Comments

Very interesting post. It's funny how things work out. You may recieve an outcome from an event that you never expected.

That's why I try to get involved in as much as I can. I am from NY and many people question my decision to attend the University of Minnesota. I love it their so far and am looking forward to my next three years. This post is very encouraging and I will continue my journey.

Posted by Ryan Freed at July 6, 2009 10:33 AM

Tom, what is so funny is that when Lorenz formulated this theory back in the 1960's, he was virtually laughed out of the New York Academy of Sciences. But in the 1990's, scientists started getting curious and played around with it. What was initially thought to be a preposterous idea turned out to work. 100% of the time.

Most people live their lives unaware of the potential impact of even the smallest decisions or actions (or even their inaction.) I've met lots of people who walk around depressed, feeling as though their life has no meaning. If they would stop to think of how even a tiny piece of advice given to a child can shape the child's future, what that child does, and how that child's actions in turn affect the lives of countless more people in turn, they would realize that every life is significant. Everyone matters. As I point out, the problem is that because we can't directly see or touch the connections between cause and effect (they are so distant in space and time) we ignore the fact that there are, indeed, connections.

Here are links to a couple of videos of my friend Andy Andrews explaining and demonstrating the butterfly effect that I highly urge people to watch. Very eye opening.

http://www.youtube.com/user/AndyAndrewsdotcom#play/uploads/17/T3XagavMnxM

http://www.youtube.com/user/AndyAndrewsdotcom#play/uploads/18/FnwddVuhW8c

And here is my all-time favorite story that demonstrates the butterfly effect in action. When you see the document on the screen, scroll up a bit and start reading under the heading "Do You Really Matter?" on page 175:

http://tinyurl.com/no3nba

I'm going to make myself hush now, because I absolutely love the subject of the butterfly effect and I could lecture on it for days on end.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 6, 2009 11:37 AM

Johnny, we hardly knew ye! I would have never guessed ROTC! The post is right on...My career planning process has often been determined by chance encounters rather than a well thought out road. I do so hope I am mindful of my effect on others as well. Now about that consulting thing being rock bottom.... :)

Posted by mike Neiss at July 6, 2009 11:52 AM

I participate in Tom's blogs and share exchanges with him today because of something that serves as proof of this phenomenon.

I was an avid reader of Tom's books from the "In Search of Excellence" days. But it was in 1999 that I went online in the wee hours of the night looking to order a copy of the video of the same name. On Wynncom's website, it was priced at something like $69.95. I placed my order. The next day, I received a call from Wynncom apologizing, stating that there was an error in their system. The video was actually supposed to be $699.95. Oops. They said that they WANTED to sell me the video at the price I'd ordered it for, but that contractually they could not. I was not upset. But because Wynncom tried to go above and beyond in the way of customer service per their experience and the ideas of Tom Peters, they sent me two complementary seats to see Tom speak in Atlanta in September.

Thus I was there, in person the day Tom did his first ever webcast and launched his "The Work Matters!" movement. But the story doesn't end there.

I decided I would purchase some tapes for sale outside the auditorium after the program. The link for their credit card machine was acting up, so it took a little time for them to complete the authorization. That delay actually paid off. Almost everyone had cleared the auditorium and lobby. As I was standing there waiting, Tom walked out of the auditorium with his little cart of books and gear. I thought "Maybe Tom won't mind signing my book?" He was gracious enough to do so and we struck up a little conversation. A photographer was taking shots of Tom at the moment and shot one of me and Tom conversing over one of his books that were released that day. I have a copy of that photo on my Facebook page, courtesy of a very wonderful lady that worked for TPCo. at the time. "Thank you, Veri."

Meanwhile, another branching of this chain of events took off...

Long story short, through another series of events that each seem tiny in and of themselves, I also wound up being in Arlington, TX for the satellite broadcast of the 1999 "Worldwide Lessons in Leadership" and attending the reception following with Tom, Ken Blanchard, Stephen Covey, Meg Wheatley, et al. I was blessed to actually get to spend some time just simply conversing with these very gifted and talented people. I was in my element and it was one of the absolute highlights of my life. That's why I will tell you with absolute conviction to my dying day that Tom Peters is NOT some haughty person with an "I'm too good to speak to the likes of you" attitude. Quite the contrary, he's amazingly down to earth and just a blast to hang out with for a while. And I have nothing but respect for him. Not because he's some popular author, but because I've spent at least some time around Tom "off stage" and in email exchanges and he has more than earned my respect as a human being.

I say all this to point out one of my favorite examples of the butterfly effect in action. Change any single, seemingly insignificant detail in any of the events of the past, and there's a very good chance I would have missed out on many excellent exchanges with Tom over these 10 years or so.

I decide to order a video at 2 a.m.... a temporary computer glitch... a customer service rep goes above and beyond... eventually leading to me enjoying Tom's blog this very day and utilizing many of his ideas in interactions with clients this very day.

