專題：MOOC帶來高等教育的春天

鄒景平/總裁學苑專欄作家

　成功的變革通常是由局外人啟動，創辦可汗學院的Salman Khan，激發史丹佛大學實驗有大量學生的線上免費教學(MOOC)，進而成立Coursera，專門提供MOOC教學，半年之內，Coursera就與三十三個世界知名大學合作，推出198門課程，吸引了一百六十四萬人註冊，並進而帶動老師使用新的教學方式。

　我們在教室聽課時，向來是學生對老師做報告，很少有老師在期末考後，對學生做報告的例子，但是在Coursera的開課平台上，每門課結束後，老師對學生做授課總結報告，卻逐漸成為一個新的，很受學生歡迎的重要活動。

　雖然Coursera是2012年四月才開張，但已形塑出一些比教室教學更符合人性的新風格，其中最明顯的兩個，一個是課前對學生發送問卷，瞭解學生的背景（年齡、國別、性別）、學習目標和學歷程度，以讓老師能及時並適度調整教學內容與方向。

　另外一個，就是老師在課程結束後，對學生做報告，將註冊人數、每週上課人數、參加期末考的人數和獲得證書的人數，做一個統計分析，老師也回顧授課過程中值得肯定的事情，以及日後的和改進措施與授課計畫等，即使課程結束了，老師還透過臉書的社群和學生持續保持聯絡，甚至於繼續舉辦office hour，和學生進行面對面的交流與互動。

　Coursera的老師也知道學生中很多是來觀摩的老師，因此，對於這些觀摩者，課程總結報告就更受到關注。例如我上的「Internet History, Technology and Security」，為期八周，但老師的總結報告就長達四十多分鐘，除了分析學生的學習狀況，對教學過程的反思，還預告了之後會開的進階課程。

　老師Charles Severace說，註冊這門課的人數有45572人，完成第一周學習的有11640人，參加期末考的有5401人，考試成績通過標準而拿到證書的有4595人。而他今年秋季班的類似課程，學生只有152人。他所任教的密西根大學，每年的大學畢業生也只有六千六百人左右。

　換算一下，Severace教授講一次Coursera的課，就至少抵他教三十次的教室課程，也差不多是四分之三的密西根大學每年畢業生數量，相較之下，就清楚的顯現出MOOC的優勢與價值。

　老師也在課程中，寄出給學生的調查問卷，共有4701人回覆，統計結果，學生年齡以25-44歲之間最多，約佔二分之一，45歲以上，約佔四分之一強，18-24歲則小於四分之一。男性占三分之二，女性佔三分之一。大學以下學歷者約佔三分之一，大學以上（含大學）則占三分之二。約有百分之十五的人，具有老師身份。

　Severace教授曾擔任電視節目主持人，訪問過許多網路科技專家，他口齒清晰、表達流暢自然，並善於使用圖表說明複雜觀念。更可貴的是，他非常注重網際網路發展的脈絡，而非具體、特定的技術細節或史實，因為他親自經歷了電腦與網際網路發展的過程，並與其中主要的貢獻者是好朋友，所以娓娓道來，並適時加上一些訪問專家的視訊來補充，使得學習過程輕鬆而有趣。

　課程結束之後，學生記掛的兩件大事，一個是什麼時候發證書，另一個就是Severace教授下一次要開什麼課？對於後者，Severace教授有清楚的交待，他說自己教課的願景，就是幫助大家卸除對科技的恐懼心理，並學會喜歡、善用與活用科技。

　所以接下來他要教的一門課，是如何運用Python程式語言，來探索人與數據之間的關係，課名是「Python for Informatics: Exploring Data」，這門課教完後，他再下一門課，就是教學生如何透過Google App Engine來建置動態網站，其中會使用到HTML, CSS, Python, Database, JavaScript, JQuery...等技術，課程名稱是：「Building Dynamic Web Sites with Google App Engine」，老師並提供一些參考資源，這對於我，真是非常好的學習路徑的指引。

　為了讓學生知道老師和未來開課的最新狀況，Severace教授特地在臉書（facebook）成立社群，目前已經有六百多人加入，大家最關心的問題，就是問其他同學拿到證書沒有？因為離課程結束已經有兩個禮拜了，還沒有收到Coursera用eMail寄來的證書，感到有些心慌，很擔心是否出了什麼差錯！

