Your Linkedin Posts

I am 100 Pulses old today!

  • Want more Clients?
  • Want more money?
  • Want more people to read your posts?

Well, in Linkedin terms I thought it might be helpful to describe my experiences, experiments and outcomes. Not every post you write on Publisher is going to get tens of thousands of views. My 100 posts have been viewed 40,000 times, have had thousands of ‘likes’ and spawned much comment (data here).

Wisdom is the result of the distillation of your experiences– Adamus Saint-Germain

I love writing these posts (#1 position in Business is PASSION) and I have only recently found that it was relatively easy to distill one’s knowledge for others. It is also a great way to showcase your knowledge and expertise in any given area and that’s a big part of content marketing.

It seems that lots of people are reading my posts. As a result I am getting some new work and reminding others of my areas of excellence. Many readers take time so say thank you and kindly say how much they enjoy reading the posts (thank you!). It is part of my daily ritual to research, think deeply and write these posts. The secret is to get up early.

Here are my 7 key elements for writing and posting on Linkedin:

  1. # 1 Have A Good Title: Coming up with that ideal title doesn’t require enormous creativity. It requires just one thing. You don’t need a mysterious question that begs the reader to click on your title or a sensational headline to compel visitors to click. You just need a number. A number in your title is a great way to get people to click on your blog post. A blog post title with a number (better yet numbers) in it is almost guaranteed to perform better than one without it. In my case (see all figures here) it stimulates the most viewers. Don’t believe me? Take a look at the top posts of all time right here on LinkedIn. They all have a number in their titles. Perhaps one day, blog title number fatigue will set in. But it hasn’t yet.
  2. Use Attractive Images: Visuals show up prominently in the LinkedIn newsfeed as they do everywhere else. Make sure that you use a visual at the top of your blog post that resonates with the professional demographic that make up LinkedIn and try making your own!
  3. Brief and Engaging Business Content (600 words approximately seems to be the average): My posts are on the long side but your posts don’t need to be. I believe that for professionals where time is money, many simply don’t have the time to read through a longer post. Keep it short and simple when possible.According to numbers from LinkedIn 6 out of every 10 LinkedIn users are interested in industry insights. The most demanded type of content among LinkedIn members should be in the front of your mind when you start posting. Insights, in general, are quite popular among users. Second to industry insight, company news appeals to 53 percent of LinkedIn members.
  4. Keywords: Every social network plays around with their news feed or timeline and thus have an algorithm similar to Facebook Edgerank. LinkedIn is no different. LinkedIn has to decide what posts to display on who’s network updates, and I would tend to believe that if you publish too frequently, that might be hurting your chances for maximum impressions for each post.
  5. Timing: I’ve found that downtime during office hours works well for catching people who have a few spare minutes to read; for example, right before work (7-8am), during lunch breaks (11:30am-12:30pm) and right before leaving work for the day (4pm). As for days of the week, I’ve always had the hypothesis that LinkedIn essentially shuts down outside of work hours.
  6. LuckThere is always a degree of luck in anything but remember that cognitive bias can make you think that doing ‘random’ things actually influences the chance of success. Read on here.
  7. Good Marketing / Sharing Strategy for your Post: Using the right channels can significant help the number of views our post gets. Do some analysis and look at the key groups and # hashtags that represent the audience you are writing for, including:
  • Twitter groups and key influencers
  • Facebook timeline and timeline in other groups
  • Google+ hangouts
  • Start a conversation and ask good questions
  • Get the right # and let others find you
  • Get picked up by key groups by being specific.

So in my humble opinion it does pay to be thoughtful about your Linkedin post strategy. With some consideration, changing strategy, testing (firing bullets then cannonballs) and making your own luck, you will get more visibility than you’ve previously had on LinkedIn. That will lead to more engagement, brand recognition and possibly even more business for you.