Everything and everyone matters.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 6, 2009 12:24 PM

Great story, Dan!

Mike, I was also on the rifle team in my ROTC days, given my proficiency with the M-1 -- tho I kept getting my thumb caught re-loading. But I've always had a problem getting up early, and the US Army - especially in Vietnam - might not have let me keep my own hours. Re your having an effect on others, that $10 you loaned me five years ago certainly counts as big-time altruism. (That doesn't mean you're likely to get it back soon, however.)

Ryan, given the Butterfly Effect, every decision you make in your college years can have life-altering consequences decades later. If the pressure of that becomes too much to handle, just do what I did and stay in bed.

Posted by John O'Leary at July 6, 2009 12:54 PM

So many people I coach have ended up doing what they do not through design but they just kinda fell into it. I am fascinated by what is concious decision and what is based on the subconcious, intuition of just plain luck.

Posted by PaulH at July 6, 2009 1:02 PM

Thanks for the advice John. I have already seen the effects of this at a young age, who knows what is in store for my future.

Tom,

I wanted to let you know that your daily quotes have been very inspirational. I posted an article, Introduction to Expressions on my website. We follow our leadership chapters with what we like to call a "Link Fest" post containing relevant material from other blogs and websites. I will be posting a link to your daily quote subscription and explaining it's significance on tomorrows link fest. Thanks for the inspiration.

Posted by Ryan Freed at July 6, 2009 1:57 PM

Good post, John. I think we can probably all relate to it in one way or another. At the base of your post seems on one level to be the ancient debate of predestination vs. choice. Personally, I believe in both. Our mere existence indicates the former and our daily lives the latter.

There is this mystical present in the post that when it comes to the financial crisis does not seem applicable. While one action (greed of the bankers and self-preservation of the members of Congress without which the public could not have acted) may have contributed to this financial collapse, the actions of others could have avoided or arrested it long before now. Wouldn't it had been great had someone listened to Taleb or Roubini?

With the Butterfly Effect, can it be reversed mid-flap or later? There is a sense of the inevitable that can go both ways, favorable and unfavorable, that causes me to wonder. Our fate, personally and professionally, then lies outside of ourselves. This is uncomfortable on one hand, but perhaps produces a personal and professional, even a global significance on the other. By this I mean, others help to form us, our outputs, and ideas, even if only from a competitive standpoint.

On a professional level this Effect, one that seems interdependent on others for success or failure, is worth considering, personally, professionally, nationally and globally. However, I do believe that this interdependence when it comes to nation states often falls flat, as each seems to be in a constant race for dominance, from a military sense but obviously not from an economic one. China's interest in the US is significant here. If this Effect is relevant, then how we adapt or reject its effects probably matters most.

Presidents Obama and Medvedev did well in Russia this afternoon. After one meeting in London earlier this year, they signed an agreement to reduce nuclear warhead arsenals to the lowest levels ever. The foundation laid by the Regan administration and hampered by the Bush Administration seems to be restored in the Obama Administration. What might the Effect been?

If the essence of the Butterfly Effect is that we need to be conscious of our actions no matter how small, I completely agree. If we are in search of some mythical linkage to affirm our actions or inactivity void of conscious thought this would concern me.

PaulH - Your points are appreciated. Often times we create our own serendipity by our thoughts and actions, shown in both conscious and subconscious ways. "As a man thinks in his heart, so is he." Our thoughts shape us and attract or detract others.

Ryan - You are a wonderful young man from whom I have learned. Thank you.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 6, 2009 4:35 PM

Great post John. I’m pretty sure luck plays a bigger part than planning in many careers.

There are, of course, those who set out their career plan at an early age and work in a focused way to move step-by-step to their desired goal before retiring safe in the knowledge they arrive 'home' in the board game of life by the planned route.

And then there are the rest of us that stumble our way through our careers rather like the typical drunken Glaswegian on a Saturday night in Soggy Hall Street, Glasgow. And like our peer who has 'the plan' we too eventually arrive 'home' but we are not quite sure how we got there if we are asked to explain our route.

Life is good Sir and now less than 24 hours to go :- )

Posted by Trevor Gay at July 6, 2009 5:52 PM

Hi Tom,

Let me first put forward I enjoy reading your posts/chirps/books. They are an example in our field.

My determining moment was in my first day in uni when someone introduced me to the faculty paper. After that it quite smoothly went to where I am now, self employed and very happy at what I am doing at the moment. Still I believe I wouldn't have ended far off from where I am now if I didn't make that that decision 14 years ago. Read 'Making history' from Stephen Fry. He works it out in a macabre way however. Good luck, Jaap

Posted by Jaap Huibers at July 6, 2009 6:36 PM

Seems like from a drugs, sex and rock & roll standpoint - wow - that did NOT work out so well with rampant addiction/dead brain cells, STD's & hearing loss - is there a business theory there somewhere of exactly what not to do?

