The best job related advice I ever got was “pick your boss, not your job. with the right boss, you'll always have the right job. with the wrong boss, no matter how good the job looks on paper, it'll suck.”

Fyi, that came from Bobby Cameron at Forrester Research

The best job related advice I ever got was “pick your boss, not your job. with the right boss, you'll always have the right job. with the wrong boss, no matter how good the job looks on paper, it'll suck.”

Fyi, that came from Bobby Cameron at Forrester Research

The best job related advice I ever got was “pick your boss, not your job. with the right boss, you'll always have the right job. with the wrong boss, no matter how good the job looks on paper, it'll suck.”

Fyi, that came from Bobby Cameron at Forrester Research

Agree completely: but the sad thing is that in many organizations we often don't get to pick our boss.

Agree completely: but the sad thing is that in many organizations we often don't get to pick our boss.

Agree completely: but the sad thing is that in many organizations we often don't get to pick our boss.

There is an ethos infecting the business world that treats customers like suckers at a carnival, and holds that the job of business is to maintain the hype, the illusion, the pitch. That if you and your co-workers are 'in on it' together.

This is the overleveraged, fundamentally dishonest game that Wall Street investment firms, sub-prime lenders, and many others in business have been playing for the past 20 years or so. I remember when Disney began raising money on Wall Street in the mid 1980s through its Silver Screen Partner funds, a lawyer friend of mine who was working with Disney at the time resigned rather than participate in what he perceived as screwing investors in the funds, and through the use of cross-collateralization, a favorite gambit of film companies at the time that let them write off losses of underperforming films against the profits of their hits. Of course, the studios were adept at jacking up the losses on the books to the point where they could write off almost any obligation to investors in these funds. (That's why Eddie Murphy famously called net profit participation in feature films 'monkey points'. Only a monkey would be stupid enough to accept net profit points, yet that is exactly what Silver Screen Partners was selling.)

Like the carnival, the game has been to rip off the suckers to the very edges of tolerance and then get out of Kokomo one step ahead of the law.

Many of the so-called players in the old game were in fact only cheerleaders for the scam. Cheery, peppy, positive attitudes tbecame more important thatn one's ability to assess a business situation or opportunity critically and honestly. The ultimate scam has, of course, been the selling of the Iraq war. A trillion dollar ripoff that will be affecting us for years if not generations to come.

The only way out of the upside-down mess is to change this poisonous ethos of the past. and replace it with a 'fashion' of working that values honesty over hype, product over packaging, and learning over indoctrination.

You're right on target with your observations. Keep up the good work!

There is an ethos infecting the business world that treats customers like suckers at a carnival, and holds that the job of business is to maintain the hype, the illusion, the pitch. That if you and your co-workers are 'in on it' together.

This is the overleveraged, fundamentally dishonest game that Wall Street investment firms, sub-prime lenders, and many others in business have been playing for the past 20 years or so. I remember when Disney began raising money on Wall Street in the mid 1980s through its Silver Screen Partner funds, a lawyer friend of mine who was working with Disney at the time resigned rather than participate in what he perceived as screwing investors in the funds, and through the use of cross-collateralization, a favorite gambit of film companies at the time that let them write off losses of underperforming films against the profits of their hits. Of course, the studios were adept at jacking up the losses on the books to the point where they could write off almost any obligation to investors in these funds. (That's why Eddie Murphy famously called net profit participation in feature films 'monkey points'. Only a monkey would be stupid enough to accept net profit points, yet that is exactly what Silver Screen Partners was selling.)

Like the carnival, the game has been to rip off the suckers to the very edges of tolerance and then get out of Kokomo one step ahead of the law.

Many of the so-called players in the old game were in fact only cheerleaders for the scam. Cheery, peppy, positive attitudes tbecame more important thatn one's ability to assess a business situation or opportunity critically and honestly. The ultimate scam has, of course, been the selling of the Iraq war. A trillion dollar ripoff that will be affecting us for years if not generations to come.

The only way out of the upside-down mess is to change this poisonous ethos of the past. and replace it with a 'fashion' of working that values honesty over hype, product over packaging, and learning over indoctrination.

You're right on target with your observations. Keep up the good work!

There is an ethos infecting the business world that treats customers like suckers at a carnival, and holds that the job of business is to maintain the hype, the illusion, the pitch. That if you and your co-workers are 'in on it' together.

