There’s a difference…

I attended a presentation by Dr. Troy Butler.  He is the Associate Dean of Research & Creative Activities at the Colorado University Denver School of Liberal Arts.  His topic involved the compatibility of artificial intelligence with a liberal arts education. 

I was surprised that Dr. Butler is also a Professor of Mathematics at CU Denver and a researcher in the field of uncertainty quantification, stochastic inverse problems, and computational probability (among other things).  According to ChatGPT, a stochastic inverse problem is: 

A kind of mathematical problem where you try to infer uncertain inputs of a model from observed outputs, while explicitly accounting for randomness or uncertainty. 

Any Star Trek fans? 

Dr. Butler focused on the mathematical/technological vs. the liberal arts – “learning how to learn” - side of the equation.  His sophistication describing how AI works reminded me of its beginnings in the business arena: 

Since Appian was first a famous Roman highway, you'd think this might be a clue to Xymos' new identity.  But the release says; 

“Appian was chosen for the name because it represents the ability to use leading edge technology and innovation, integrated into solutions that provide differentiation and competitive advantage.” 

Just what the Romans had in mind. 

Rick Levine 

I have a liberal arts degree and I’m a career sales professional in the business-to-business, technology field.  Even so, when it comes to the uncontrolled proliferation of AI, I find myself leaning towards the Luddites’ camp as described by Jaron Lanier in You Are Not a Gadget: A Manifesto ©.  

With that in mind, permit me to summarize my takeaways from Dr. Butler’s presentation: 

• AI (which I refer to as “the machines”) does not think the way we humans think.  It computes – the way we humans can’t compute.  There’s a difference.
• Human thinking involves perception, reasoning, imagination, and rational judgement.  The machines occasionally hallucinate. That’s about it.  There’s a difference.
• AI computes on “big data” (immense/immeasurable, really) with Large Language Models, probability, and “Machine Learning”.  That’s not how you and I do it.  There’s a difference.
• AI doesn’t have “feelings”.  It merely emulates via a statistical combination and sequencing of words in a sentence that has a high probability of sounding like feelings to we humans.  AI does not “discern”; it is not “a friend”.  It’s a machine.

 

There’s a difference. 

GAP 

When life gets tough we could get a helmet… or… we could leverage the peace and share the power of a positive perspective.

 

Testing, testing…

I hadn’t heard of Cunningham’s Law until a young man stopped by my recent book-signing event.  He liked that I cite several “laws” in my book, The Peace and Power of a Positive Perspective©.  He asked if Cunningham’s was in there.  (It isn’t).  My visitor shared this perspective: 

People are more willing to correct you than to help you. 

                   Ram 

As a test, let me ask you if you’ve heard of Cunningham’s Law?  Here’s my answer: 

Cunningham said the best way to get a right answer on the Internet is to simply post a question. 

What do you think; did I pass the test on the meaning of his law?  Did you?  Back to you in a minute… 

I like these types of laws so much that I titled the second chapter of my book, “Laws, Proverbs & Malarkey”.  Murphy’s Law is in there, of course.  One of my favorite sources is Augustine’s Laws© by Norman R. Augustine.  He is a U.S. aerospace businessman who was Chairman and CEO of the Lockheed Martin Corporation.  His firm did a lot of business with the US Government.  That, of course, gave him plenty of fodder for fun: 

Law Number XXXVII: 

Ninety percent of the time things will turn out worse than you expect.  The other 10 percent of the time you had no right to expect so much.                            

Norman R. Augustine 

Sounds like today’s elections, yes?  But I digress… 

I also enjoy quizzes, tests, riddles, and such.  Like this little ditty devoted to lateral thinking found on page 130 of my book: 

Place 9 pigs in the 8 pens (below). No pen can have more than 1 pig placed in it; no pig can be left out of the pens.  The configuration of the pens cannot be changed. Your design of the pigs is not important.

