August 2007 Archives

BusinessWeek has an article "Why 'Good Enough' Is Good Enough", with the premise that "imperfect technology greases innovation -- and the whole marketplace."

I'm known for saying in my keynote speeches that "perfection is the enemy of innovation." Why? Perfection is expensive, unattainable, time consuming and limits flexibility -- a quality needed for innovation.

However, be sure that the "good enough" mantra doesn't become misunderstood as an excuse for poor quality in areas where quality matters to customers.

My friends from consulting firm Innosight say it best: release a 1.0 version of a product that is "good enough where it has to be, better where it needs to be" (for the consumer job to be done). And then improve the product based on feedback from consumers in the marketplace.

Or as H. Jackson Brown, Jr. said it:

"Some things need doing better than they've ever been done before. Some just need doing. Others don't need doing at all. Know which is which."
UPDATE: the original article below describes my training with SCT as of August 2007. Here are additional links to updated results:

  • Fitness Results Over One Year: Transforming My Body Through Fitness and Nutrition (January 13, 2008)
  • Strength Training: Unpacking New "Streamline SR" Fitness Equipment (August 25, 2007)
  • Fitness Results: Break Out Quarter! (Quarterly report, August 29, 2007: gained another 6.1 pounds of muscle; lost another 2.85 pounds of fat):
  • Strength Training with Static Contraction Training: results after ten months (Quarterly report, May 17, 2007: gained another 1.2 pounds of muscle; lost another 2.95 pounds of fat )
  • Strength Training with Static Contraction Training: results after four months (November 23, 2006)


  • I'm measuring my fitness results quarterly via hydrostatic analysis, which is the gold standard and most accurate method for measuring body composition.

    Results Over The Last Three Months:

  • Lean Muscle: gained another 6.1 pounds of muscle (excellent for my 162 lb frame; following Static Contraction Training - SCT)
  • Fat: lost another2.85 pounds of fat (also good for my frame)
  • Body fat %: reduced from 17.8% to 15.7% (in the 85th percentile for my age; further improvements are for athletic or cosmetic purposes, not necessarily for health)
  • Cumulative Over Six Months: Gained 7.3 pounds of muscle; lost 5.8 pounds of fat.

    Of course, one or two quarters is a short period of time. Longer term, if I continue at the same pace over the next six months, then for the year I will gain more than 14 pounds of muscle and reduce almost 12 pounds of fat. Net, I will have transformed my body through fitness and nutrition.

    Charts that show my results over the past six months, since February 2007:

    Body Fat Percent:
    Body Fat Percent chart

    Lean Muscle Mass Percent:
    Muscle Mass Percent chart

    Change in Lean Muscle and Body Fat in Pounds:
    Change in Lean Muscle and Body Fat in Pounds

    Additional links:

  • Fitness Results Over One Year: Transforming My Body Through Fitness and Nutrition (January 13, 2008)
  • Strength Training: Unpacking New "Streamline SR" Fitness Equipment (August 25, 2007)
  • Fitness Results: Break Out Quarter! (Quarterly report, August 29, 2007: gained another 6.1 pounds of muscle; lost another 2.85 pounds of fat):
  • Strength Training with Static Contraction Training: results after ten months (Quarterly report, May 17, 2007: gained another 1.2 pounds of muscle; lost another 2.95 pounds of fat )
  • Strength Training with Static Contraction Training: results after four months (November 23, 2006)


  • Chrysler and Innovation

    | | Comments ()

    A good Q&A with Larry Keeley in a BusinessWeek article about Chrysler, the automotive industry, and innovation. Keeley is co-founder and president of Doblin, an innovation strategy firm. Keeley was recently named by BW as one of seven "Innovation Gurus" that are changing the field.

    "Innovations have to happen inside the car, in changes that improve our busy lives, make them more manageable, more comfortable," Keeley said.