A butterfly event for me was a manager who out of the blue picked me to operate the office mainframe computer. What a trip/blessing/curse/magical mystery tour to be an early adopter of having intelligent machines do most of the work. About 5 years ago I sought him out in Ashland, Oregon to thank him for how things played out.

Clearly the current notorious "butterflys" are the nefarious front liners who stole mortgages at all levels then walked away from their new rat infested "homes" - only to later be imprisoned/deported as penance for their sins against humanity, their indecent crimes, and immoral ways. :>)

Posted by UK Love at July 6, 2009 6:59 PM

1. "Want to debate?" - Guy behind me in my freshman class in high school. Completed high school with two state speech championships. Gave me confidence and an identity that got me through. I use these skills everyday - 40ish years later.
2. Took a "computer" class in high school. Became a passion and a career. Being paid to have fun.
3. Air Force barracks buddy: "they'll send you to college and make you an officer and you can still do computers." ROTC at Southern Cal. Twenty year career living around the world.
4. A note I had rejected as a laugh came back with a fellow officer's note "Bruce, I think you might like this." Spent a year at the Software Engineering Institute at CMU. Still use everyday what I discovered while there, almost 20 years now.
5. Met my wife at an SEI sponsored conference I spoke at. She had to attend because her boss got called away. We never even lived in the same timezone until we got married. Nineteen years and two kids later still going strong.

Posted by Bruce Benson at July 6, 2009 9:07 PM

Hi John! It's so interesting that you posted this after I just delivered a speech called, "What if..." I often wonder what my life would have been like had I moved to NYC after college rather than Atlanta...I can't even imagine how different! But, then of course, that's looking back trying to imagine what might have been and I'm not sure what purpose that serves. I would propose you ask the question "What if...?" to imagine a new future. My speech was about 3 techniques used to tap into your creative mind: #1 Learn to Challenge Your Assumptions, #2 Change your perspective and #3 Let your ideas run wild. Here's to the possibilities!

Posted by Darci Riesenhuber at July 6, 2009 10:25 PM

Many many butterflies, flocks (swarms?) of the things. Butterflies (the shifting of a law faculty from one university to another) led to my dropping out of law and into design; a tutor moving my application portfolio into a different category led to my getting into art college; a dare led to my first design job in museums; a chance conversation with a fellow commuter led to my move into the private sector telecoms industry, and and and...

... if my current client had not grown up in London and visited the Science Museum in her youth, and chosen to visit it again when I was heading its enterprise division, and the director had not asked me to host her visit, then I would not now be in Syria creating a national programme of non-formal learning opportunities for young people, which is quite simply the most fulfilling job I have ever had.

"What if..." indeed.

Posted by RobCH at July 7, 2009 12:43 AM

Great stories here of folks who—mostly unwittingly and yet fortuitously—made a major contribution to our lives. It’s especially rewarding when we can actually locate those people—sometimes decades later—and thank them.

Dan, good videos you recommended. Yes, the outcome of major wars—and certainly major battles—is frequently determined by butterflies.

Darci, we can’t go on meeting this way. Hey, good point about using “what if” for re-imagining the future. But we don’t have to think of the “past” as the past—as in dead and buried. After all we’re always viewing the past in the present. We have an opportunity to frame it, view it, interpret it anew each time. (For instance, I used to think of my early years in college as pretty bizarre—the ROTC drills, the Ancient Greek classes, the weekend pharmaceutical research, etc.—but now I see that period of my life as wildly and richly experimental—a good thing for a conservative Irish-Catholic kid.) So we can always take a refreshed view of our own storyline. And in looking at the “initial conditions” of that storyline we can find new insights. And people to be eternally grateful for.

Posted by John O'Leary at July 7, 2009 10:17 AM

"#1 Learn to Challenge Your Assumptions, #2 Change your perspective and #3 Let your ideas run wild. Here's to the possibilities!"

This is really good Darci.

1. How often is this done?
2. This can't be done without 1.
3. We are often separated from imagining possibilities. The imagination, as TP said in his "Quote of the Day," is valuable:

"With imagination, one can add value to, literally, anything."

But I wonder if how value is assessed is what matters and if the imagination is not fostered there is literally no value.

How much of what Darci has said is based on that flutter?

My life has been a conscious effort to get outside of my comfort zones in order to produce possibilities. I have not waited for the decisions of others to act and if my actions are based on some beforehand decision it includes, at least, my conscious thought. It's ultimately about our decisions even if the decisions of others have led us to a particular place.

Luck is an interesting phenomenon. I think we create our own luck; our choices, experiences and wonderment may have their basis too. It doesn't seem likely that luck is just floating about unattached to anything. Perhaps what we think of as luck is indeed that flap, that action of another, that interconnection that hits a conscious (you have to at least recognize or choose a path when presented) creative or willing mind. In this sense luck is all around. What we focus on or allow or our openness to see beyond our familiarity, may make all the difference.

