The Indiefield Blog

Companies should never try to change the worldview of the audience they're selling to. The term worldview in this context is the set of expectations and biases that colour the way each of us see the world. The worldview of a 50 year old luxury wine-loving investment banker is very different from that of a 21 year old graduate. One might see a £1,000 bottle of Château Pétrus as both a bargain and a must-have, while the other might see the very same bottle of wine as a tasteless and insane waste of money. Worldview changes three things: attention, bias and vernacular. Attention, because we choose to pay attention to those things that we've decided matter. Bias, because our worldview alters the way we filter and interpret what we hear. And vernacular, because words and images resonate with people differently based on their worldview. It's extremely expensive, time consuming and difficult to change someone's worldview. Sell nuts to squirrels, don't try to persuade dolphins that nuts are delicious.

On social media people talk endlessly about all the things the typical person can't possibly afford. Mansions, cars, jets, jewels, dinners with Gwyneth Paltrow. At the same time, you get negative feedback when you talk about things people have chosen not to have. If you promote a great product that only works on an iPhone, all the people who have chosen Android get angry, that special kind of angry that belongs to the people who made a decision. The reason, I think, is that you're reminding people of a decision they made, a decision that might have felt right at the time, but when they made it, they didn't know what would happen. Turns out there is a big difference between "don't tell me what I can't have" and "don't tell me what I've chosen not to be able to have". So dreaming of winning the lottery is fine but experiencing regret over a decision is not.

If you're not eager to share your perspective, don't bother sharing it. The audience wants to hear what you have to say, and if the question isn't right on point, reframe it, and answer that question instead. If your answers aren't interesting, exciting or engaging, that's on you.

"I did the reading."

No one said the preparation part was fun, but yes, it's important. I wonder why we believe we can skip it and still be so extremely smart.

Philosophers and lawyers talk about agency: the responsibility that comes with the capacity to act in the world. If you can decide, if you can act, you have agency. Life without agency would be a nightmare. Trapped in a box, unable to do anything by choice, nothing but a puppet. It always makes me wonder why then, do both companies and people struggle so intently to avoid the responsibility that comes with agency? "It's not my job, my boss won't let me, there's an ISO rule, we're prohibited, it's our supplier, that's our policy...". It's not something you can turn on or off. Either you have the capacity to act in the world. Or you don't.

The news tells us about the world economy or the national economy, or even the economy in a specific region. This is easy to talk about, statistically driven and apparently important to everyone. But in reality this has absolutely nothing to do with your day, your job and your approach to life. If the unemployment rate in market research doesn't match the national numbers, the national numbers don't matter so much. Economics used to be stuck in geography. Now, as markets and industries transcend location, useful economic stats describe the state of the people you're working with and selling to.

Some people work hard to lower the bar at work. These are the people who not only do the minimum amount permitted, they actually work hard to do just a little bit less than that. Most people seek to meet the bar. They figure out what's expected, and do that. A few people, very few, work to relentlessly raise the bar. They are the ones who overdeliver on projects, show up ahead of schedule, instigate, suggest and push. Raising the bar is exhausting, no doubt about it. I'm not sure the people who engage in this apparently reckless behaviour would have it any other way, though. They get to experience a fundamentally different day, a different journey and a different reputation to everyone else.

No company cares about you. Companies are simply not capable of this. Your bank, certainly, does not care. Neither does your pension provider or even that online retailer that you purchase so much from. It's amazing to me that people are surprised to discover this fact. People, on the other hand, are perfectly capable of caring. It's part of being a human. If you want to build a caring company, you need to fill it with caring people and then get out of their way. When you free your people to act like people (as opposed to cogs in a profit-maximising efficient company machine) then the caring will obviously happen.

There is often an initial warning sign that a project is in trouble. Sometimes it even begins before the project does. Our subconscious starts looking around for an excuse, deniability and something to blame. It gives us confidence and peace of mind - it's far easier to be calm when the police appear at your door if you have an excuse handy. Sometimes we even start looking for the excuse before we accept the project. We say to ourselves (and our clients), "this is best efforts ..." Then, as the project moves along (or not), we continually add to and refine our excuse, reminding ourselves of all the factors that were out of our control. Some people who have a built-in all-purpose excuse (middle child syndrome, wrong astrology sign, some slight at the hands of their upbringing or the system from long ago) and they often end up failing. They have an excuse ready to go, so it's easier to back off when the going is tough. Here's an alternative to the excuse-driven life: what happens if you actively avoid looking for excuses at all? Instead of making excuses, the successful project is filled with people who are obsessed with avoiding excuses.

A shop owner has to make bets. To buy inventory, to choose this over that, to make decisions in advance about what's going to sell. The owner might need to make these decisions months in advance, with no chance to re-order if there's a hit and nothing but discounted sales (losses) for what doesn't sell. The relentless physics of the situation means that shops need the ability to not just pick hits, but to make them. It's so different in the digital world. Amazon Prime says: "We're going to sell everything, and a lot of it. We don't care which thing, because it's all the same to us. Just put everything in the store and the market will sort it out". As a result, they have far less promotional power. Amazon doesn't make a hit, it contains hits - they have it all and the longer the tail, the better.