A piece of banana cream pie... the 2016 version.

The following is the original and the rewrite can be found by clicking here.

There will be a point in all of this; I am almost certain.

I was out to dinner the other night with my father and daughter; at the end of the meal I thought I would treat myself to dessert. As I was looking over the menu, I noticed they offered banana cream pie (number two on my dessert list... number one is chocolate, but only by a hair).

As I placed my order with anticipation, I was instantly reminded of a small circa 1930's diner just north of Carlsbad, California that serves the best banana cream pie ever - The pieces are generous, five inches high, large pieces of banana prevail and covered with whipped cream in just the right proportion to bring all the flavours together. Best pie in the county I was told... maybe even the state. 

Banana cream pie was about to be redefined for me. 

As the server placed the banana cream pie in front of me I had to take a moment to comprehend what I was seeing; what I found myself looking at was a white bowl and a spoon... it was explained to me the banana cream goodness was inside. Admittedly, the dessert was good and it did have real banana in it, but in the end there was no pastry, and I missed the signature wedge that defines a piece of pie. 

When the server came back she asked how it was and I said, "It was good, but it really wasn't pie you know." She smiled and said, "Yes it is. It tastes like banana cream pie and there is pastry* at the bottom. We bantered back and forth until I paid the bill. We parted with differing opinions.

Looking back, the natural question to ask is, "Who was right about the pie?" We both agree that it tasted like banana cream pie, but differed in aspects of crust and presentation. Hers comes with a spoon, when everyone knows you eat pie with a fork.... I mean really, what's up with that?  

And finally, we get to some sort of point in all of this. 

The banana cream pie is not about "right" or "wrong", but rather about individual experience, creativity, way of thinking and interpretation... all to be respected, considered, and appreciated. A simple reminder that not only will people look at something differently, but will also have differing ideas on what something should be - A crucial consideration for driving change, progress and evolution. 

What the banana cream pie is really about is "expectation"... and the importance of clarifying what exactly that is.

If the expectation is to have a tasty "banana cream pie like dessert" that can be served quickly and at low cost for a busy restaurant, then the 2016 version is spot on (as I said, it was tasty)... but if the expectation is to have a generous piece of pie with pastry, banana cream, whipped cream and a real fork... well, I guess a trip to California will be required.

The best pie in the county I've been told,

iamgpe 

* The pastry she alluded to was a granular substance and impossible to define with regard to its origin... all I know, it sure wasn't wheat.

Sometimes "solutions" can be just as "problematic"...

The following is the original and the rewrite can be found by clicking here.

If you want to evoke a response just mention a "problem"... "I'm glad it's not my problem". "I wouldn't want to be you". "Oh, that's a tough situation". "That's really unfortunate, I hope you can work through it". The bigger the problem, the more exclamation marks you will find involved.

Whereas, if you happen to mention you have a "solution", you will elicit a far more upbeat response... "Way to go". "You saved the day". "You are a goddess and have saved the company". The bigger the solution, the more exclamation marks you will find involved.

Intuitively, leaning towards the "solution" side of the equation makes for a better day; although having said this, the Contrarian off in the back corner just looked up and wants to offer a thought or two. He has no debate with the fact that "solutions" are better than "problems" and he also wants to scream out, "You are a goddess and have saved the company!!!" He does however suggest that you shouldn't be so quick to perceive a solution as all rainbows and unicorns, as they can be problematic unto themselves (no pun intended; well maybe a little).

Solutions are defined by the problems they "solve for", so as a quick litmus test you need to ask your self:

• "Do I have a solution for a recognized problem?"
• "Do I have a solution looking for a problem?"
• "Do I have something really cool, but not sure what to do with it?"

Other questions may come to mind, but the point is a solution needs to have a problem to solve for - Anything else is problematic as it becomes distracting, wastes time, and detracts from finding a real solution. And even with an aligned problem and solution, it doesn't mean you are free and clear to receive all of those accolades because there is still that whole matter of "line of sight".

