200705
(answer to a question about "Ideology and 'Leadership' in Your World")
Ideology can be a means of leadership (ie to challenge, reach, maintain, strengthen the status), but one doesn't necessarily need it to enjoy leadership. Content generally matters less than the look, or charisma. When both are combined, that can be very efficient and potentially dangerous, depending on the character and the ideology : the first face that generally comes to mind when you mention "ideology" and "leadership" is Adolph Hitler's.
The rencent French presidential elections opposed two styles of leadership and clearly raised the issue of ideology, traditionally a taboo in French politics (it echoes dark periods of our history). Both finalists had a lot of charisma and overused images and symbols, but one would rely on an outspoken and consistent ideology (the winner, Nicolas Sarkozy) while the other (Segolene Royal) avoided the issues because her own camp was too divided to agree on a clear and consistent vision (not to mention the lack of consistence of the candidate herself). The socialists had to admit this failure on ideology cost them the elections. Note that Blair also won 10 years ago on that turf. Time will tell whether Sarkozy can deliver the goods he promised... or the evils he is sometimes stimulating.
To me, true leadership is about changing the ideology, not surfing on it.
Friday
Define: hero
20070601
(answer to the question "What is a hero?")
A hero cannot be self proclaimed and has to be somehow distinguished by someone else. By whom, in which context and on what ground ? Answering to these questions will give you a fair notion of the value and durability of this distinction.
Warning : heroes in mirror are hollower than they appear. By no means can this superficial notion define a being : it is not about what you are, nor even about what you do, but about how you are perceived.
(answer to the question "What is a hero?")
A hero cannot be self proclaimed and has to be somehow distinguished by someone else. By whom, in which context and on what ground ? Answering to these questions will give you a fair notion of the value and durability of this distinction.
Warning : heroes in mirror are hollower than they appear. By no means can this superficial notion define a being : it is not about what you are, nor even about what you do, but about how you are perceived.
On the border of corruption
20070601
(answer to the question "Where would you draw the borderline towards "corruption"?")
For me, corruption starts where respect stops. All you have to do is to respect the law, but also your customers, your employees, your partners, your competitors, your environment, yourself...
You may not always win, but there is a room for sane business.
(answer to the question "Where would you draw the borderline towards "corruption"?")
For me, corruption starts where respect stops. All you have to do is to respect the law, but also your customers, your employees, your partners, your competitors, your environment, yourself...
You may not always win, but there is a room for sane business.
How do you value time ?
20070529
(answer to the question "How do you value time?")
Time is what you make of it. Time is a measuring tool which may differ from person to person. I don't think one should think of life or love in termes of gallons, cubic centimeters, pounds or whatever.
I don't value the thermometer, I value life itself, and I certainly don't wan't to figure it out that badly / poorly.
(answer to the question "How do you value time?")
Time is what you make of it. Time is a measuring tool which may differ from person to person. I don't think one should think of life or love in termes of gallons, cubic centimeters, pounds or whatever.
I don't value the thermometer, I value life itself, and I certainly don't wan't to figure it out that badly / poorly.
The most significant concept in human history
20070529
(answer to the question "What has been the single most significant concept, idea or notion in human history?")
Humor.
Beyond intelligence and the awareness of death, humor requires the ability of self-depreciation.
(answer to the question "What has been the single most significant concept, idea or notion in human history?")
Humor.
Beyond intelligence and the awareness of death, humor requires the ability of self-depreciation.
On the innovation process
20070530
(answer to the question "What are the essential elements of the innovation process?" - the creative and synthetizing part)
From experience (as a strategist as well as as an author), I know it takes at least two sets of qualities : at the concept / idea level, and at the communication level. I've always enjoyed the conceptual part, and I have a lot of fun writing. Being an author is a permanent state and writing just an action, but people judge you by your output.
Ideally, there should be a visual / mental "click" from your audience / readers, but it is not always easy to translate your great vision the most efficient way. Pedagogy / communicability is key : your vision should be simple to understand and explain. Some doors can remain open if needed (you cannot embrace every dimensions, solve all questions), but everyone should be able to see what's at stake, share a common ground with all others. Besides, there is certainly no such thing as a "one size fits all" process for innovation, nor a universal way of synthetizing.
Actually, each consulting firm has a method, some are relevant in certain contexts, counterproductive in others. For example, the BCG can be help you bulldoze small bumps on the road and have a big corporation embrace a clear strategy, but when it comes to innovation, you want to protect diversity and be careful not to destroy valuable germs. The devil is in the details but a great value lies in theses details too.
At the end of the day, it is all about making a vision of a piece of knowledge useful, more valuable than it is by itself.
On mankind growing by learning from its mistakes
20070519
(answer to the question "Do you think that mankind has grown by learning from its mistakes ?")
Our civilization has been surviving for quite a few centuries and won't vanish overnight like the Maya's... unless someone decides to push that darn red button that is. I'd say mankind has grown to the point it became one civilization, and it has no choice but to learn from its mistakes. I don't think mankind has always grown by learning from its mistakes but I know it can't keep growing without it. The XXIst century is key at all levels (environment, economics, politics, religion, health, social divides...).
Such "positive" thinkers as Lobby Dick Cheney could dub Yugoslavia's collapse and the Rwanda or Darfur scandals the "last throes" of the old order (heck : some dictators have been "smoked out" even in Africa), but I'm not so sure. Ten-twenty years from now, we'll eventually have some notions of what can be achieved during this century.
(answer to the question "Do you think that mankind has grown by learning from its mistakes ?")
Our civilization has been surviving for quite a few centuries and won't vanish overnight like the Maya's... unless someone decides to push that darn red button that is. I'd say mankind has grown to the point it became one civilization, and it has no choice but to learn from its mistakes. I don't think mankind has always grown by learning from its mistakes but I know it can't keep growing without it. The XXIst century is key at all levels (environment, economics, politics, religion, health, social divides...).
Such "positive" thinkers as Lobby Dick Cheney could dub Yugoslavia's collapse and the Rwanda or Darfur scandals the "last throes" of the old order (heck : some dictators have been "smoked out" even in Africa), but I'm not so sure. Ten-twenty years from now, we'll eventually have some notions of what can be achieved during this century.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Search through my personal portal :