　原來證書在學生的心目中，還是佔著非常重要的地位，連我自己也是一樣，普林斯頓大學的世界排名，常在第一或第二位，雖然也在Coursera開課，但他們的規定是不允許老師發證書，雖然老師的課講得非常精彩，但若我花了很多心力學習，卻沒有任何憑證或紀錄，那股學習的動力就難以激發出來了！

　雖然Coursera提供的是網路教學平台，但Coursera的老師們，卻不像在封閉的教室中那麼孤立無援，因為在共同的開課平台下，Coursera的後台人員和學生們，都會告訴他們一些其他老師的教學方法和點子，像同學互評、遲交作業的寬限機制與課程總結報告等，都是先有老師採用之後，發現效果不錯，就推薦給其他老師。使用的人多了，就形成了Coursera的新學風。

　美國的老師比較沒有架子，對所教的主題既有熱忱，又有深厚的實務經驗，願意跟學生溝通，跟學生的互動多，也樂意採納學生的建議。

　Severace教授更是特例，八周的課程，他就在美國各地舉辦了六次的與學生的面會（office hour），因為他經常要到各處開會，他就趁機舉行面會，瞭解學生的學習狀況，並收集他們對課程的建議，聚會的地點通常是當地的星巴客咖啡店，每次約有五到十位學生參加，老師並拍下簡短視訊，讓其他同學認識他們。

　Severace教授回顧在Coursera教學過程，他認為自己也從學生那裡學到許多，由於使用推特(twitter，功能與微博近似)，讓他可以快速得知學生的反應，使用臉書又可讓他在課程結束後，仍然可以持續跟學生互動，師生關係不因課程完成而結束，卻形成一個徒弟追隨師父的社群，繼續保持聯繫。

　Coursera的老師們，常常把他們開的課稱為一個實驗，大家想透過實驗來發現新的可能，新的教學方法，新的師生互動模式，讓學生有高品質的學習，讓學生有更人性化的學習，並因之逐漸形成新學風，讓好老師出頭，讓世界各地的學生受惠！

　種種跡象，讓我發現MOOC帶來高等教育的春天。(本文原刊於總裁學苑)

Seth's Blog : What do you make?

Decisions.

You don't run a punch press or haul iron ore. Your job is to make decisions.

The thing is, the farmer who grows corn has no illusions about what his job is. He doesn't avoid planting corn or dissemble or procrastinate about harvesting corn. And he certainly doesn't try to get his neighbor to grow his corn for him.

Make more decisions. That's the only way to get better at it.

重新思考你管理專案的方式

貝爾斯基(Scott Belsky)/「彼罕思」網絡(Behance)執行長

　藍道．史都曼（Randall Stutman）在許多美國企業擔任高階主管教練，他常說一個好的領導人必須「樂觀面對未來，嚴謹看待任務」。創意領域的領導者要因點子未來的潛力而興奮，也該深切思考如何將點子當作專案來管理。

　總之，每個概念發想都必須和專案計畫緊扣。不管是私事（如策畫友人的生日派對）或是工作（將上市的新產品），每一個案子都是你的想法的實踐過程。

　我們鼓勵你把手弄髒。「專案管理」這個專有名詞讓大部分的創意工作者退縮，像是甘特圖（Gantt chart）這種精密的表格也許很折磨人，但畢竟境由心生，專案管理會累人或令人滿足，端看你的處理方式與心態。如果沒有良好的工作管理，絕不可能成功地將概念付諸實踐，因此，請容許我為你做出該如何管理專案的建議吧。

　我和我的團隊觀察了上百個工作團隊和獨立工作者，這些年來，不僅記下一些很棒的做法，更演繹出一套創意專案的管理原則，小至個人作業、大至企業團隊皆適用。就算最剛愎的創意人也能夠採用這套「行動方法」（Action Method）。

　「行動方法」質疑以往傳統的專案管理方式。聽從上司分派任務的思維已經過時，重視縝密計畫、由上而下的單向溝通模式也顯得笨重而沒有生產力。觀察分工精細的大公司後可發現，正式的專案管理中，最有生產力的創意工作者會同時分工進行，更有彈性地完成工作。這些公司各擁獨門的管理系統，但有以下共同特點：

　努力不懈地將點子付諸實踐。大多數點子來來去去，能否實踐都是看運氣，下一步常會迷失在筆記和草稿中，而一些創意工作必備的工具，如空白的筆記本，只會讓問題更糟。所以，每次一有概念發想時，你必須捕捉並強調你的「執行步驟」。