It continues to be an extraordinary ride!

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 7, 2009 10:41 AM

John - you are absolutely correct. One can always reflect back and look at it with a new perspective (#2) and gain insight that wasn't there the first time around. I trail run quite frequently and I'm always so amazed at how different everything looks when you run a trail in the opposite direction...almost as if I've never been there before. I see trees I've never noticed before. Curves in the path that don't even look familiar. It's quite weird, but exciting at the same time.

By the way, learning to challeng our own assumptions is much more difficult that it sounds given that most of us don't even know the assumptions from which we operate. They are usually unspoken assumptions, often unacknowledged, living in our subconscience. It's those values and beliefs that have come to form who we are and how we think. Have you ever worked with an executive leadership team and asked them to challenge their own assumptions...do they even know what they are? Change an assumption and you can create a butterfly effect on an entire culture.

Oh, and Judith, I heard someone on a daily news program this morning say that "the harder one works the more luck they have."

Posted by Darci at July 7, 2009 2:16 PM

How easily we ignore the fact that "today" IS "tomorrow's past." I see some great comments above in regard to realizing that it's NOT too late to shape tomorrow. I say "Live life on purpose." My two basic rules: (1) Live today with an awareness that it shapes tomorrow, and tomorrow we will be living with the consequences of today's actions, and (2) Rule #1 only turns out to be false if we don't get 'tomorrow' in which case we will spend not just tomorrow but ETERNITY weighing what we did today.

Either way, today matters.

A little proverb I love:

"Yesterday is a canceled check. Tomorrow is a promissory note. Only today is 'legal tender.' Spend it wisely." -- source unknown.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 7, 2009 2:19 PM

Darci, sounds like you've done some of the same sort of work I have. Indeed it is very, very difficult to unveil those assumptions. But it is truly transformational when it does happen. I'm not making a joke when I say that what I've often discovered working with teams is a lot of assumptions about other people's assumptions. Isn't that the core of what people second-guessing one another intentions and motives consists of? It takes a lot for some teams to reach the level of trust and openness that makes it possible to do this sort of thing -- suspending and challenging assumptions. Some teams NEVER reach that point. But if and when they do, you often find things changing for the better quickly because folks have begun working together on a much different and more effective level.

The number one reason I find for people being unable to recognize and deal with their own assumptions: I-N-S-E-C-U-R-I-T-Y. Some think "pride" is the number one reason. I disagree. Attack my pride and I'll be ticked off with you, but call you "wrong," tune you out, and move on. Attack my security and I become paranoid and won't sleep a wink.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 7, 2009 2:36 PM

"By the way, learning to challeng our own assumptions is much more difficult that it sounds given that most of us don't even know the assumptions from which we operate. They are usually unspoken assumptions, often unacknowledged, living in our subconscience."

Darci - Thanks for that. I most certainly concur. It seems to me that the single most important thing in awakening our conscious and subconscious mind is to associate with others who are different from us. If we do not allow for differences in belief and expression, how are assumptions challenged or perhaps even known?

We come to know ourselves on all levels through our interactions with others.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 7, 2009 3:54 PM

All this discussion today has me wishing we could all play the "Beer Game." If you're not familiar with that one, read "The Fifth Discipline" or Google it. It's one of the most hilarious but poignant ways I've ever seen of helping people realize that their own actions and underlying assumptions and the way they and others misread one another's actions and assumptions can create huge fluctuations in anything from a supply chain to, oh, say an entire global economy.

I say it's hilarious. But I've also seen people almost come to blows while playing it, too. I learned quickly not to use it with teams that aren't really ready for changes in their thinking.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 7, 2009 5:16 PM

Dan, the Beer Distribution Game is a VERY cool tool - especially for understanding the Bullwhip Effect in supply chains. Developed by MIT as a "management flight simulator," it demonstrates - among other things - how small changes in "initial conditions" can have enormous downstream effects. And, yes, it shows the importance of challenging one's assumptions - as you, Darci & Judith have discussed. Top executives - including clients of my previous company who used the Beer Game - are routinely humbled by the game, learning valuable lessons about their "attachment" to their strategies.

Posted by John O'Leary at July 8, 2009 9:53 AM

"Whose flapping wings triggered the world wide recessions?" That's easy -- the brainiacs who concocted collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps. With help from snoring regulators.

Posted by stephen at July 8, 2009 8:27 PM

...and the aide of key government officials i.e., Senator Chris Dodd (D) and Senator Richard Shelby (D). Dodd is the chairman of the powerful Senate Committe on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs and Shelby is a ranking member. How is it that these men are still in their positions?

