Post image for Your Audience, The Measuring Stick, and the Power to Judge

When doing your legacy work, think about who you’re doing it for. Not just what, but who and why. Ask yourself:

  • Who do I want to remember me?
  • Who will be impacted by the work I’m doing?
  • Why do they need what I’m giving?

Answering these questions helps you focus more on the specific needs of your audience (i.e., work that makes a difference), instead of throwing out “all-purpose” work (i.e., work that anyone can do).

But here’s something you may not have considered: when you choose an audience, you hand them a measuring stick and give them the power to judge your work.

Click to continue…

{ 11 comments }

Thanks to everyone who took the time to respond to the AOGT reader survey – you’ve been hugely helpful! Let’s take a look at what you said, and what I’ll be doing or changing as a result. Note: I’ve rounded the numbers to the nearest whole percentage point.

On posts per week…

I asked: Currently, AOGT publishes 5 posts per week. What do you think about this posting schedule?

57% of you said: “It’s perfect as is.”
34% of you said: “I’d prefer 3 posts a week.”
9% of you said: “Information overload! 2 posts a week please.”

It sounds like nearly half of you are a bit overwhelmed by the 5-posts-per-week schedule, and half of you are happy with it.

Action plan: let’s compromise and take it down to 4 posts a week, then see how things play out. What do you think?

Click to continue…

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

The Independent “No”

by Jeffrey Tang

At work, I’m trying to help my sub-managers learn to say no. More specifically, I’m trying to convince them it’s okay to say no to me.

As much as I like being in charge, and as much as I want people to support my ideas, I don’t need a team of people who agree with everything I do. In fact, I’ve tried to build a team of people who are strong where I’m weak and weak where I’m strong.

What I need (what every leader and movement needs) is people who are willing to disagree with me and defend their own independent judgment. When I screw up, I need teammates who will stand up and tell me that your idea is terrible, and here’s why – even if the final decision is mine.

In particular, I’m looking for three things in myself and others: conviction, honesty, and reason.

  • Conviction means that you trust your own judgment and are willing to stand by what you believe is best, even if your boss/advisor/teammate/friend says otherwise.
  • Honesty is the willingness to say what you mean without hiding behind euphemisms, throwing around exaggerations, or jumping onto the soapbox.
  • Reason is the ability to defend your opinion, to give justifications for what you believe and why. It’s also a willingness to change your mind when or if you see that your reasons are flawed. Reason keeps conviction from becoming dogma or obstinacy.

Click to continue…

{ 4 comments }

How We See the Problem

by Jeffrey Tang

Post image for How We See the Problem

When I tackle a problem, I tend to do so with words. For me, finding the solution often hinges on the right term, nuance, or turn of phrase to express an abstract idea. I quite literally talk (or write) myself through things, even when the problem isn’t about writing.

Words are the framework of my world, but I’m aware that’s not the case for everyone.

If I’m a linguistic problem-solver, then some of my friends are definitely visual problem-solvers who prefer diagrams and schematics. Others are social problem-solvers, whose first instinct is to seek collaboration.

Just as people learn in different ways, I can imagine a whole spectrum of problem-solving techniques that appeal to different people and work best in different situations. An artist sees the world as shades of color, an architect as expanses of space, a designer as a combination of the two. But right now, I’m curious about what works for you.

What kind of problem-solver are you? How does that affect which problems you choose to address? How does it change the way you see the world?

Click to continue…

{ 9 comments }

Post image for The Case for the Low-Risk Start

“He who is not courageous enough to take risks will accomplish nothing in life.” – Muhammad Ali

It’s true – nothing great can be accomplished without risk. But that doesn’t mean we have to take all the risks at the beginning.

The way I see it, there are two main ways to start anything: with a bold leap of faith, or a with a quiet step forward.

You can quit your job and move across the country to build your dream company – or you can work on it a few hours each day after dinner, making the transition only after you’ve laid a strong foundation.

Click to continue…

{ 18 comments }