　可行的任務最好個人化。讓某一個成員管理下一步驟通常行不通。讓某一個人做好會議記錄再分給其他成員，會讓專案的責任變成模糊而且不切身。每一個人都需要去「擁有」他自己的執行步驟。辨識其他人寫的筆記並非易事，如果是自己記下的工作任務，上面有熟悉的語彙和筆跡，一定會比較容易上手。

　完整的筆記其實事倍功半。我們發現筆記很少發揮作用，「過度筆記」其實和「起而行」是有衝突的。只記下必要事項並化為具體的行動，才能在工作中領先群倫。

　用有設計感的系統讓自己更有組織。用來記下「執行步驟」的材料也很重要，顏色、材質和風格都要納入考慮。很多成功的創意人認為，多些設計巧思可讓執行步驟更有吸引力，當然就大大增加執行的機會。

　以「案子」而非「地點」來規畫工作。現在人們通常不在辦公室工作，不是管理好收文籃就會有生產力。分配好在家裡或公司該完成哪些工作也還不夠。我們應該像那些優秀的創新者一樣，以案子為中心處理工作和管理流程，而不是以工作地點劃分。(本文節錄自《想到就能做到：活用組織力+人脈力+領導力，讓創意不再卡住、自然實現》，大塊文化，2012年12月28日出版 )

Seth's Blog : Design like Apple, but name like P&G

Design like Apple, but name like P&G

Apple's naming approach is inconsistent, it begs for lawsuits (offensive and defensive) and it shouldn't be the model for your organization. iPhone is a phone, iPad is a pad, iPod is a ... (and owning a letter of the alphabet is i-mpossible).

Procter and Gamble, on the other hand, has been doing it beautifully for a hundred years. Crisco, Tide, Pringles, Bounty, Duracell--these are fanciful names that turn the generic product (and the story we believe about it) into something distinct.

If you can invent an entire category, fabulous, that's an achievement. For the rest of us, resist the temptation to be boring or to be too aggressive. It's your name and you need to live with it.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/12/design-like-apple-but-name-like-pg.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : The cost of neutral

If you come to my brainstorming meeting and say nothing, it would have been better if you hadn't come at all.

If you go to work and do what you're told, you're not being negative, certainly, but the lack of initiative you demonstrate (which, alas, you were trained not to demonstrate) costs us all, because you're using a slot that could have been filled by someone who would have added more value.

It's tempting to sit quietly, take notes and comply, rationalizing that at least you're not doing anything negative. But the opportunity cost your newly lean, highly leveraged organization faces is significant.

Not adding value is the same as taking it away.

周末文選：我們能掌控什麼？

郝明義/大塊文化董事長

　如果以名利來論工作，不論就外人還是自已，似乎都比較容易看出成績。拋去名利，工作不但成了一件得失寸心知的事情，並且，往往是寸心難知。
有沒有什麼易知之道？有沒有什麼可以幫助自我檢驗的標準？

　我自己在使用的測試辦法是自我掌控。也就是透過自我掌控程度的測試，來評估自己能力的進退。

　這個測試的第一個項目，是「立場」。
　第二個項目，是「方向」。
　第三個項目，是「方法」。
　第四個項目，是「慣性」。

　立場、方向、方法、慣性，是進行任何工作都必須掌控的步驟。四者相互關聯，交替影響，對最後的成績各有作用。不過，仍有其先後順序，好比建造一座高樓，地基越是扎實，成功可能越大。

　立場，就是最根本的地基。做任何事情，要先認識自己的環境，看清自己的立場。如何看清自己的立場，在千軍萬馬中怎麼看，在混沌不明中怎麼看，要不斷地練習、掌控。

　有了立場，就會有原則。根據這個原則，就會發展出方向。但是你有你的立場和方向，別人也有別人的立場和方向。有人會明著來衝撞你的方向，有人會暗地迂迴來影響你的方向，如何在眾聲喧嘩中抓穩自己的方向，也要不斷地練習、掌控。

　你要掌控你的方向，別人也要掌控別人的方向，方向和方向交錯之間，就不免崎嶇難平、刀光劍影。所以，在顛簸前進中如何過關斬將，這又需要方法，也要不斷地練習、掌控。

　方法用多了不免重複，不免技窮，應毋為人所趁，也應毋故步自封，所以過去失敗的慣性固然要打破，過去成功的慣性也要顛覆。如何在慣性思考與行為中隨時給自己當頭棒喝，也要不斷地練習、掌控。