OK back to you, Cunningham, and today’s test.  I wonder how many of you passed?  Did you reply to this post with the correct version of Cunningham’s Law to correct me?  What I stated above is the wrong answer - just like Cunningham posited.  Oh, and if you give me your answer to the 9 pigs in 8 pens I'll be ready to correct you HaHa!

Hmmm, posting wrong answers on the Internet to get to the right answer…  I guess we’re all being tested. 

                                                            GAP 

When life gets tough we could get a helmet… or… we could leverage the peace and share the power of a positive perspective.

Modern workers…

Modern workers; aka younger workers; aka millennials; aka scary!  How would you manage a team of those today?  Maybe you already know.  Please share your leading practices with the rest of us, OK? 

I try my best to stay abreast of day-to-day business matters, especially in the technology sales field.  I wonder how anyone manages a young, technology sales team today. 

In Triggers ©, Marshall Goldsmith offers guidance: 

Situational Leadership 

Hersey and Blanchard's premise was that leaders need to adapt their style to fit the performance readiness of their followers.  Readiness not only varies by person it also varies by task.  Followers have different levels of motivation and ability for different tasks. 

Leaders and managers adapting their style to direct reports’ tasks; is that how it's done?  I suspect when a leader does adapt, their people have a better situation to succeed.  Yet, I doubt most leaders approach it that way.  You don’t think so either?  If not, why do you suppose not? 

Much has been written about the behavior of modern workers; their lack of company loyalty; today's era of "quiet quitting"; work-life balance; etc.  Truthfully as a member of the Baby Boomer generation, I'm not sure our younger workers are that much different than I was at their age.  Of course, my generation didn’t get as much publicity back in the “Dark Ages”.  Thank you social media, HaHa! 

Daniel Pink wrote in Drive © another perspective: 

So perhaps it's time to switch the focus of some of our workplace policies and use them to unshackle the hardworking majority rather than inhibit the less noble minority.  If you think people in your organization are predisposed to rip you off, maybe the solution isn't to build a tighter, more punitive set of rules.  Maybe the answer is to hire new people. 

You might be thinking… Gary, it's easy to say "hire new people"; that's hard to do in today's tight labor market.  I agree. 

If we’re going to retain our modern workers, I believe now more than ever training needs for managers and leaders is paramount.  (I feel management training is an event at most companies vs. a commitment to continuous people-management improvement, right Elon Musk?) 

What do you think of the approach articulated by none other than that legendary management consultant Peter Drucker: 

We spend a lot of time teaching leaders what to do.  We don’t spend enough time teaching leaders what to stop.  Half the leaders I have met don’t need to learn what to do.  They need to learn what to stop. 

Do you think this tug-of-war between modern workers and their companies results in a lose-lose proposition for both?  What do you think leaders should "stop" to help things to go? 

Seth Godin weighed in on “responsible stewardship”: 

Do you have to abandon the old ways today?  Of course not.  But responsible stewardship requires that you find and empower heretics and give them the flexibility to build something new instead of trying to force the Internet to act like direct mail with free stamps. 

I imagine empowering today's "heretics" is a bit scary for managers and leaders; it certainly would be for me.  Before I retired, however, I had the opportunity to work with and alongside modern workers at my company.  They quickly erased my stereotypical fears.  

Today's modern workers may approach things differently, but...  

                 they          are          awesome!  

Managers and leaders might do well to stop trying to stop them.

                                                            GAP 

When life gets tough we could get a helmet… or… we could leverage the peace and share the power of a positive perspective.

PC or Mac (or iPad or Android, or…)?

OK, who stood in line recently to buy a new iPad?  Have you been in an argument about the advantages vs. disadvantages between owning the iPhone 11 now vs. waiting for the iPhone 12 with 5G to be perfected?  I’m not much of a gadget guy, unlike my wife, who is a total gadget girl. Referencing the advertising campaign – I’m a PC; she’s a Mac.  And don’t get me started with my 10 year old grandson! 