This is the overleveraged, fundamentally dishonest game that Wall Street investment firms, sub-prime lenders, and many others in business have been playing for the past 20 years or so. I remember when Disney began raising money on Wall Street in the mid 1980s through its Silver Screen Partner funds, a lawyer friend of mine who was working with Disney at the time resigned rather than participate in what he perceived as screwing investors in the funds, and through the use of cross-collateralization, a favorite gambit of film companies at the time that let them write off losses of underperforming films against the profits of their hits. Of course, the studios were adept at jacking up the losses on the books to the point where they could write off almost any obligation to investors in these funds. (That's why Eddie Murphy famously called net profit participation in feature films 'monkey points'. Only a monkey would be stupid enough to accept net profit points, yet that is exactly what Silver Screen Partners was selling.)

Like the carnival, the game has been to rip off the suckers to the very edges of tolerance and then get out of Kokomo one step ahead of the law.

Many of the so-called players in the old game were in fact only cheerleaders for the scam. Cheery, peppy, positive attitudes tbecame more important thatn one's ability to assess a business situation or opportunity critically and honestly. The ultimate scam has, of course, been the selling of the Iraq war. A trillion dollar ripoff that will be affecting us for years if not generations to come.

The only way out of the upside-down mess is to change this poisonous ethos of the past. and replace it with a 'fashion' of working that values honesty over hype, product over packaging, and learning over indoctrination.

You're right on target with your observations. Keep up the good work!

Mike: I don't think I'm quite as cynical as you… yet

Never underestimate the power of incentives. It's tough for people to turn their back on profitable “games”, to go against the crowd and to declare that “everyone else is wrong” (either through their words of dissent and recrimination or by their actions to stop playing). It can take a tremendous amount of personal conviction and strength, and not all of us have it at all times. Our survival instinct guides us to swim with tide, not against it.

And that's why picking the right people, company and cause is so critical. We are what we do: not what we say, or feel, but what we do. If we start playing the wrong game, it can be incredibly hard to stop, especially if we become good at it. Not everybody can improvise as well as you!

Mike: I don't think I'm quite as cynical as you… yet

Never underestimate the power of incentives. It's tough for people to turn their back on profitable “games”, to go against the crowd and to declare that “everyone else is wrong” (either through their words of dissent and recrimination or by their actions to stop playing). It can take a tremendous amount of personal conviction and strength, and not all of us have it at all times. Our survival instinct guides us to swim with tide, not against it.

And that's why picking the right people, company and cause is so critical. We are what we do: not what we say, or feel, but what we do. If we start playing the wrong game, it can be incredibly hard to stop, especially if we become good at it. Not everybody can improvise as well as you!

Mike: I don't think I'm quite as cynical as you… yet

Never underestimate the power of incentives. It's tough for people to turn their back on profitable “games”, to go against the crowd and to declare that “everyone else is wrong” (either through their words of dissent and recrimination or by their actions to stop playing). It can take a tremendous amount of personal conviction and strength, and not all of us have it at all times. Our survival instinct guides us to swim with tide, not against it.

And that's why picking the right people, company and cause is so critical. We are what we do: not what we say, or feel, but what we do. If we start playing the wrong game, it can be incredibly hard to stop, especially if we become good at it. Not everybody can improvise as well as you!

Taylor – I've been thinking about this and how I'm finding people to collaborate with naturally through twitter. No formal filtering going on. All driven my context of the moment and mutual interest. There's a big shift happening in this area (on the fringes right now) that I think will increasingly find its way into common practice for 'organizations'. I also think we are moving away from 'smarts' and 'best practices' and moving toward 'good enough' for 'right now'. At least that's what I'm finding.

Taylor – I've been thinking about this and how I'm finding people to collaborate with naturally through twitter. No formal filtering going on. All driven my context of the moment and mutual interest. There's a big shift happening in this area (on the fringes right now) that I think will increasingly find its way into common practice for 'organizations'. I also think we are moving away from 'smarts' and 'best practices' and moving toward 'good enough' for 'right now'. At least that's what I'm finding.

Taylor – I've been thinking about this and how I'm finding people to collaborate with naturally through twitter. No formal filtering going on. All driven my context of the moment and mutual interest. There's a big shift happening in this area (on the fringes right now) that I think will increasingly find its way into common practice for 'organizations'. I also think we are moving away from 'smarts' and 'best practices' and moving toward 'good enough' for 'right now'. At least that's what I'm finding.