　立場、方向、方法、慣性。

　不論在任何時刻，不論做任何事情，都可以提醒自己來做個分析，做個訓練。像個旁觀者一樣盯緊自己的每一步動作。

　當然我們會出錯。或是我們明明以為清楚自己的立場了，但是事後才發現根本就拿捏錯了。或是立場抓對了，但是經不起別人各種理由的遊說，又把方向搞反了；再或者，立場和方向都掌控得很不錯，結果卻是執行的方法出了很大的紕漏，把一局絕妙好棋下成一局死棋。

　但又有什麼關係呢？

　如果立場、方向、方法以及慣性是在自己的掌控下進行的，而最後的結果一塌糊塗，那是說明我們歷練不夠，才能不夠，技不如人。結果雖不如意，一切都已盡其在我。相反地，如果我們掌控不住自己的立場、方向、方法以及慣性，那麼即使最後的成果大獲全勝，那也只是運氣太好，應該汗顏。

　要判斷自己能力的進退，與其看事情的成敗，不如反省這些掌控力道的消長。

　情緒不只可能是壓垮駱駝背上一根草的重量，也可能是突然從天而降的一顆隕石的重量。(本文節錄自《工作DNA 駱駝之卷》，大塊文化出版，2013年1月 )

Seth's Blog : The Icarus Session in your town, plus live with me in New York

The Icarus Session in your town, plus live with me in New York

I'm trying something new and I hope you'll check it out.

At 7 pm (local time, wherever you are) on January 2nd, I'm inviting you and your peers, colleagues and friends to organize and attend an Icarus Session. You can find out the details at this link: Icarus Sessions. Read all the details to find the big picture and the link to sign up. Every city needs a volunteer organizer as well, and you can take the lead on the meetup site when you get there.

The short version: people volunteer to give a 140 second talk about what they're working on, creating or building, to do it with vulnerability, passion and generosity. And then to sit down and cheer on the next person.

Hundreds of cities, thousands of people, all connecting at the same time, around the world.

These are free, self-organized exchanges of bravery. A chance to find fellow travelers, artists and those making a ruckus and hear what they're passionate about. No pitching, no selling, but a 140-second confession of passion, fear and connection.

To kick it off, I'm hosting a live lecture, reading and session the afternoon of January 2nd in New York City. Details are right here.

I'll be hosting future events in Boston, London and one or two other cities over the coming months. I'll announce some soon.

I can promise it'll be interesting, and it might just change your work.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/12/the-icarus-session-in-your-town-plus-live-in-new-york.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Cold reading

Cold reading

Psychics, advertisers and coaches work hard to create interactions that feel direct. They'd like you to think that their work is about you, (lots of people thought that the song was actually about them) that they know what you're thinking and what you want.

The tsunami of data available online makes this easier than ever. It's not hard to buy data, not only about your demographics, but about how you spend your time on the web.

Which means that it seems as though that site or this ad is just for you. What could be better?

The important distinction is this: the content might be for you, but it's not necessarily about you. Take what you need, but ignore the rest.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/12/cold-reading.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

專題：問對的問題，就能避免錯誤決策

蓋‧川崎(Guy Kawasaki)/

　企業若是以「擊敗競爭對手」而不是以「取悅顧客」為重心，就一定會出現針鋒相對的利益爭奪戰。爭戰會導致企業為了「看似正確的理由」而做出錯誤的決定。

　因此，你必須問對的問題。譬如，老婦人故事餐廳的老闆荷莉．哈特就提出一個正確的問題：如何重新替客人定義用餐經驗？

　麥肯錫國際顧問公司東京分公司的前總經理大前研一對於問對的問題，提供了另一個成功例子。大前研一提出的問題催生了「傻瓜相機」。

　七○年代中期，單眼相機因為先進的多重功能和靈活度而廣受大眾喜愛，許多相機製造商都深信：成功之道就是製造出更好的單眼相機。

　但是大前研一並不認同這個結論。他進一步多問了兩個問題：「最初人們為什麼要拍照？」和「當人們拍照的時候，他們要的是什麼？」

　他悟出了一個道裡：其實比起好的「相機」，人們更想要好的「照片」。因此，大前研一和他的團隊來到一間底片沖洗室，盯著一萬八千張照片樣品，試著分析相片沖洗效果不佳的原因。最後他們發現了三個主要原因：