Be Amazing Every Day

Does innovation cause significant positive change

Light bulb moment: Is the word innovation so over used that we just don’t care? Why would anyone spend time reading a book on innovation, unless it is truly significant and could cause real change? Indeed, some people are asking us to stop using the term innovation entirely. In my opinion, it is just a word and words are free to be abused. Not according to Scott Burkin,

‘I’m confident in this advice: Stop using the word innovation. Just stop. Right now. Commit to never saying the word again. Einstein, Ford, Leonardo da Vinci, Picasso, Jobs and Edison rarely said the word and neither should you.’

Is he right? Well a guarded, definitely maybe. I was astonished that, according to the Wall Street Journal, last year a search of annual and quarterly reports filed in the US, showed companies mentioned the word innovation 33,528 times last year, which was a 64% increase from five years before that. More than 250 books with innovation in the title have been published in the last three months, most of them dealing with business, according to a search of Amazon.com. Most are ironicallyvery dull, desperately out-of-date and do not add any significant positive change to world.

So what do you think about when you hear the word innovation? Do you see a light bulb? There are many definitions out there and the most common seems to be:

‘ An innovation is something original, new, and important – in whatever field – that breaks in to (or obtains a foothold in) a market or society’

In this definition the words originalnew and important are vital. The key question is what is actually original, new and important and according to whom? Can we rely on this for the future guidance? Google gave me some 40+ definitions of the word. Throw them into Wordle you get:

The four key words are:

  • Create – This seems quite appropriate because innovation isn’t about ideas. It’s about turning something previously only thought about, into a reality.
  • Something – Innovation takes many forms, not just products or technology: inventions, services, experience, price, method, process and so on.
  • New – Even if you are applying innovation to the most staid industry in the world, there are still things being done, tried or tested that are new to that organisation.
  • Value – Innovation is pointless, unless it is focused on generating value: for customers, for its people, or its investors and stakeholders.

So, you could say that the definition of innovation boils down to create something new and of value or better still innovation causes significant positive change.Banks have been innovating for the last few hundred years, evolving into complex, modern organisations, that can transfer money across the world safely, instantly at the speed of light. Unless they are my bank, which seems to allow anyone in Honduras and Guatemala to take all my cash out while I am asleep in London. For most financial institutions, innovation means ensuring existing processes work faster, adding functions and features to existing automation, and inventing new financial products. So this is innovation where there is something new, but it’s not inherent in the product or service itself, it’s about the way it’s delivered, or the way it works.

We all know there are lots of pretentious words in business and companies use them indiscriminately. They include (but not exclusively):

  • Synergy,
  • Paradigm-shift,
  • Dynamic,
  • Breakthrough,
  • Game-changing,
  • Radical,
  • Future
  • Disruptive,
  • Transformative

and, of course, the ubiquitous innovation. It is quickly losing whatever meaning it once had. Bill Taylor in the Harvard Business review article, ‘Stop Me Before I “Innovate” Again!’, said,

‘Leaders who aim to challenge the limits of what’s possible in their fields, develop a “vocabulary of competition” that captures the impact they’re trying to have, the difference they’re trying to make, the future they’re hoping to create. Almost none of these companies and leaders use the word “innovation” to describe their strategy — implicitly or explicitly, they understand that it has been sapped of all substance. Instead, they offer rich and vivid descriptions of what they hope to do, where they hope to get, and why it matters.’

Just about every company says it has innovation. Businesses throw around the term to show they’re on the cutting edge of everything from technology and medicine to snacks and cosmetics. Companies are touting chief innovation officers, innovation teams, innovation strategies and even innovation days. Often innovation for companies actual means,

  • we need new ideas
  • we need better ideas,
  • we need big changes
  • we need to place big bets on new ideas
  • we want to make a lot more money

Innovation has been co-opted just like synergy and dynamic and a hundred other terms. This is an example of conflation, where innovate has come to mean which means re-imagine and re-create, with simply the word, change. Every company wants to be innovative of course. On their websites we have further dogma, with semi-profound (yet clichéd): We Innovate Every Day, Innovation by Design andInnovation Business Plan.