More natural, more transparent, more “real”… or at least I hope.

Does it make sense to say that “good enough” for “right now” lends to a more fluid organization, more shifting, more fluid, less “company” and more “collective”?

But doesn't that also mean there needs to be more “best practices” or “understood rules for coordination” to reduce interpersonal, intracompany transaction costs for organizing activity? Or does the Internet and the increasingly passive, ambient, asynchronous nature of communication such a better platform for organizing activity that codified best practices are no longer as necessary?

More natural, more transparent, more “real”… or at least I hope.

Does it make sense to say that “good enough” for “right now” lends to a more fluid organization, more shifting, more fluid, less “company” and more “collective”?

But doesn't that also mean there needs to be more “best practices” or “understood rules for coordination” to reduce interpersonal, intracompany transaction costs for organizing activity? Or does the Internet and the increasingly passive, ambient, asynchronous nature of communication such a better platform for organizing activity that codified best practices are no longer as necessary?

More natural, more transparent, more “real”… or at least I hope.

Does it make sense to say that “good enough” for “right now” lends to a more fluid organization, more shifting, more fluid, less “company” and more “collective”?

But doesn't that also mean there needs to be more “best practices” or “understood rules for coordination” to reduce interpersonal, intracompany transaction costs for organizing activity? Or does the Internet and the increasingly passive, ambient, asynchronous nature of communication such a better platform for organizing activity that codified best practices are no longer as necessary?

Thanks for this conversation. My thoughts are just emerging on this now.

I think best practices are valueable for documenting and sharing how
things have been done. I also think that what we are moving toward is
about engaging people with unique contribtuons to make vs. trying to
import best practices. It's about engaging human capital vs.
Intellectual capital and will be more common the more fluid the
organization or project is in terms of collaborators (peer producers).

Heh – interesting the think through this out loud. Thoughts?

Thanks for this conversation. My thoughts are just emerging on this now.

I think best practices are valueable for documenting and sharing how
things have been done. I also think that what we are moving toward is
about engaging people with unique contribtuons to make vs. trying to
import best practices. It's about engaging human capital vs.
Intellectual capital and will be more common the more fluid the
organization or project is in terms of collaborators (peer producers).

Heh – interesting the think through this out loud. Thoughts?

Thanks for this conversation. My thoughts are just emerging on this now.

I think best practices are valueable for documenting and sharing how
things have been done. I also think that what we are moving toward is
about engaging people with unique contribtuons to make vs. trying to
import best practices. It's about engaging human capital vs.
Intellectual capital and will be more common the more fluid the
organization or project is in terms of collaborators (peer producers).

Heh – interesting the think through this out loud. Thoughts?

Thanks for this conversation. My thoughts are just emerging on this now.rnrnI think best practices are valueable for documenting and sharing howrnthings have been done. I also think that what we are moving toward isrnabout engaging people with unique contribtuons to make vs. trying tornimport best practices. It’s about engaging human capital vs.rnIntellectual capital and will be more common the more fluid thernorganization or project is in terms of collaborators (peer producers).rnrnHeh – interesting the think through this out loud. Thoughts?

I think you're spot on. Figuring out how to engage people and be flexible enough to get the maximum value out of new contributors will definitely be a key asset. Best practices will be in terms of how to engage and share; best practices will not be “this is exactly how to do it”.

I think you're spot on. Figuring out how to engage people and be flexible enough to get the maximum value out of new contributors will definitely be a key asset. Best practices will be in terms of how to engage and share; best practices will not be “this is exactly how to do it”.

I think you're spot on. Figuring out how to engage people and be flexible enough to get the maximum value out of new contributors will definitely be a key asset. Best practices will be in terms of how to engage and share; best practices will not be “this is exactly how to do it”.

I think you’re spot on. Figuring out how to engage people and be flexible enough to get the maximum value out of new contributors will definitely be a key asset. Best practices will be in terms of how to engage and share; best practices will not be “this is exactly how to do it”.

[...] What I want to do: I want to work on something that matters, on something I can care about with a group of great people. [...]

[...] the importance of APIs (read and write APIs, btw) in linking together web services, creating development communities and building effective business models, developing an API at the same time as creating the [...]