▓焦距調整度差

▓光線不足

▓針對底片感光度以及底片種類，光圈開孔大小的設定不正確

　他們歸納出「人為因素」是照片失敗的原因。這個理由再加上其他分析結果，激發了整個團隊的靈感，進而成功創造出自動對焦、內建閃光、自動辨識底片種類的傻瓜相機。

　由於大前研一提出了對的問題，傻瓜相機的製造廠商得以專注在顧客身上，進一步滿足顧客真正的需求。最重要的原則就是，問對的問題牽涉到深入探究顧客的利益，和過度誇飾的產品特色則沒啥關連，比起一窩蜂加入製造單眼相機的行列，傻瓜相機的製造商反而生產出顧客真正需要的相機：一台不必猜測如何使用就能拍出好照片的相機。(本文節錄自《行銷戰術全書》，大樂文化出版，2012年11月27日 )

Seth's Blog : Out on a limb

Out on a limb

This might not work.

I didn't realize how tired I was until I started driving away from the Icarus launch event on Wednesday.

Since June, I've been working flat out on creating the four books that were part of the Kickstarter and the big launch that climaxed with an event here in New York. Along the way, I experienced what many people feel as they work on something new--I was spending part of my time (against my better judgment) exhausting myself trying to predict and then control what people would think about my work.

Will they get it? Will this chapter hit home? Am I too far out on a limb?

This might not work.

At some level, "this might not work" is at the heart of all important projects, of everything new and worth doing. And it can paralyze us into inaction, into watering down our art and into failing to ship.

I do my best work when I practice what I write about, and this time, I decided it was important to go as far out on a limb as I could. The Icarus Deception argues that we're playing it too safe, hence my need to go outside my (and your) comfort zone.

Changing the format, changing the way I interacted with some of my readers (using Kickstarter) and changing the timeframe of my work all combined to make this project the most complex one I've ever done. Lots of moving parts, of course, but more scary, lots of places to fail. All very self-referential in a series of books about failure and guts and flying closer to the sun, of course. That's the entire point, right?

Of course, trying to control what other people think is a trap. At the same time that we can be thrilled by the possibility of flying without a net and of blazing a new trail, we have to avoid the temptation to become the audience, to will them into following us. Not only is it exhausting, it's counterproductive. Sales (of concepts, of services, of goods) don't get made because you've spent a sleepless night working on your telekenisis. They happen because you've made something worth buying, because you've outlined something worth believing in.

"This might not work" is either a curse, something that you labor under, or it's a blessing, a chance to fly and do work you never thought possible.

As I slumped into my car, I turned on the radio. Stuck in the CD player, forgotten in the rush to get to the event, was the audio copy of Icarus.

(Download Audio Excerpt)

I don't usually listen to my books after I've made them, but the recording sessions had been so arduous that I didn't even remember making the recording. So there it was in my car, left behind as a quick refresher before I went onstage to give my first public talk about the book.
It turns out that I don't just write for you. I also write to remind myself of what I'm hoping to become as well. Hearing myself, months later, reading something I didn't remember writing or reading, I shed a few tears. Yes, this is work worth doing. Yes, being out on a limb is exactly where I want to be.

That's where we're needed... out on a limb.

Seth's Blog : What people buy when they buy something on sale

What people buy when they buy something on sale

Assuming it's not something they were shopping for in the first place...

The impulse big-sale buy is not a matter of acquiring a high value item they'll need later at a bargain price today.

No, the consumer is spending money in exchange for the feeling, right now, of saving big. The joy of a bargain. The item is secondary, the feeling is what we just paid for.

You wouldn't know that from the way people selling things act, but that's what we buy.

[Aside: More than a billion people on Earth have never purchased anything on sale at a store. The clearance-sale emotion is a learned one, and a recent one at that.]

