The Indiefield Blog

Right now, the economy thrives on messy competition - businesses and products battling for attention, shelf space, and profits. It's wasteful, unpredictable, and often inefficient. The internet has made this competition even fiercer, with platforms like eBay and Google pitting buyers and sellers against each other.

But what if we flipped the script and used technology to create smarter coordination instead? Take Kickstarter: it lets creators gauge interest and secure funding before they produce anything. Or imagine using similar tools to fill restaurant tables, sell soon-to-expire goods, or optimise event attendance.

By understanding buyer preferences in advance, we can reduce waste, lower costs, and make things run smoother for everyone. The future of the economy isn’t just about competing harder. It's about coordinating better, creating less waste, and giving consumers more power.

And let's be honest, they don't accomplish much. Even the most polished and convincing excuses rarely lead to meaningful progress.

Explanations, on the other hand, are both rare and valuable.

But the real game-changers are accurate predictions and insightful observations. Those are the skills that set you apart and make a lasting impact.

Spoiler: we're paying for the news.

There's not some mysterious force beaming headlines into our brains - we pay for it, with our money or attention. And what are we buying? Shouting heads, shallow takes, and the latest "scandal-gate". We think we're paying for hard-hitting journalism, but... nope. It's like ordering a gourmet meal and getting fast food.

Almost everything else we buy has gotten better over the years. Has the news? Some outlets aim high, but too many are racing to the bottom and winning that race feels like losing. So next time you scroll, ask yourself: "Wait, I paid for this?"

Putting your final demands on the table at the last minute is traditionally a successful negotiating strategy. It's at the last minute that people are focused, that the stakes are at their highest and when you're the most likely to extract concessions.

The first problem with this is that the professional negotiator on the other side has precisely the same tactic, so it's hard to use it productively.

Secondly, and more importantly, if the relationship is to persist, if you are in this for the long haul, it's essential to recognise that this brinksmanship costs both sides. It makes the pie smaller and it makes it more difficult for you to build something strong, durable, and happy going forward.

Most consumers are complaining to the wrong companies about the wrong things.

There are many (usually large) organisations that shut out consumers. There are politicians who don't listen. There are companies that are wilfully isolated. These are not the people getting yelled at.

So we all yell at the few companies that are actually trying and actually listening, rewarding their goodwill with a flogging. This needs to change.

In a way we are all programmers now. We all have to decide what to post next, what to point to next, what to launch next.

Is there a skill in dreaming up what happens next and what the sequence should be? I think there is. Yes, you must do great work. You also need to figure out how to program for your audience, even if the audience is only one person.

A company uses structure and resources and power to make things happen. They hire people, issue policies, buy things, build things, earn market share and get things done for their clients.

If you only show up when you want something, people will catch on. If you only learn the minimum amount necessary to get over the next hurdle, you'll fall behind.

If short term choices leave you focused on the urgent, you'll almost never get around to doing the important. A flustered programmer who grabs some online code for a short term fix with no real understanding of its impact or inner workings will be in the same chaotic state at some point in the future.

So make sure you do more than the minimum if you truly want to succeed.

The real point of the exercise is to build a company that makes a difference. To care a lot about who your clients are and why (or if) they're happy and if you are making a real difference for them through the work you do.

A shortcut to client and colleague intimacy is to respond in real time. A phone call is more human than an email. On the other hand, when you do your work on someone else's schedule, your productivity plummets, because you are responding to the urgent, not the important, and your rhythm is shot.

The trick is to sort by how important it is that your interactions be intimate. Build blocks of time to do serious work, work that's not interrupted by people who need to hear from you in real time. Not doing this is killing your ability to do great work.