Banking has failed. Housing has failed. Urban affairs are in a mess. It seems that these men are like some Wall Street executives who by sheer number of years and clout are promoted and remain in positions in spite of their performance.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 8, 2009 9:46 PM

The Beer game really needs another player role - the consumer - basically that role is to sit in on the game sessions and drink all the beer coming through the system. Once enough beer has been drunk the player is in the ideal position and state of mind to pass judgement on the other players and their strategies......

Posted by PaulH at July 9, 2009 5:54 AM

John, it is truly one of the greatest tools I've seen for showing folks how our "best thinking" is more often than not exactly what creates our worst problems. "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -- Einstein.

Stephen, I would add the "wings" of the consumer. Our demand for ways to buy homes and cars and things we cannot realistically afford is a demand that someone is bound to try to capitalize on -- namely "lending institutions." As they say, be careful what you ask for "flap, flap" because you just might get it... "flap, flap"... and end up with a foreclosure and bankruptcy... "splat"...

"Honey, was that a butterfly that just hit the windshield?"

It ain't all the lenders fault. If someone makes a faulty product and we naively keep buying it, we should question ourselves instead of shouting "How the hell are they allowed to do that and stay in business? Look at all the mess they made." But we DO buy what they're peddling.

It's sad, but true, that had there been this much discussion and complaining about the nature of what they were doing when they started doing it, the situation might be different today.

We want cheap credit, lenient credit, and indeed end up overextending ourselves. They see that as an opportunity and facilitate it, overextending THEMSELVES in the process. We -- the consumers -- are just as guilty as they are in this mess. True, they "sell" us on doing the same foolish things over and over, but we're just as guilty of "selling" to them by unwittingly demanding it of them.

Not long after he took office, I heard that Obama was instituting steps to encourage credit card companies and auto finance companies to offer more credit to consumers. "HELLO? Is anybody awake out there?" Bankruptcies hit all time highs while credit defaults are causing banks and lending institutions to fail. I was totally flabbergasted that President Obama was even suggesting that what we needed was more of the same.

PaulH, the consumer position is good. Enough cold beers and the game would have more entertainment value... and the economy might start looking less dreary. While we're playing the consumer role in the game, we should paint our bodies, wear clown wigs, wave pom poms, and root for one of the other players in the game... "Watch this y'all, Chuck's playing the part of the warehouse guy. Betcha he punches ol' Robert in the nose before the game's over. He damn near pulled out his .357 in the parking lot on Bill after the last game. GO CHUCK, GO CHUCK... come on everybody... let's get a wave going..."

A wave... one person starts it, and soon 80,000 people in the stadium are doing something that's seen on televisions all over the country. Hmmm... good example of the butterfly effect right there.
Amazing what one too many beers can lead to.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 8:27 AM

Maybe I just found my new motto: "Give me a beverage strong enough, and singlehandedly I can move the world's economy." -- Dan Gunter, circa this moment. LOL.

Why NOT? Everything else to do with the economy has pretty much wound up in the toilet.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 8:28 AM

Stephen, Judith, Dan: yup, no shortage of butterflies to blame for this mess, including lenders, regulators, politicians, and, yes, consumers. (If I say more than that, this thread may quickly jump off the tracks.)

Paul, I think I'll pass your idea along to my MIT associates - none of whom are teetotalers to my knowledge - who may be open to a redesign of the game.

Dan, "Give me a beverage strong enough..." is a keeper. I think you should feature it on your blog - which I just discovered (I'm a little slow) and bookmarked!

Geez, I shouldn't overlook a more recent but potent example of SDIC in my life: nine years ago a long-time colleague of mine, Ilene Fischer, had joined the Tom Peters Company and was beating on me to join her in a culture change engagement she was brilliantly spearheading in a health benefits firm. I had lots of other things going on at the time but finally acceded to her escalating demands (Ilene sometimes has difficulty cognitively processing the word "no"). I wound up spending a terrific three and half years with that client and have thoroughly enjoyed my time with Tom & company ever since. Thank you, Ilene. Thank you, Tom. On the wings of butterflies...

Posted by John O'Leary at July 9, 2009 10:14 AM

John, I'll give your suggestion serious consideration. It does have broad implications (along with interpretations, admittedly.) In terms of the number of "butterflies," I spend a fair amount of time mentally reverse engineering things (if that makes me weird, I'm okay with that, as I do learn from it) and wondering why in the world at least ONE of those butterflies didn't see what was coming (us, the consumers included) and choose to flap our wings in a different direction, to lean on the analogy du jour. As they say, hindsight is 20/20.

In retrospect, the signs of impending disaster (okay, foolishly crashing and burning is more like it) were there. For all parties involved. Even the fact that that fabulously low interest rate on a home mortgage offered by a bank that is obviously stretching itself in terms of whom they are lending to is a sign it's likely to get sold to another lendor and end up looking nothing like it did originally.