專題：不能小看使用者

桑原晃彌/日本CULMAN公司顧問

　「顧客」是商業說服術的關鍵字之一。賈伯斯也經常有效地使用此一字彙。

　iPod還在研發階段時，市面上已經出現了其他公司所生產的MP3，但都是一些無法隨心所欲操作的產品。因此，只要改善這些缺點就能大賣。

　對身為一家電腦公司的蘋果來說，iPod是非常與眾不同的家電產品，也必須花很多時間來研發。此外，半年後的聖誕節，被視為最適合上市的時間點。因此，賈伯斯下了「半年內必須完成」的指令。就這樣，展開了星期五交出試作品，週末進行測試後，星期一增加堆積如山的要求，如此艱辛的開發作業。

　對於那些抗議的工作人員，賈伯斯便用「使用者」這個關鍵字來說服他們。

　「面對問題時，一開始想到的，都是雜亂無章的解決方式，且大部分都會因此中止。即使如此，像剝洋蔥般地堅持下去的話，就能獲得簡潔且正確的解決之道。大部分的人都在這地方放棄，無法繼續堅持下去。但是，使用者是不容小覷的。我認為他們需要的是創新的產品。」

　重點是，當你以顧客的身分思考，並用直覺去覺察顧客的需要，要找到一個細微特色的優勢，似乎就變得比較簡單了。細微優勢通常以三種簡單的類型出現：第一，消除惱人的麻煩；第二，關心顧客的荷包；第三，把包裝變成武器。(本文節錄自《賈伯斯找到生存力量的94句話》，天下雜誌出版，2012年12月5日 )

 

Seth's Blog : Fall recommended reading list

Here it is: My fall book list—this time, it's half a dozen new books, some music and even a gadget.

(Here are three past lists).

For the first time, I'm building my list using the beta version of a new Squidoo tool we call postcards. Now it's simple and easy to highlight a product or an idea and share it with friends. We take the postcards you build and arrange them into stacks, organizing them by creator, topic and popularity. You can even embed a postcard onto a website (see below).

What you see are the first steps of what we hope will be a powerful platform. I hope you'll try it out by recommending a few finds of your own.

Seth's Blog : Too simple

Too simple

If the explanations you're demanding for what works aren't working, perhaps it's because you're avoiding nuance in exchange for simplicity.

It would take Lee Clow far more than five minutes to explain how to design an ad that works. Clive Davis didn't have the words to tell you what would make a hit record. Even the ostensibly simple food of Alice Waters can't be easily copied by an amateur.

And yet your boss keeps asking you to explain your whole plan in three Powerpoint slides.

The VC who allocates one minute to understand why your business will work has done everyone no favors. The blog reader who clicks away after a paragraph wasted his time visiting at all.

Skip the complicated, time-consuming part at your own risk. The cycle of test and failure works largely because it exposes us to nuance.

If it were obvious, everyone would do it. Wait, that's too simple. How about this: Nuance and subtlety aren't the exception in changing human behavior. They're the norm.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/12/too-simple.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : When everyone has access to the same tools

When everyone has access to the same tools

...then having a tool isn't much of an advantage.

The industrial age, the age of scarcity, depended in part on the advantages that came with owning tools others didn't own.

Time for a new advantage. It might be your network, the connections that trust you. And it might be your expertise. But most of all, I'm betting it's your attitude.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/12/when-everyone-has-access-to-the-same-tools.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

服務業專題：把自己當成顧客

蓋．川崎(Guy Kawasaki)/

　我承認，像「別預設任何事，往眼前找就是了」這種忠告，對於實際行動的催生實在不夠具體。因此，讓我再更明確說明一下，要領會自己的優勢，就必須站在顧客的立場思考。以下兩則關於小孩子的例子，可以解釋得更清楚。

　有個小妹妹總是堅持到某家小商店去買水果糖，儘管她家附近有更方便的超市。小妹妹這麼做的原因是：「尼克（小商店老闆）都會給我比較多的糖果；可是，另一家店的小姐都會再拿掉一些。」

　顯然是超市店員一開始就放了過量的糖果，後來才會拿掉一些，以便秤出重量正確的糖果。而小商店老闆尼克則是一開始就放了比較少的糖果，然後再加進更多糖果。不過，孩子們顯然都相信尼克給的糖果比較多。

　接下來的例子發生在維吉尼亞州。某間學校一直苦於招收不到學生，無法順利開一門叫做「男孩家政課」的課程。仔細想想這個課程名稱，也就不覺得招不到學生有什麼好奇怪了。在校方設身處地為孩子們考量一番之後，決定將課程名稱改為「單身漢的生活」，結果很快就有一百二十個人報名。

　這兩個故事都告訴我們，以顧客的立場去思考事情，能幫助你找到吸引他們的正確方法。試著想像一下你就是李察．希爾斯；你會利用什麼樣的細微優勢，讓顧客比較偏愛你的型錄呢？試著進一些XXL超大尺寸的衣服、設計較大尺寸的型錄，使顧客能更清楚看到商品圖片，或從《老農民曆期刊》上擷取一些趣聞，提供給顧客？