Isn’t it funny how we associate ourselves with the technology of the day? Reminds me of the story by Dan Danborn: 

I am a dot-com person, but my friend Steve, who works for a public television station, is a dot-org person.  He believes dot-org persons are more noble than dot-com persons because dot-com persons are in businesses where they try to make money, while his dot-org public television station has a more lofty goal than making money:  they would rather beg and whine for it.                   

Passionate about their technology, yes?  

And which of your gadgets are you passionate about?  Is it passion; or addiction???  Did anyone read the article a few years ago labeled “Crackberry”?  This included testimonials from businesspeople who literally lost sleep in order to respond to emails in the middle of the night.  Sound familiar anyone?  OK, I’ll raise my hand here too – not because I wake up at 4 a.m. to check emails, but I do admit that I carry my mobile devices with me everywhere.  You? 

So far we’ve just been touching on gadgets.  Add in applications and streaming?  Forget about it! 

“IOT” and the Internet; how did it come about that technology took over our lives?  Here’s one theory from Rick Levine: 

And along comes the Internet.  It was as if we'd ordered it from Arizona: “Hello, US Federal Government?  Yes, we'd like one totally open, high-speed, data backbone. Uh-huh, and charge that to the Department of Defense, why don’t you?  What's that?  What do we want if for?  Oh, just chatting about stuff.  You know, this and that."            

So as I add it up, in the past forty years I have moved from mainframe/character-based/green-bar-paper; through mini-computer/GUI/dot-matrix-printing; past Win-Tel/Internet-based/color-laser-printing; into mobile/social/video/paperless/Cloud computing.  I used to be able to leave my work at the office when I went home.  Now, I am one with my office (and may The Force be with you, too!).

It makes me wonder if the titans of the technology industry think about what they have created.  I wonder what gadgets they personally use (and how many they carry).  Do they have an army of administrative assistants to support their daily routine?  And if they do, isn’t that a manual approach to the modern world?  Would they chuckle about that?  

The gadgets they invented have us tripping over ourselves to acquire the latest and greatest upgrades; consuming untold numbers of hours using these devices; working harder and harder just to keep up; while they kick back in a private jet, on their way to meetings scheduled for them by executive assistants, with notes and follow-ups handled by a herd of staffers.  Does that still count as “high-tech”? 

All in the name of smaller-faster-mobile-social-ubiquitous-technology.  Here’s one philosophy from Steve Wozniak, Apple Co-Founder, and one of the titans who impacted our lives: 

            Never trust a computer you can’t throw out a window.

And that’s why I take out the insurance coverage on my smart phone. 

GAP 

When life gets tough we could get a helmet… or… we could leverage the peace and share the power of a positive perspective.

Interesting…

I suppose you would categorize me as a “knowledge worker”: 

A knowledge worker is someone whose job entails having really interesting conversations at work. 

     Rick Levine 

Interesting is an interesting choice of words. 

I had an interesting conversation with a colleague about a few of our young sellers in a role play situation.  I was observing them but I didn’t actually see how they prepared or were coached.  I just assumed their inexperience would be glaringly obvious. 

Interestingly, each of them stepped up and performed in the role play without hesitation… and … interestingly… THEY WERE AWESOME!  They executed better than I could have with all my decades of experience - and I told them so.  I explained that even without experience, their preparation, articulation, and willingness to be coached shined! 

Interestingly, we often observe the difference between knowledge and someone trying to B.S. their way, true?  At work I’m reminded of Grabel frequently: 

Grabel's Law: 

Two is not equal to three - not even for very large values of two. 

Russell Kay 

When I was a young and inexperienced salesman, I used to B.S. my way through.  You know, the old, “fake it until you make it” approach?  That was until I felt the pain of  “show me” and “prove it”.   Inflicted not by my managers or peers, though.  I was punished by impatient and unforgiving clients and prospects who easily recognized B.S. when they saw it. 

Interestingly today, just when I start believing that as a “senior” I now know it all.  Just when I think of our young sellers who, from a quota standpoint remind me of the gladiator phrase, “those who are about to die”.  Just when my B.S. meter starts to go off, I get to enjoy being surprised. 

