Collaborative Linchpin Art
No Comments »This is probably one of the biggest “aha” things I’ve had hit me in a while… but it might be completely evident to everyone else. It’s a longer post than normal, but I need the space to get the idea out there. I’m going to post it anyway. If you choose not to read it in full now, maybe it will show up in a book later on.
Scientist vs. Artist and “The Market” vs. “The Fringe”
In the context of linchpins and what it means to make “art”… it seems to me that there’s such a big difference between the scientist’s way of looking at something and the artist’s way (and the people who respect art) of looking at something. Maybe it has more to do with context and perspective than anything, but if you take music as an example… generally, there are two cases:
- There are people who only like music that a majority of other people like. (called “The Market”)
- There are people who don’t care what other people like and have their own opinions. (called “The Fringe” by “The Market”, but are probably just normal people who don’t want to be dragged along by “The Market”)
Taking music as art it’s pretty much impossible to be objective except in the case of The Market. If we both agree with The Market, then we’ll like the same things (within context and genre). If we are both of The Fringe, we will respect each other’s opinions on what to like and very possibly explore music recommendations from each other. Thus, if we are part of The Market we draw our objectivity from the market and if we are part of The Fringe, we draw our objectivity from our own opinions, experiences, and what is recommended to us by others.
However, in the context of the music industry, there were a select few who dictated to the masses what they needed to listen to (what made it to radio). In the past, these select few have been at the steering wheel of the industry; the gatekeepers of which artists and music was allowed to be commercialized. These people created a complex process and rules (and laws) for governing how things make it through to the masses. These processes were generally extremely lucrative for the owners of the process. This was counter-active to the real “art” and for years and years lots of great music was hidden from people who wanted (needed) it. The gatekeepers decided what the objective view was for their industry.
As these “laws” are destroyed through various means, The Fringe begins to approach (and overtake) The Market. The gatekeepers are smashed into a thousand pieces and even people who would like to still be led around by the nose after The Market are discovering that it’s no longer really cool to do that anymore. They don’t listen to the radio, they have an iPod. And like the music industry, we are in the process of seeing the same thing happen to video media (previously known as “television”).
The Art of the Process?
Moving along with the idea that Linchpins create art and art is what God meant people to create, whether it’s an art of business or an art of software, or manufacturing or whatever, it’s still what you’re on the planet to do. But maybe you’re in the business of governance and process and there’s an art to that. But I believe strongly that anything that moves you towards staying in a box is eventually going to become a bad thing (unless it changes). That’s the gist of being a Linchpin, understanding which boxes are good boxes and when to move to another box, or stay out of boxes entirely, at least for a while. The Theory of Constraints by itself is art, but the instant that it becomes the only way to do something is the instant that it becomes debilitating.
Let’s move the comparative into software – the process of building software has been exploded, eroded, and been basically eradicated by folks who have built great things without massive shops and departments and processes and governance. Think of the last handful of massive platforms that have hit and very few (if any) were built the way a scientist would build software, or better yet, the way most large companies build software. There were individuals or very small groups, constantly plugging at something, working loosely, code on their on computer kind of stuff, or just me and my ideas – eventually leading to something great.
And though every student of software development has heard ad nauseam that old fabled comparative of software to architecture or construction, it is the worst of failed comparatives. Every good artist knows or works to know their best “zone” (a la Zone from Drive) and what it takes to get that moving. And as they collaborate, they either consciously or unconsciously compromise some of that to gain the power of the group. The real key then to successful collaboration in the world of software is not the process itself, but the commitment of the individuals to work together in that process; in fact, we see that teams who together develop their own process are almost “superhuman” compared to those who try to impose some outside process on their team. Defining the parts of the process they will use is almost like creating an artistic identity for that particular team.
So, why do we constantly have this desire for governance and process when we can see that some of the greatest art is created outside of any of that? Because we are lazy and don’t want to do the work of thinking for ourselves – the Lizard Brain strikes again! (More on that in another post.)
The Art of Software
Software feels more like art than it ever has. If you’re in software, you need to get comfortable with that statement, like yesterday. Big Companies are struggling with how to move their software into art; ultimately they just can’t seem to equate the looseness of the process to revenue. (Maybe it’s because “The Market” is driving the bus that has the CEO and CFO in the front seat?) But when you think of art, you think of Basecamp, not SAP. You think of Twitter, not Oracle. I wonder if the revenue generation of software art has exceeded yet the revenues of Big Co software? Maybe a similar comparison is that Apple has passed Microsoft in value. Think of “revenue generation per employee hour”. Good grief, the Big Cos are getting their hats handed to them. If it takes 50,000 people to make art, maybe we need to reconsider? So, I got to thinking – some companies are better at selling shares of their company to Wall Street than they are at making Software Art.
My “aha” statement here is: Many people are using software only because the company building that software was best able to sell their shares to stockholders and rapidly put the “laws” in place around it. Just like listening to the radio, in many cases in software, we’ve been getting what The Market has given us!
When “The Fringe” Overtakes “The Market”
Eventually, the big “art” software will dramatically surpass Big Co software in revenues – there’s no denying that. It is unlikely that Big Cos will ever be comfortable enough with Linchpins to have them around very long. The ones that can embrace this and find ways to turn “collaborative Linchpin art” into revenue are the ones that survive. I say “survive” rather than “succeed” because the days are coming when a 2-man fly-by-night team will be able to overtake even the largest and most complicated software – and not in years, in months.
Next, the commercialization of the art (be it music, software, or whatever) is changing dramatically. People now can choose from a myriad of products and services and ultimately make their choices not on what has been spoon-fed to them, but by what they like, or moreover, what a Linchpin (The Fringe) has recommended. Soon, if not already, business who purchase software will be allowed the same freedom. Let’s take a look at Basecamp as an example. It’s the counterpoint to big software. People choose it because it has less. People choose it because they like the founders. People choose it because it almost feel like they just bought an Apple product. For years, we chose software based on a simple equation: The Most Features + The Cheapest Price = The Choice. Not any more.
So, What do we do Now?
If you’re an individual… go to the place where your deepest passion meets the world’s deepest need, to paraphrase Frederick Buechner. Be prepared. All of your life will drive you to this place – multiple wash-outs, failures and resets will all push to the place where you can create the art that the world needs. If that art is software, you’ll find ways to make it great without embracing every whim of The Market. If it’s making music, you’ll make it regardless of whether a big Nashville label signs your music or not – and you’ll work to figure out how to make what you love to do something that people <need> to listen to. If it’s cooking, you’ll wonder why you constantly try to create new dishes and perfect old ones and you’ll wonder why people come from miles around to get it. It might be confusing and circumstances will definitely weigh against you – but the world is now proving that people who embrace what their hearts drive them to do are the ones who are truly successful.
If you’re a business… big or small, you need to have Linchpins at your core. Multiple people, all called to do what they are doing, working together to create something remarkable that people want (need) – Collaborative Linchpin Art. If you’re creating Collaborative Linchpin Art, you can worry less about monetizing it – the raving customers will come. Just treat them nice when they get there and take of your Linchpins.