Tuesday Edition

Go to Garrison Keillor's Cool Friends interview

On a trip away from Lake Wobegon, Garrison Keillor took time to talk to us at tompeters.com. He and Erik had a great conversation about his latest book, A Christmas Blizzard, and many other topics, including a note from Julie Christie. We know you'll enjoy reading his Cool Friends interview.

View our Archives for past interviews.

Blog Roll

The 26th Story
800-CEO-Read
Ageless Marketing
andHow To Reach Women
Katya Andresen
Tom Asacker
Asiabizblog
Jordan Ayan
Martha Barletta
Dave Barry
Ed Batista
Becker-Posner
The Big Picture
The Bing Blog
Blog Critics
John Bogle
BoingBoing
Boomer411
Brand Autopsy
Chris Brogan
BusinessPundit
BW Brand New Day
BW Management IQ
BW The Tech Beat
Cali and Jody
Ben Casnocha
Change This
Church of the Customer
Clear Path International
Conversation Agent
Cooking for Engineers
Copy Blogger
Core77
Coudal Partners
Mark Cuban
Aubrey Daniels
Design Gazette, jkr.co.uk
design*sponge
Jory Des Jardins
Betsy Devine
Don the Idea Guy
Dooce
Down the Avenue
Daniel W. Drezner
Esther Dyson
eHub
Frank Eliason
Judith Ellis
English Cut
Enterprise Media
Evhead
Steve Farber
Fast Company
Fast Lane
Brad Feld
The Fischbowl
Richard Florida
Ze Frank
Freakonomics
Free Business Tips
Gil Friend
gapingvoid
Dan Gillmor
Global Neighborhoods
Seth Godin
Good Experience
Gothamist
Great Leadership
Alan Gregerman
Health Affairs
Health Beat
The Health Care Blog
Dick Heller
Hyperthinker
IDEO Eyes Open
iinnovate
Influx Insights
Innovate on Purpose
In Pursuit of Elegance
Instapundit
The Intuitive Life
Isenblog
Joi Ito
Rich Karlgaard/Forbes
Josh Kaufman
Guy Kawasaki
Leading Blog
Learned on Women
Jonah Lehrer
Martin Lindstrom
Chris Locke
The Long Tail
Made to Stick
John Maeda
Management by Baseball
MarketingProfs:DailyFix
Marketing to Boomer Women
Mavericks at Work
The Messaging Times
Metacool
Nick Morgan
Name Wire
Mike Neiss
Netwoman
No Bullet Points
The Nudge Blog
Nuts about Southwest
John O'Leary
Persistence Unlimited
Personal Branding
Dan Pink
Pink Slip
Play the Game of Life
Pollster
John Porcaro
Portfolio Careers
Virginia Postrel
Power Line
Presentation Zen
PSFK
Pyromarketing
Mitch Ratcliffe
Fred Reichheld
ResearchBuzz
Retailer Blog
Jennifer Rice
Dan Roam
Kevin Roberts
Scott Rosenberg
Rules of Thumb
Samizdata
Ian Sanders
Tim Sanders
Todd Sattersten
Mary Schmidt
Robert Scoble
Scripting News
Doc Searls
Andy Sernovitz
Rajesh Setty
Stephen Shapiro
Signal vs. Noise
Slashdot
Simplicity
Smart Mobs
Sorted Books
Springwise
Halley Suitt
Andrew Sullivan
Sustainable Work
Bob Sutton
The Talent Code
TechCrunch
The Technium
Third Age
Trend Hunter
Trend Watching
Trump University
Penelope Trunk
Trusted Advisor
Twist Image
Web Worker Daily
David Weinberger
What's Next
Susan Willett Bird
The Wisdom of Improv
WonderBranding
Wooster Collective
Steve Yastrow
Your White Room

dispatches from the new world of work

"Systems Thinking" and Me: Never the Twain Shall Meet

I just read a major article on Bill Clinton's new approach to philanthropy. It is profit-based. (Stuff, to get imbedded in day-to-day life, has to be based on sound economics.) I applaud that. The problem I had was that Clinton's principal associate is Ira Magaziner, the same "intellectual" who was the schemer-in-chief behind "Hillary care" in 1993.

Years ago, in my McKinsey days, one of my bosses was bemoaning the help we were getting from an "economic genius." He said, "Tom, consider a matrix. One axis boils down to 'simplifier' vs 'complexifier.' The other is 'smart' and 'dumb.' Thus we are dealing with a 2X2 matrix. The analyst-from-heaven is the 'smart simplifier.' The analyst-from hell is 'smart complexifier.' He is, in fact, worse that the 'dumb complexifier,' who you can simply ignore, and the 'dumb simplifier' who might actually be of help." I can't help but think (Huh? I'm quite certain) that Magaziner is the poster child for "smart complexifier."