Thinking about it from that point of view, just as I wouldn't feel as safe flying on "El Cheapo Airlines" and would probably opt to pay a little more for a carrier I feel secure with, perhaps we shouldn't be so easily lured by the ability to pay a little less interest on a mortgage, causing us to bypass the more reputable lendors?

By the way, I love your comment about your friend Ilene's cognitive impairment regarding the word "no." Kept on flapping those wings, did she? She must be one of those Monarch butterflies out of Brazil -- life there probably teaches teaches you the value of persistence. ;-)

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 10:45 AM

I don't know about the Beer Game but it just seems, well, so very male, drinking and drinking into oblivion and all. Do women by and large even drink the stuff? We will probably need by far more than cases of beer to engage in competition. :-)

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 9, 2009 10:58 AM

The more butterfly wings are spoken about here the more the concept can become a bit too sappy, a bit too desirious, a bit too "hopeful." If we rely on these wings or even look for them we may never fly; we may never soar, as they are the actions of others. If through rememberance we associate its effects with our success or failure, we can, in fact, limit our very own possibilities. The more the Butterfly Effect is spoken of here the more I dislike it as a business concept.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 9, 2009 11:28 AM

Judith, perhaps you would enjoy grabbing a copy of "The Fifth Discipline" by Peter Senge. And a half-case of Budweiser. The game (at least in its original form) does not involve real beer. But hey, I live in the South, where a lot of business transactions are conducted -- and business decisions made -- over a pitcher of draft and "This round's on me" often translates to "You've got yourself a deal, buddy."

Maybe that's why you don't hear as many tales of teenage entrepreneurs in the Southeastern states. At age 16, you can get your driver's license. At 19 you can have a business license. But you have to be 21 years of age to (legally) play the game of business as it's played in Alabama.

Adding at least 5% ETOH content to the original "beer game" would be interesting though.

Perhaps I'll license an Alabama version of the famous beer game... "The Redneck Beer Game. Learn all you need to know about business, economics, and 'buzz' marketing. Available at a fine package store near you."

As for women drinking the stuff, spend some time observing things here in the South and you'll discover for yourself just how outdated the notion of the Southern Belle sipping on a mint julep on a Colonial style porch really is. Jack Daniels and Coke... maybe.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 11:31 AM

"The more the Butterfly Effect is spoken of here the more I dislike it as a business concept."

Like it or not, it's real, however you choose to describe it. And it's only limiting to our potential if we ignore it.

"Reality. What a concept." -- Robin Williams, as "Mork" in the hit show "Mork & Mindy."

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 11:34 AM

Dan - You did not just explain that "the game...does not involve real beer?" LOL! As for Southern belles, I do not know any.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 9, 2009 11:35 AM

Dan - What is real? That someone's decision will affect mine positively or negatively? Exactly what is the "it" to which you refer?

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 9, 2009 11:38 AM

Judith, "It" refers to two things: (1) being the concept of the "butterfly effect" (formally/technically referred to as the "Law of sensitive dependence upon initial conditions") and (2) the reality that "it" ain't all up to us. All of us want at times to think we are ultimately the controllers of our own fate. That simply is not the reality of life.

Let's assume for a moment that I am the world's safest driver. I take every precaution possible, wear my seat belts, obey the speed limits, adhere to following distance rules, you name it. I'm driving home from a video shoot or a consulting job. On the interstate, someone on the other side of the interstate falls asleep, careens across the median and hits me head on. They fell asleep because they chose to drive when too exhausted to do so safely. Why were they so exhausted? Because their boss forced them to work a double. Why did he do that? Because a client of theirs requested a rush job for delivery the next morning. Why did they do that? Because the person who was supposed to have ordered it a couple of days sooner instead of the day before they needed it decided to take a couple of personal leave days and it did not order it in a timely fashion...

Lots and lots of butterflies. Had any single person's decision been different (not to drive, not to agree to work over, not to fill a rush order request, not to take personal leave) then I would not have been involved in the car accident.

And as to whether "it" will affect your decision positively or negatively, the truth is, everything you do (unless you live on a deserted island) is affected both positively AND negatively by the decisions of others constantly. I'm not so sure you could avoid it on a desert island, seeing as how the growth of the plants, animals, and fish -- the whole ecology --that you'd have to survive on are all affected by atmospheric conditions, which are -- according to scientists -- being affected by pollutants, which are the result of choices made by...

The point quite simply is that you can use whatever analogy you want, but scientists finally figured out that what earlier scientists disliked (every bit as much as you describe disliking it) turned out to be true. It might seem "sappy" to you, but it's real.

Nobody is saying you have to "rely on the actions of others" or "look for them." In actuality, you make your own choices based upon the "initial conditions" you are aware of. You weigh those and make your own decisions. That does not mean you will get the outcome you expected. Some other butterfly flaps ITS wings and "Bam." You're in an auto accident what wasn't your fault. You can prepare (preplan your funeral,) mitigate (buy car and health insurance,) train to respond (know to dial 9-1-1 to get help if you're in an accident,) and work to recover (a few months of physical rehab,) but what you can't do is know for 100% certain that you won't be in an accident.