    This rings true to me. For example, my Toyota FJ Cruiser has an audio-in jack in the dashboard, enabling me to easily play my iPod through the sound system. This makes my drive more manageable and more comfortable. In contrast, most cars I rent when traveling don't have an audio-in jack. With the ubiquity of the iPod, why don't the automobile companies include this as a standard feature on all new cars?

    More from Keeley in the article:

    DSC_0151---small.jpg "How many times do you see ads and commercials touting a car's horsepower. Do you know your car's horsepower? Do you care? No - nobody knows unless they've lived in Detroit or worked in the auto industry. We spend most of our lives stuck in traffic jams going nowhere near the maximum speed of our vehicle. The innovations have to happen inside the car, in changes that improve our busy lives, make them more manageable, more comfortable. That's where the frontier is.

    These guys [the automotive industry] are trying to focus on the same old market segments. It is just so tired. Every single company at every brand offers every single variant. I can get an SUV from Porsche, from BMW , from Cadillac, from Mercury, from Ford, from Chevy, from Buick, I mean come on, guys. That only makes sense if you look at the industry from the vantage of a manufacturer. It only works if you think about the world in terms of factory efficiency. The industry knows nothing about the frontier needs of the consumers.

    If I wanted to create a big winner for Chrysler, I would help them to devise an approach that is so different from the way the rest of the mainstream industry is behaving. Every industry and every company needs to learn from the periphery rather than the core. Change always happens at the periphery."

    DSC_0151---small.jpg Regular readers of my blog know that I've been doing a form of fitness and strength training called Static Contraction Training - and that I've achieved significant gains in strength (34% gain on bench press and 39% gain on leg press).

    With the very heavy weights needed for SCT, I've pretty much maxed out the conventional equipment at the gym. I found myself spending more time than I wanted loading and unloading weight plates - counter to my goal of maximum results in minimum time - so I began looking for a better option.

    I decided to get the "Streamline SR" from Super Rep (formerly known as Explosive Fitness), equipment specially developed for Static Contraction Training. The equipment uses a static (but adjustable) bar, with a meter that measures force up to 5,000 pounds of resistance. I recently received the equipment and it is the first component in my home gym.

    The Streamline SR requires assembly, with two 9/13-inch wrenches and one 1/2-inch wrench. The instruction manual suggests to allow two to four hours for unpacking and assembly, which proved to be about right. Assembly wasn't as difficult as I thought it would be: it was somewhat like assembling a bicycle.

    Links: Updated Results:

  • Fitness Results Over One Year: Transforming My Body Through Fitness and Nutrition (January 13, 2008)
  • Strength Training: Unpacking New "Streamline SR" Fitness Equipment (August 25, 2007)
  • Fitness Results: Break Out Quarter! (Quarterly report, August 29, 2007: gained another 6.1 pounds of muscle; lost another 2.85 pounds of fat):
  • Strength Training with Static Contraction Training: results after ten months (Quarterly report, May 17, 2007: gained another 1.2 pounds of muscle; lost another 2.95 pounds of fat )
  • Strength Training with Static Contraction Training: results after four months (November 23, 2006)


  • I'm looking forward to integrating this equipment into my work out routines, and will report the results here from time to time. In the meantime, here are unpacking photos, as well as a photo of the finished unit:

    Made to Stick photoI recently attended a presentation by Dan Heath, co-author of the best selling book "Made to Stick". Here is a summary of the most interesting things I heard about why some ideas thrive while others die - and how to improve the chances of worthy ideas.

    "With millions of ideas clamoring for attention, you've got to figure out how to get attention," Heath said. "You don't necessarily have to be a creative genius. There are templates for ideas that stick."

    Heath developed the book by first asking the question, "What makes naturally sticky ideas stick?" He then set out to reverse engineer that and arrived at six traits that successful ideas have in common:

  • Simplicity: strip an idea to its core, something simple and profound. Short sound bites are not the mission. Proverbs are the ideal.