I'm also told that Mr M is a devout advocate of "systems thinking." Well, I'm not.

The first thing I wrote that got national attention was an Op Ed in the Wall Street Journal in June 1981. (It appeared 5 days before my Dad died, which was sad, because rightly or wrongly he would have been beside himself.) The article got me in deep doo-doo with my McKinsey colleagues. It was called, "Ideas. Plans. Actions." Planning was the rage, as it mostly still is—and it was-is McKinsey's bread & butter. My article claimed that "planning" was highly overrated. The best performers, I said, seesawed back and forth between "ideas" and "actions." That is, they had a "big idea." (Or a small one, for that matter.) Rather than think it to death, they immediately got the hell into the field and experimented with some element of it (a prototype). They watched what happened, adjusted, and then quickly ran another experiment—in the meantime the "big idea" also was trimmed or expanded to fit the incoming "real" data, the results of those experiments. As far as I'm concerned this approach, rather than a "planning-centric" approach, is the best (bold assertion) route to success. By the by, another definition of "my" approach is the Newtonian "scientific method," wholly dependent on ideas shaped and reshaped by actions—my studies of Nobel laureates in the sciences, for example, suggests (and not oversimplifying by much) that the winners "do more experiments faster." (Among other things, this was what my summer neighbor for a few years and winner of a Nobel for the first successful organ transplant told me of his situation, giving me heightened confidence in my beliefs.)

I am an unabashed fan of MIT Media Lab guru Michael Schrage—particularly his book Serious Play. His principal axiom: "You can't be a serious innovator unless you are ready and able to play. 'Serious play' is not an oxymoron; it is the essence of innovation." And, in turn, the heart of his serious play is ... fast prototyping: "Effective prototyping may be the most valuable core competence an innovative organization can hope to have." His intriguing connection, which makes all the sense in the world to me, is that true innovation comes not from the idea per se, though it guides the work, but from the "reaction to the prototype." In fact, in a surprising number of cases (the majority?) the collective responses to a host of fast prototypes reshape the original idea beyond recognition—or lead one down an entirely new path.

Years and years ago, while working in the UK, I delightedly heard a Cadbury exec call his approach to product development "Ready. Fire. Aim." It was love at first sound. (Mistakenly, Ross Perot is often given credit for this—though I acknowledge it captures his successful mode of action.)

Here is a sampling of my favorite quotes, from trustworthy sources, on the topic:

"How do I know what I think until I see what I say."—C.K. Chesterton

"We made mistakes, of course. Most of them were omissions we didn't think of when we initially wrote the software. We fixed them by doing it over and over, again and again. We do the same today. While our competitors are still sucking their thumbs trying to make the design perfect, we're already on prototype version #5. By the time our rivals are
ready with wires and screws, we are on version #10. It gets back to planning versus acting: We act from day one; others plan how to plan—for months."—Bloomberg by Bloomberg

"This is so simple it sounds stupid, but it is amazing how few oil people really understand that you only find oil if you drill wells. You may think you're finding it when you're drawing maps and studying logs, but you have to drill."—The Hunters, by John Masters, wildly successful Canadian Oil & Gas wildcatter

"Experiment fearlessly"—BusinessWeek, in a Special Report, on the premier innovation strategy of the best innovators

"The secret of fast progress is inefficiency, fast and furious and numerous failures."—Kevin Kelly, founding editor, Wired

I won't arrogantly proclaim "Case closed"—though, secretly (not), that's what I feel based on over a quarter century of pretty intensive study.

There is lots to learn from "systems thinking"—but the heart of the matter for me will always be to cast the plan aside for the moment—and get into the lab (field) and try something concrete. Only then will you begin to learn about the practicality (implementability) of your Grand-Grandiose Design—uh, system.

(NB: The principal objection to my approach is that we end up with a not so pretty cobbled together design. True. But there is a term for that: "Welcome to the real world." Or Speaker Tip O'Neill's "Politics is the art of the possible"—all effective implementation is the product of smart corporate or non-corporate politics, as much as that idea offends purists. Magaziner's approach in '93 might well have been "perfect"—though most of us think the opposite, but its result was overcomplexity, total failure to implement—and loss, after 50 years of hegemony, of the House by the Democrats.)

Tom Peters posted this on 09/29/07. | Comments (19)