When it comes to innovation, the myth of the lone genius also dies hard. You will find dated anecdotes extolling how the boss of Southwest Airlines, Ritz Carlton or [insert company name of the day] are just brilliant at innovation, usually driven by a lone genius. Usually they will quote Steve Jobs – so I will repeat this trend, with his famous words,

Innovation is the difference between a leader and a follower.’

Steve Jobs didn’t have to say he was an innovator. He just had to hold up an iPhone. The best marketing is of course, a great product. Innovative companies firstre-create and re-imagine and disrupt, and then let others pile on the adjectives. Not the other way around.

There is little evidence people we would call the creatives, got that way by reading a particular book or watching a video. Maybe by hanging around Hoxton, or Central St. Martins. Most skills in life are only acquired by hard work; to be more creative means to create and learn, rather than merely read and be theoretical. But there are some books out there, that have or will cause significant positive change. I have been honoured to read excerpts from the brand new paperback, The Service Innovation Handbook: Action-oriented Creative Thinking Toolkit for Service Organizations. It is due out in paperback in January 2015 and is by the brilliant author and academic guru, Dr. Lucy Kimbell.The key word in the title is action. It is an excellent primer for those involved in service innovation. It is neither boring nor dull and is absolutely cutting edge. It is very readable and accessible to both academics and those involved in business, innovation and being an entrepreneur: order it now!

Another inspirational tome is from the great Peter Drucker. He has written a book that is profound, clear, concise and memorable Called Innovation and Entrepreneurship it is a short books that encapsulates all of the theory you need to think about starting a business and what it will take to find, develop, launch and grow product ideas.

Sometimes, however, what people mean by innovator is what we will call an innovative leader. Brain Rules, written by John Medina is an excellent neuroscience based book, that touches on the power of the brain to be truly creative and innovative. Those with these brain facets give rise to the small number of innovations that end up having big impacts.

We should also reflect on some older data and authors, that have had a profound influence, like Marshall McLuhan. He was a key thinker in the field and way ahead of his time. His work is viewed as one of the cornerstones of the study of media theory, as well as having practical applications in the advertising and television industries. Even if you’ve never read Marshall McLuhan, you’re probably familiar with a couple of his ideas. The medium is the message and The human family now exists under conditions of a global village. We live in a single constricted space resonant with tribal drums. Both of those quotes are around 50 years old now; McLuhan was remarkably prescient in predicting the World Wide Web. I love his quotation about the future: Only by standing aside from any phenomenon and taking an overview can you discover its operative principles and lines of force. Ordinary men, however, when confronted by new environments, resort to the rear-view mirror. We can’t extrapolate the past to predict the future. In a complex economy, the way to think about the future is this:

  • We can’t predict the future.
  • But we can learn about the patterns from which the future will emerge.
  • We can’t control the future, we can influence it.
  • The best way to influence the future is by innovating

So what can we do? The innovative leader is clearly not a micro-manager. They focus on the big picture and works with creative thinkers who can add to that vision and make it greater. Micro-managers, on the other hand, tend to stifle creativity and focus far too much on the details – causing them and their teams to lose sight of the big picture.

Perhaps most importantly, the innovative leader needs to be able to communicate their vision and generate enthusiasm for it. The team needs to be able to see the vision themselves and be willing to invest their own time and resources into making it happen. Innovative leaders know that leadership by demand is far less effective at encouraging creativity and innovation than is leadership through motivation and inspiration.

While the business world is in constant search of the next big thing, leaders must remember that you don’t so much need to be inventive as you do innovative. Being inventive is creating something new that has never existed. Innovation is the creation of something new that represents a communal adaptation or application used and embraced by the masses

If you go around telling people you’re humble, the opposite is true. Humble is a descriptor that’s bestowed not seized. The same is true with innovationCalling a something an innovation or someone an innovator, doesn’t make it so.

I shall switch off the light bulb now.

Be Amazing Every Day