    Heath said that he thinks marketers spend too much time obsessing about their customers and demographics. Customers want something that will do a job for them. The successful Swifter product wasn't born out of understanding the "mopping demographic", it came from an understanding that people need to do a job - sweep floors.

  • Unexpectedness: violate people's expectations to capture people's attention... and hold on to it. But not just surprise, which doesn't last. Generate interest and curiosity.

    "Think about what people expect us to say, that as soon as we say it, people tune out," Heath said. "Is there something we could disrupt there to get their attention?"

    Heath said that the Atkins diet is an example, because it was completely different than what we expected a diet to be. Interestingly, you probably first heard about it not from marketing but via word of mouth, which is how sticky ideas travel.

  • Concreteness: explain ideas in terms of concrete images, human actions and sensory information.

  • Credibility: if we're trying to persuade a skeptical audience to believe a new message, we're fighting against an uphill battle against a lifetime of personal learning and social relationships. Fortify the idea with sources of credibility, including authorities, the power of vivid details, and contextualizing statistics in terms that are more human and everyday.

  • Emotions: to get people to care about an idea, make them feel something.

    Heath talked "identity appeal", which is about three questions people ask: who am I, what kind of situation is this, and what does someone like me do in this situation? As an example, Texas had a wildly successful ad campaign to reduce litter in the state with its "Don't Mess With Texas" ads, which appealed to a Texan's sense of patriotism for the state, what they think of themselves as a Texan. This is in contrast to "consequence appeal", which is about cost vs. benefit.

  • Stories: to get people to act on ideas, tell stories. Three types of stories: The challenge plot (David vs. Goliath), the connection plot (form a relationship across boundaries), and the creativity plot (triumph over a difficult task via ingenuity). All three share a sense of inspiration.

    These six qualities are quite powerful and many are common sense, however they aren't commonly applied due to the 'curse of knowledge'. Heath explained:

    "The smarter we get, the more experience we gain, the more skill we get," Heath said. "But simultaneously, it becomes increasingly hard to empathize with our audience, who doesn't have all the knowledge we have. The people with the most knowledge often have a difficult time talking about it."

    The cure: translate that message into something sticky. A person can learn without a lot of domain knowledge.

    Heath was asked, how do you apply these principles?

    "We all have the moment when we have the spark of an idea," Heath said. "Freeze that moment. How do you go about expressing it? What is the creative execution?" That's where the six traits come into play.

  • What separates companies that innovate successfully from those that fail in their innovation efforts? Futurethink, an innovation research, tools and services firm, surveyed 248 executives to find out. The results are published in their white paper "Cracking the Code of Effective Innovation"

    Key findings in the report:

    1. The state of innovation in organizations today is in dire need of improvement. The average innovation score across all organizations was 8.3 out of a possible 20.

    2. Organizations are taking the easy way out. They tend to focus on "ideas" and "climate" capabilities that are relatively easier to manage and control. They neglect "strategy" and "process" -- the more difficult and complicated capabilities required to successfully make innovation work.

    3. Organizational size plays a major role in the effectiveness of innovation. The smallest and largest organizations had the highest innovation scores. But mid-sized companies all fell below the average.

    4. Two styles of innovation emerge. One is an informal approach with a focus on generating ideas typified by small organizations. The other is a more formal approach that relies on a robust process for innovation, typified by the largest organizations. The most effective way to innovate would be to blend these two approaches (easier said than done).

    5. Surprising list of high and low performing sectors. Sectors that one would expect to be high-performers scored below the average. These include Computers, Electronics & Technology, Consumer Packaged Goods, and Healthcare. On the other hand, sectors that one traditionally thinks of as not innovative actually scored above the average. These include Education, Government, and Industrial Products.

    The white paper delves into the details of these findings.

    About this Archive

    This page is an archive of entries from August 2007 listed from newest to oldest.

    July 2007 is the previous archive.

    September 2007 is the next archive.

    Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.