Yes, knowledge workers are those who have interesting conversations at work.  Truth be told, most of my conversations at work are with a very small, select set of colleagues.  Although at this stage of my career my job is intellectually interesting, I feel I have to be careful sharing my opinions because of my sensitive B.S. meter.

I suspect my younger, less experienced colleagues have B.S. meters also.  One of those said young colleagues who performed so impressively in that role play actually left the company shortly thereafter.  I was disappointed and a bit surprised. 

My company proclaims the value of our culture in emails and texts almost daily.  Career ascension and diversity is a constant theme offered by leaders to followers.  But now my B.S. meter has me wondering: 

Culture was not something you do by writing memos.  You've got to appeal to people's emotions.  They've got to buy in with their hearts and their bellies, not just their minds. 

Richard C. Huseman 

Maybe it’s more important to knowledge workers seeking to move up in the company than I understand.  In her book, Love 'Em or Lose 'Em © Beverly Kaye offers this interesting perspective: 

Ponder this:  Is "up" the only career path they see?  And is "up" in short supply? 

“Up” is in short supply at my company.  I suspect that’s true at many companies.  Not everyone can be promoted to management or leadership positions.  And yes, that means younger, highly capable people often choose the old “grass is greener…” option.  Been there; done that; myself. 

Interestingly, knowing whether those pastures are actually greener - or browner - isn’t discovered until after one moves.  Been there; done that; too. 

GAP 

When life gets tough we could get a helmet… or… we could leverage the peace and share the power of a positive perspective.

 

What’s that Buzzing?

 Ah yes, buzz words – how wonderful!  Although I’m in the technology sales profession which is fully stocked with acronyms; buzz words; and technospeak...  I bet whatever career field you’re in you too have bountiful bundles of buzz words, true? 

When you think of our terminology in the technology field, including platform designations, product features, and company names, the amusement is abundant.  I think technology may only be surpassed by pharmaceutical companies.  Where do they come up with those hard to pronounce and impossible to spell drug names! 

Today – let’s poke fun at my profession starting with Rick Levine’s observation: 

Since Appian was first a famous Roman highway, you'd think this might be a clue to Xymos' new identity.  But the release says; 

“Appian was chosen for the name because it represents the ability to use leading edge technology and innovation, integrated into solutions that provide differentiation and competitive advantage.” 

Just what the Romans had in mind. 

I heard a Goodwill Industries radio commercial the other day asking a salesperson to donate an old business suit.  It included many buzzwords from a list that was elaborated on in this post: http://www.growwire.com/tech-buzzwords 

          Pivot   360-degree view   Disrupt

Actionable Insights   Sync Up   Holistic Approach

Leverage  Open the Kimono   Circle Back   

Deep Dive   Visibility   Core Competency

Buy-In   Growth Hacking   Silos   Hustle   

Unicorn   Agile   Bandwidth   Innovation

Digital Transformation 

Do any of these buzzwords find their way into your emails; texts; conversations; or meetings?  I mean, if you don’t have the bandwidth today we could circle back later, do a deep dive to leverage a more holistic approach, open up the kimono and reach actionable insights.  Wait… what? 

Of course, businesspeople who come up with this jargon in the technology field take their buzzwords seriously.  What… wait… can I use “buzzword” and “seriously” in the same sentence?  But I digress… 

In the book The Challenger Sale ©,  the authors published this top 10 list of Buzzword / Marketing Speak / Overused Term.  

What do you think?  When someone is speaking with you and they start to string together buzzwords, does that impress you? 

Maybe it’s a generational thing?  Lord knows, I have to pay extra attention to my younger colleagues.   When I’m having a verbal discussion, they speak unbelievably fast.  I’m peddling as fast as I can just to keep up.  When I’m engaged in a written exchange they add to the buzzword challenge their own “netlingo”!  Their abbreviated imagination BTHOOM.  