Of course you could flap your wings and decide that being in an automobile is too dangerous. Some people think that way to the point of phobic behavior.

The other possibility is to do what the guy did when he heard "Most accidents happen within a mile of home." He moved.

;-)

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 2:26 PM

Judith, I explained that the ORIGINAL version of the game does not involve real beer. That doesn't mean the new and home-brewed -- I mean IMPROVED -- version of the game can't. And I do know at least one "Southern Belle" (in my opinion, anyway): my beautiful wife-to-be. She graces any front porch upon which she chooses to sit. We're usually sitting there waiting for the pizza delivery guy. The beers are in the fridge. All except the one we're drinking while waiting on the pizza to arrive.

A fully loaded pizza and ice cold Bud. That's enough to make any Southerner say "It's all good." Four or five and you end up saying something really intelligent, such as "It don't matter."

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 2:37 PM

Judith, I am now wondering if you're going to ask me what the "It" in the last sentence of the above post refers to. Probably the same "it" you refer to occasionally, I would venture to guess.

I guess we could conjecture that "It's all 'it'."

So, you ready for a cold beer now? LOL.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 2:41 PM

Dan - Man, I can't read all that to what I thought would be a simple response.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 9, 2009 3:30 PM

That's okay. Or should I say "It's okay" ???

cheapest canadian viagra

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 4:24 PM

It's always OK, Dan.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 9, 2009 4:27 PM

I see the beer works!

Maybe we should flap our butterfly wings by sending a few planeloads to the next OPEC or oil cartel meetings? Newsflash: "This story just in... oil prices drop to 27 cents a barrel. We asked a noted economist in the Southern U.S. what that means, who told us 'That means roughly 19 truck loads of Bud per oil tanker.'..."

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 9, 2009 4:40 PM

LOL!

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 9, 2009 6:02 PM

viagra and women

Dan - I just read your comment. Thank you. But I am now really for sure that you don't either read all of the comments or that you simply become selective in what you want to "hear" or perhaps even miss the all-important lessons of "hearing" what others have written. (Hearing here is understanding.) Maybe too it's a sheer lack of understanding. I too am often there.

By the example you have just given above it is obvious that you have not read or "heard" all of the comments above, as you seem to write as if you alone have just made the points of the necessity of our universal connectivity. So, when seeking to explain to another what you think the other has not understood or perhaps in an attempt to answer a question honestly (I appreciate this), an important connection or synthesis is lost. Perhaps a sheer disconnection too.

Dialogue is all about synthesis in the form of agreement or dissent. Perhaps this is why I myself don't read all the comments because what is often said again has already been said, but just with more words, though differently. Maybe this is the great joy in language and expression: the sheer ability to say it in the way that we can. I understand this too. But it would perhaps just be good that when such is said that it embraces what others have already said in such discussions, especially when one is trying to make a point to what one has already said.

Anyway, it's all good.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 10, 2009 5:22 AM

viagra in australia online

Hmmm... let's see if I can follow your suggestion:

"I see many of your words as redundant. You lose me and perhaps other readers that way. Or perhaps you simply don't read what others have already written?"

Would that be a suitable replacement (according to your definitive standards) for the above THREE PARAGRAPHS you wrote?

"You must be the change..." eh, never mind. You're probably not reading this anyway.

buy viagra online australia paypal

viagra overnight shipping no prescription If you are reading this...

For the record, I do read all the preceding posts at length and consider them prior to a posting my own comment(s), just as I read Tom's blog entries fully before commenting. But according to your standards and guidelines, it would seem that reiterating a point, and/or adding my own comments, illustrations, examples, or thoughts -- whether in support of or disagreement with someone else's point -- is redundant and therefore wrong. If it is the case that you feel strongly enough about this to critique me on it, then I assume that we should not expect to see any further comments from you such as "LOL" or "Excellent point." Has anyone asked you to refrain from doing so? I don't recall coming across any such requests. Nor have I, myself, asked you to stop.

I have not, do not, and will not criticize another participant on Tom's blogs for the length of their posts, just as I would never belittle Tom Peters for the length of some of his blogs entries which require the investment of a little more time to read. Thankfully, Tom shares his thoughts openly and says what he feels like saying. I appreciate that. I also appreciate the fact that he obviously strives to avoid the use of vague or unfamiliar words as a means of trying to impress readers. I'll close on that thought. I'm probably already over my words/post allowance.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 10, 2009 8:56 AM

An open note to all fellow community members;

My humblest apologies to all of you if my comments have in any way implied lack of attention to any of your own. Rest assured that your comments are appreciated. It is an adventure and a privilege to be a part of this community. My annoyance/tolerance level for one particular fellow community member has been repeatedly exceeded, despite my sincerest attempts to raise that level -- over, and over. Reciprocated humor is one thing. Repeating cycles of attacks are another. To wit, I am from this post forward refusing to acknowledge or in any way respond (at all) to one individual's comments. I am doing so in order to keep my participation on a level I feel is respectful of our host's character and efforts, and those of my fellow community members. As for the thoughts and comments of all others, I look forward to reading them, as always.

