Some thoughts on working in the postmodern ecosystem, specifically in a start-up environment.
1. One month equals a quarter and one year seems like five.
2. The spokesperson or the spokes-people.
3. Gen-Flux: are you bracing for upheaval
_______________________________________________________
1. One month equals a quarter and one year seems like five.
This may be of no surprise to you… but, in the start-up world everything is urgent. This urgency is not bad or good… it just is.
“…for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.“
- Hamlet, speaking to Rosencrant
I think what Shakespeare was saying in this iambic pentameter prose, is this: only in looking back do we have the space to judge whether an action can be categorized as good or bad. In the moment judgement is given no quarter, only action and progress.
In the start-up world nothing is more truthful than this sentiment. As the future of the company leans on the progress of today. Yes, we can look back on last week and learn. Realizing which decision and subsequent action was a good play, and critiquing the bad ones, always learning, always implementing, always moving. And in this movement we look up every once and a while and realize the work that has been done equates to months of productivity mashed into the confines of a 30-day cycle. Then in a moment of celebration we sigh, one of those contented after a good meal sighs, take off our headphones and share a pint of barley. Crashing down on our pillows we dream of API integrations and organic user growth strategies… Only to be awoken at 5:45am to the smooth sound of Jack Johnson’s “Anything But the Truth” from our Hip Clock app on our iPhone, allowing Jack’s acoustics to propel us again, into the urgency that is the start-up life.
2. The spokesperson or the spokes-people.
My buddy Tony spurred some thinking in me, with his post on brand influence. It seems in a pre-social media (read: social empowered) world, the norm was to restrict brand engagement to the requisite spokesperson, thereby vaulting (as Tony states) the brand, the organization or the spokesperson themselves (usually the CEO or President) above the minions who actually run the show. But in an era of participation, where each cog now has a voice of their own, we are seeing varying degrees of response from said corporations accustomed to controlling the voice.
Some have responded with ignorance, others with 1984-ish regulations in which employees are reprimanded for speaking out (in any form) about the company. Personal antidote: After signing a 3-month contract with a large corporation in Pella, IA, I innocently tweeted out something to the effect of adulation for getting to work with such a well respected corporation. That very day, before I had even stepped foot into the building, I received no less than three emails of reprimand for tweeting about the corporation. It seems this former Fortune 500 company had employee regulations in place stipulating the “appropriate social network behavior” which is basically, “Don’t tweet about said company.”
This would be an example of a corporation that doesn’t embrace the reality of today, that is, each member of the organization is a conduit of information about the company. This is scary to most organizations, because they are worried about the negative PR that a disgruntled employee may create. So. Instead of solving the problem of disgruntled employees they attack the symptom by putting a employee regulation in place.
But if we look at this from another perspective by embracing the employees of the organization as people with vested interest in the success of the company, we can empower our teammates to be positive voices, vaulting the perceived image of the company to something tangible rather than a boilerplate image manufactured for the big screen.
Newsflash. There is no longer a big screen. Just as there is no longer room for just one voice, one builder. We are all builders, and if treated well, each of us will also be the best evangelists the company could ask for. It’s a mutually beneficial relationship, keeping the integrity of management intact, by giving a voice to the cogs.
3. Gen-Flux: are you bracing for upheaval
I was reading an article in Fast Company, on the Gen-Flux… And I’m now pretty convinced, people groups as defined by genographic norms are being replaced by more psychographic traits. That is, the new paradigm, as influenced by globalization and the internets, is based on flexibility, instability, and adaptability. Gone are the broad strokes defining a culture by its birthdate, rather we can be defined by our model of phone, and whether or not you are bi-lingual… not in language but in code type. Those of us labeled Gen-Flux do quite a few things very well, we are flexible to the environment albeit corporate, non-profit, start-up or small business. We are comfortable with instability, that is, we do not need a label to be productive and work well in the unknown. We are adaptable and can be dropped into new teams and projects at a moments notice, we can learn on the fly and don’t need months of educational prep to be productive.
Some personality types thrive in this new environment, as it seems the job security of our professional fathers has been shown for what it is… white collar factory work. Jobs dependent upon escalating GDP and unlimited access to natural resources. But in this new world — financial stability of large organizations is tied to the markets of Asia and Europe. We are no longer an autonomous economy, this utopia has been replaced with an incestuous interconnectivity which rises and falls based on the turmoil of the day (no matter where the disturbance propagates).
So. Are you ready? Are you a Renaissance Man or Woman… Or are you a stalwart? Bemoaning the bygone days of corporate retirement packages and social security paybacks.
