Blending skills in new ways.
Posted 12.17.09 by Adrian Ho
Like Faris, I’m a big fan of recombinant culture. It’s the framework that underlies many the things that most capture my imagination.
The example of this that I’ve been thinking about recently has to do with the remixing of the “Philosopher” with the “Man of Action.” Of course, the most visible symbol of this comes from looking at our past presidents. Clinton, was replaced by Bush, who has been replaced by a blending of both in Obama.
It seems to me that this is a framework that’s also useful in describing some of what’s happening in our industry. We can see this in the blurring of production-oriented companies and strategy-oriented companies. I’m obviously heavily biased but I think there’s a new-found respect for strategy, but only when paired with technical ability and not when delivered by traditional consultancies. On an individual level our icons aren’t the thinkers or the doers but instead they’re more interesting blends like Noah who makes the stuff he thinks about, and thinks about the stuff he makes.
I don’t think this is a coincidence, I think this is happening because this is precisely the combination that we need to deal with the times we live in.
As the problems facing brands become more and more complex, so too do the solutions. Even the most meager social media presence can’t be comprehensively thought through or planned, nor can it simply be managed through doing alone. It seems to me that the right approach is to think as you act, to learn while you practice, to develop systems and frameworks through doing.
As the complexity of our work increases, the need for this approach becomes even greater. While it’s tempting to try to spend longer thinking about more complex problems, it’s often more productive to actually start doing them sooner. However, complex solutions require more stakeholders, so there’s an even greater need for developing frameworks and ways of thinking about what we do that can be taught and transferred.
There are, of course, fairly significant business-model barriers in bringing together these two different kinds of skills in a company. Production skills are often billed on an hourly basis, while strategy is typically priced based upon value. However, I think that the more difficult barriers are cultural. These two archetypes have historically been polar opposites and simply putting together people who embody one aspect with people who embody the other is a recipe for disaster.
In order to move a production company into a more strategic area, you’re probably going to have to alter your production staff too. Similarly if you’ve been a strategic company and you want to start doing, you might want to look at replacing your strategic resources first.
Archetypal people create archetypal companies and if your goal is to create a new kind of organization these kinds of people don’t really have a place.
Like Faris, I’m a big fan of recombinant culture. It’s the framework that underlies many the things that most capture my imagination.
The example of this that I’ve been thinking about recently has to do with the remixing of the “Philosopher” with the “Man of Action.” Of course, the most visible symbol of this comes from looking at our past presidents. Clinton, was replaced by Bush, who has been replaced by a blending of both in Obama.
It seems to me that this is a framework that’s also useful in describing some of what’s happening in our industry. We can see this in the blurring of production-oriented companies and strategy-oriented companies. I’m obviously heavily biased but I think there’s a new-found respect for strategy, but only when paired with technical ability and not when delivered by traditional consultancies. On an individual level our icons aren’t the thinkers or the doers but instead they’re more interesting blends like Noah who makes the stuff he thinks about, and thinks about the stuff he makes.
I don’t think this is a coincidence, I think this is happening because this is precisely the combination that we need to deal with the times we live in.
As the problems facing brands become more and more complex, so do the solutions. Even the most meager social media presence can’t be comprehensively thought through or planned, nor can it simply be managed through doing alone. It seems to me that the right approach is to think as you act, to learn while you practice, to develop systems and frameworks through doing.
As the complexity of our work increases, the need for this approach becomes even greater. While it’s tempting to try to spend longer thinking about more complex problems, it’s often more productive to actually start doing them sooner. However, complex solutions require more stakeholders, so there’s an even greater need for developing frameworks and ways of thinking about what we do that can be taught and transferred.
There are, of course, fairly significant business-model barriers in bringing together these two different kinds of skills in a company. Production skills are often billed on an hourly basis, while strategy is typically priced based upon value. However, I think that the more difficult barriers are cultural. These two archetypes have historically been polar opposites and simply putting together people who embody one aspect with people who embody the other is a recipe for disaster.
In order to move a production company into a more strategic area, you’re probably going to have to alter your production staff too. Similarly if you’ve been a strategic company and you want to start doing, you might want to look at replacing your strategic resources first.