　重點是，當你以顧客的身分思考，並用直覺去覺察顧客的需要，要找到一個細微特色的優勢，似乎就變得比較簡單了。細微優勢通常以三種簡單的類型出現：第一，消除惱人的麻煩；第二，關心顧客的荷包；第三，把包裝變成武器。(本文節錄自《行銷戰術全書》，大樂文化出版，2012年11月27日 )

問題不在急速成長，而是價值觀的改變

桑原晃彌/日本CULMAN公司顧問

編按：蘋果公司創辦人及董事長賈伯斯(1976-1985年、1997-2011年)，中間一度離開蘋果十二年，他回顧這段時間蘋果組織的問題，有以下的觀察...

　對於自己離開後，規模不斷擴大卻仍陷入破產危機的蘋果，賈伯斯分析其原因在於：「問題不在急速成長，而是價值觀的改變。」

　比起賺大錢與擴大規模，賈伯斯更堅持製作出好產品。但史考力恰好相反，他不重視製造產品，而是著重在增加利益與擴大公司規模。

　其結果，蘋果創造好產品的生產力不斷衰退。創造是比追求利益更加細膩的作業。

　比起創造與新穎，更重視利益與規模。這樣的價值觀變化，會讓人或企業陷入危機。就算是獨占企業也是一樣。某天，獨占的情況也會因為某些因素而突然結束。獨占狀況一結束，只能走回創造之路。但擁有獨創才能的優秀人才，已經離開這種公司了。過去的獨占企業，最後也面臨悲慘又混亂的窘境。

　一家企業是否能存活，最重要的是，必須慎重地持續守護肉眼看不見的價值觀。(本文節錄自《賈伯斯撼動世界的142句話》，天下雜誌出版，2013年1月4日 )

Seth's Blog : The fermata

The fermata

It is a mark from the composer to the conductor: Hold the pause as long as you like.

When we finally have the attention of an audience, our instinct is to rush. Attention is precious, please don't stare, okay, I'm hurrying, there, I'm done.

It doesn't have to work that way.

If you've got something to say, say it. Slowly. With effect. The audience isn't going anywhere. At least not the people you care about.

No, don't waste their time. Yes, handle your message with the respect it deserves.

If you have to rush to say it, it might not be worth saying.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/the-fermata.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

你組織的方式以及你想法的命運

貝爾斯基(Scott Belsky)/「彼罕思」網絡(Behance)執行長

　AMR研究中心為供應鏈研究權威，替《財富》全球五百大企業其中非常多家服務，它自二○○四年起，每年選出二十五家有最佳供應鏈管理的公司。你可能會很驚訝地發現，蘋果公司於二○○七年第一次進榜就得到第二名，並在二○○八年超越安布（Anheuser-Busch）、沃爾瑪、寶僑和豐田，登上第一名。

　為什麼蘋果這一間以新點子和能做出「不同思維」而知名的公司，也是全球最有組織力的公司？答案就是，組織是讓點子實現的主要動力。

　若要產生影響力，組織和創意是同等重要的。試想以下的方程式：

　創意力×組織力＝影響力

　事實上，我們想法的影響力有一大部分取決於我們保持組織的能力。那些具有大量創意、但幾乎或完全沒有組織力的人，平均來說都是毫無成就。讓我們來想像一個有著瘋狂創意但一片混亂的思考家，這個方程式會是：

　100×0＝0

　這個有讓你想起誰嗎？有誰是具有一籮筐的點子，但實在太沒有組織，以致沒有任何想法能完全實現？另一方面，一個有著一半創意力且稍微有組織的人卻能造成大得多的影響力：

　50×2＝100

　這個方程式幫助我們了解為什麼有一些「比較沒那麼有創意」的藝術家可能比那些有才華的同儕做出更多的作品。這樣的發現很令人震驚，或許也很不幸：一位有著普通創意力但具備傑出組織能力的人，會比毫無組織的創意天才帶來更大的影響力。(本文節錄自《想到就能做到：活用組織力+人脈力+領導力，讓創意不再卡住、自然實現》，大塊文化，2012年12月28日出版 )

Seth's Blog : A bias for trust

A bias for trust

Two very simple truths:

a. Don't waste your time initiating relationships that aren't going to thrive and benefit both sides.

b. Productive connection requires mutual trust. You can't empathize with someone you don't trust.