I don’t know; are we all so busy these days that our only way of communicating has been reduced to buzzwords; shortcuts; acronyms; and netlingo?  Seems to me that such digital transformation will inadvertently disrupt our ability to understand one another.  George Bernard Shaw in his book Managing Conflict in the Workplace © puts it this way: 

The problem with communication, is the illusion it has taken place. 

You tell me… is our society today increasing the mastery of the English language and in so doing improving our level of communication and corresponding understanding?  Maybe we’re simply waiting for the robots to take over communications on our behalf.  Computers talking to computers… hmmm… would such growth hacking make things for we humans better?  Or worse? 

And as such innovative initiatives evolve, who would be the innovator, the program or the programmer?  The question may deserve a 360-degree view before we all hustle to buy-in to this agile, solution to a new, improved and unique way of thought exchange. 

Where is Spock’s Vulcan mind meld when we need it? 

GAP 

Did you like this little ditty?  You might enjoy my past posts too: www.TheQuoteGuys.com

“Old School” …

I read an article in Sales and Marketing Magazine © by Tim Houlihan, Chief Behavioral Strategist at Behavior Academy.  He bracketed his thought leadership with a couple of opinions about history.  Here’s the first:

In 1450, the printing press was expected to render the brain useless by making memorization obsolete – it didn’t.  In 1600, most people were certain the Earth was the center of the universe – it isn’t.  In 1700, most sailors believed drinking malt whisky cured scurvy – it doesn’t.  In 1985, my sales manager told me that mobile phones (then hard-wired into cars) were only good for one thing: calling your customer to say you’re going to be late.

It’s easy to criticize the mistakes of those who came before us, true?  I mean, part of gaining subject matter expertise is learning from mistakes; ours and others:

An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field.

                                 

Niels Bohn

It’s not surprising that people today discount the value of historical knowledge and experience.  They cite examples of failure in our companies; our communities; and our country that have failed - and there are many. 

However, if historical knowledge and extensive experience is no longer of value then who will we follow, and why?  What do you think of those with “credentials” vs. those with “accomplishments”?  There’s a big difference. 

Here’s Tim other opinion that stood out:

Maybe we’ve met.  Was it at a trade show or a conference?  You said you’ve built a lot of sales incentive programs as a manager, and, not to toot your own horn, but they have worked pretty darn well.  So why read this article?  With 20-plus years and more than 1,500 sales incentive programs under my belt, I’ve got something to share.

What do you think?  Is 20-plus years valuable; or should we discount it?  Is Tim’s experience with 1,500+ programs “Old School”?  If so, is that term a compliment or a criticism?  I wasn’t sure myself.  I found this amusing, etymological debate about Old School (link).

Does your company value experience and the people who possess it?  Does your company believe “old guys” are too Old School to have value?  Is your company engaged in a youth movement?

Lest you haven’t realized - and I don’t know how you couldn’t - but just in case and to set the proper context, I’m definitely Old School with all the trappings…  gray hair; a 4-decade resume; deep historical knowledge; the works.

Yet, I’ve noticed the rise of occurrences at my company and others of this phenomenon cited by none other than our favorite, Unknown Sage:

Success has many fathers while failure is an orphan. 

Russian Proverb

Today, I’m witnessing an increase in people claiming unearned success.  Is this a business world spillover originating from youth sports and participation trophies?  I’d like to believe they mean well.  But is bypassing the time it takes to “earn your stripes” too Old School?

Our Unknown Sage reminds us of Hershiser:

Hershiser's Rule:

Anything labeled new and/or improved, isn't.

And goes on about ungrounded claims of success:

When dog food is new and improved tasting, who tests it? 

Is today’s “Subject Matter Expert” title declared or earned?  If earned, based on what criteria?  If their criteria span history and experience, should their expertise be discounted?

Yes, they have met us Old Schoolers before.  Should they discount our value?  Well… do you?

GAP

When life gets tough we could get a helmet… or… we could leverage the peace and share the power of a positive perspective.