It is my desire to participate openly, sincerely, and fully. I hope we all realize and appreciate Tom's interest in us doing so. If anyone else in this community sees my comments or stated decision in this post as rude, inconsiderate, or inappropriate, feel free to say so, and rest assured that I will take your comments under humble and sober consideration.

This is one of those situation where I felt as though some things needed to be said.

I will leave you all with my sincerest apologies if I have in any way offended or seemed inconsiderate toward any of you.

Posted by Dan Gunter at July 10, 2009 9:43 AM

No need to apologise Dan. Keep 'em coming as far as I’m concerned.

Posted by Trevor Gay at July 10, 2009 1:04 PM

Dan - My comment was largely that there seemed to have been a distinction in what was said by others in your last comments, but in reality there was no such distinction or further enlightenment to my understanding. For example, the point for me was not that that we are not influenced by others positively or negatively; to think otherwise is unrealistic. Rather, the point was deciding one way or the other after the effects of others are known.

No flap or flutter should ultimately decide the direction of your business. However, this is not to say that you should be not very aware of your surrounding, nationally or globally. That would be unwise and foolish. Your lengthy response took many detours which to me simply said what had been said, but still did not by and large address the important decision of choice or even the negative aspects of the flap or flutter of another, past or present. John, by the way, has chosen not to address such either.

Perhaps John feels that it is irrelevant or insignificant. That too is fine. But to simply rely on the effects of others, to even look for them (I am not talking about team work here, but this flap or flutter of butterfly wings that create in this post only looked at a kind of positive domino effect, the negative aspect was not addressed in the post) is to mind not a great business plan.

Now, if we are simply recounting here the great times that butterfly wings have produced great results from merely a standpoint of observation that is one thing. But to rely on such as a foundation for sound business practices is definitely something else. I do, however, believe in movement and even that which may not at a particular time produce the desired results. I have moved or even responded to that of others and it appeared that nothing came of it. But I later determined that while the effect wasn't immediate, it was endurable. It was still, however, a choice to move in one direction or another.

Now, to your point about that "one particular fellow community member" and criticism on this blog. (Ooh, who might this be? That was cute. :-) I think it's funny that you not only offered your own criticism, which I wholly do not mind, but went so far as to make comparisons with Tom Peters. This to me is foolish. Do you need him to justify your argument, to take sides? This to me is childish. Redundancy of words is not the issue here; it is redundancy of thought. (I have done so here to try and bring a particular point home.) But it is clear after reading your last comments that you simply do not understand mine.

Communication, expression and language, is not always comprehensible by all no matter how clear or basic the language. It depends on whose reading. It's my great joy to write in a way that expresses my heartfelt opinions and conclusions which havr absolutely nothing to do with trying to impress. This you can believe this. I never write to impress; I write to express. Whether that expression is to your liking or disliking is completely fine with me. (Whether you understand it. Well, that's another matter.) I do not think of whether you are going to like or dislike what I have written. But whatever the case, I'm good with it…always.

For the record, Dan, I think that you are an intelligent person and you also seem to be a good person. I have no ill feelings toward you whatsoever—none. You might also be surprised to know that my maternal grandfather is half Cherokee Indian. I have popped into your blog a few times and I see that you have such roots too.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 12, 2009 11:59 PM

It's been a week. Reading John's post again the negative effect was indeed addressed by the mere mention of the financial crisis. I, however, sense that in the comments that followed by most, including John, that the negative is not the crux of this Effect presented here, as all of the examples in the discussion point to positive experiences. There is a fairy tale aspect of the notion as a business concept and/or one that is outside of our control. I guess it need not be, but as it unfolded in the discussion and to a large extent in the post it appears to have been both. My initial comment was to address the Effect mid-flap as a means to avoid a catastrophe.

Perhaps it is human nature to gravitate to the positive or to dismiss the negative as some sort of domino effect or simply the actions of others, absolving us of responsibility. (Yes, it is clear that there are natural disasters caused by hurricanes, for example, that involve a number of factors. But how we prepare makes the difference. Most of what we are experiencing today are not natural disasters and could have been arrested in early on. We would need not even ask "what if") Perhaps it is also this positive nature that has not enabled us to move forward on a whole host of issues that sincerely address the question of "what if" governed by our decisions that it will not happen again. The financial crisis would be number one in my view.

Posted by Judith Ellis at July 13, 2009 7:49 AM