Now that you have a problem that has found a solution, the question becomes how are you going to get there. People will want to understand how you are going to actually get to the solution - Do you have "line of sight" to how you will make your solution a real one... what is your pathway to success?

The concept of "line of sight" is beneficial in three regards:

1. "Line of sight" forces the development of the plan making the solution a reality; it forces the execution steps for success to be developed.
2. "Line of sight" reminds you to develop tight and concise language to articulate the problem, solution, and the pathway to success. More often than not, you will need leaders, partners or investors to "see what you see" to get support.
3. "Line of sight" will help you determine if the solution is workable in the first place.

It looks like the Contrarian is finished and has gone back to whatever he was doing... although he did mention something about "you saving the company".

iamgpe

A healthy obsession to stay relevant...

The following is the original and the rewrite can be found by clicking here.

For no particular reason and out of blue, I thought of a brief conversation I had with a leader a couple of years back. We hadn't seen each other in a while and as we were quickly catching up, he asked me what I was doing now - My response was simply, "Trying to stay relevant".

He looked at me for a second and said, "Me too". 

A slight (but relevant) deviation from the topic at hand takes us to Andy Grove, the legendary CEO of Intel, who had a healthy obsession regarding paranoia and wrote about it in his book Only the Paranoid Survive - In part, this is explained in the preface of the book:  

Sooner or later, something fundamental in your business world will change.

I'm often credited with the motto, "Only the paranoid survive." I have no idea when I first said this, but the fact remains that, when it comes to business, I believe in the value of paranoia. Business success contains the seeds of its own destruction. The more successful you are, the more people want a chunk of your business and then another chunk and then another until there is nothing left. I believe that the prime responsibility of a manager is to guard constantly against other people's attacks and to inculcate this guardian attitude in the people under his or her management...

Similar to Andy's healthy obsession with paranoia, I know of at least two people who see the importance of having a healthy obsession to stay relevant, which brings us full circle to the quick conversation that started all of this. Since it seems I have a propensity for definitions, I thought I would start with this:

Rel·e·vant \ˈre-lə-vənt\: closely connected or appropriate to what is being done or considered.

So with that said, and in its simplest terms, "to stay relevant" is to stay closely connected or appropriate to what is being done or considered. Straight forward enough, but similar to what Andy Grove eluded to, sooner or later, what is being done or considered will change... and what was once relevant can quickly become irrelevant (I don't think a definition is needed here).

For the sake of being overly thought provoking, let's say this obsession to stay relevant is for everything - jobs, skills, views, philosophies, relationships, education, politics, the arts, etc. etc. etc.;  pretty much LIFE, give or take a few things. Here is what I have gleaned about the subject so far as I work through my obsession:

• Change, as the popular saying goes, is the only constant and puts you forever at risk of becoming irrelevant - Get comfortable with it.
• In a rather impactful way, you will become irrelevant more than once in your life. In short, it's going to happen to you, and you will have to work through it.
• What you want to be relevant with, is you choice ... staying relevant may not be.
• As much as you can become irrelevant, you can equally become relevant. Only you can decide if you want to stay where you are.
• Not accepting or adapting to change is one of the faster routes to being irrelevant.
• The universe doesn't care if you believe your way of doing things is the best way. Sometimes you will get lucky and be aligned, but know it is fleeting.

As you look at staying relevant, be it in the narrow scope of a job or to staying vibrant with as many aspects of your life as you can, it is ultimately about evolving with the environment around you, seeing what's coming and adjusting accordingly: 

• Have you taken a course of some sort in the last 12 months?
• Do you have a smartphone that is less than two and a half years old?
• Do you have a web site?
• Do you know how to write code?
• Do you have more than two social media channels you actively use?
• Do you actively blog?
• Do you actively video blog?
• Do you read more than five books a year?
• Do you travel?
• Do you socialize with people that are at least ten years older and younger than you?
• Do you actively network?
• Do you ensure your office door is not closed all the time?
• Do you have an overwhelming urge to be curious?
• Etc.

 Truth be told, I can't answer yes to all of the above, but my obsession has me working on it.

gpe