If you enter an engagement filled with wariness, alert for the scam, the inauthentic and the selfish, you'll poison the relationship before it even starts. Those you deal with won't be challenged to rise to your expectations of excitement and goodwill. Instead, they'll struggle in the face of your skepticism.

Instead of seeking and amplifying the sharp edges, consider focusing on the dignity and goodwill of the people you're working with.

Sure, there are people out there who will disappoint you. But expecting to be ripped off poisons all your interactions instead of saving you from a few dead ends.

An open mind and an open heart usually lead to precisely that in those that you are about to deal with. Perhaps we should give people a chance to live up to our trust instead of looking for the gotcha.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/10/a-bias-for-trust.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : The end of should

The end of should

Banks should close at 4, books should be 200 pages long, CEOs should go to college, blogs should have comments, businessmen should be men, big deals should be done by lawyers, good food should be processed, surgeons should never advertise, hit musicians should be Americans, good employees should work at the same company for years...

Find your should and make it go away.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/10/the-end-of-should.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

CEO專題：商管大師觀點─克里斯．安德森

伊恩．瓦里斯(Ian Wallis)/Startups.co.uk、GrowingBusiness.co.uk編輯總監

全名：克里斯．安德森
出生年：一九六一
專長：科技報導、數位世界革命的相關評論。
著名事蹟：擔任《連線》雜誌（Wired）總編輯，主張企業應將重點放在利基市場。
知名著作：《長尾理論：打破80/20法則的新經濟學》（The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More）、《免費！揭開零定價的獲利祕密》（Free: The Future of a Radical Price）。

　克里斯．安德森的背景介紹

　克里斯．安德森原本專攻物理研究，後來開始在《自然》（Nature）與《科學》（Science）等期刊從事科學報導的工作。之後，他也在《經濟學人》（The Economist）擔任多個職位，包括科技版面與美國商情版面的編輯。二○○一年時，他成為《連線》雜誌總編輯。他的兩本著作皆十分暢銷，興趣包括音樂與機器人學。

　安德森的著名事蹟

　「長尾」一詞是從克雷．薛基（Clay Shirky）發表的一篇短文中衍生而來。二○○六年出版的《長尾理論》一書，集結了安德森在《連線》雜誌發表的多篇文章。長尾理論指出，製造成本、通路與產品庫存等因素與影響力日增的中介平台及意見領袖逐漸結合在一起。這兩股勢力的結合將使得傳統的熱賣或暢銷商品的獲利模式變得愈加罕見。

　此一論點可解釋網路時代裡許多專門經營某些利基市場的企業（通常為小型或未上市公司）的成長動因，例如亞馬遜、Netflix等等。當時的企業家都還只能在網路世界裡沿路摸索、且戰且走─沒有人知道網路世界裡下一個爆紅的東西是什麼，也不懂個中道理。更重要的是，大家無法了解不同規模的公司，如何運用這種新科技創造獲利。

　在這個瞬息萬變的科技時代，世界愈來愈緊密相連。《長尾理論》是當時第一本提出具體見解的書，解釋打入利基市場的能力將如何開創巨大商機。

　概念內涵

　總結來說，《長尾理論》檢視經濟（與文化）逐漸遠離暢銷商品的演變，從占據需求曲線頂端的相對少數「熱銷商品」，轉移至由許多利基商品拖出來的長長曲線尾巴。

　《長尾理論》主要是揭示西方經濟體以及文化從大眾市場轉變成數百萬個利基市場造成的結果。它觀察到科技帶來的效應，使得消費者更容易找到並購買利基產品。這都要歸功於「無限陳列空間效應」以及新型通路結構（包括數位下載與點對點傳輸市場）的出現，打破了傳統廣播與實體零售的通路瓶頸。

　隨著生產與流通成本下降─尤其在網路世界─企業也就不再那麼需要將顧客視為同質的單一群體。除去了舊有的陳列空間限制與通路流通的瓶頸，市場定位狹窄的商品與服務就能出頭，而且還能跟主流熱銷商品一樣吸引人，甚至發揮更大的吸引力。

　傳統零售經濟模式只能利用有限且昂貴的陳列空間，擺放有限的商品。陳列最有可能熱賣或暢銷的品項，才能確保商品的周轉率與銷量達到最大。另一方面，網路零售商卻能陳列各種商品，提供比主流商品更多的利基選項。這上百萬種的利基商品所創造的長尾效應，過去都因為大家偏愛少數的熱賣商品而遭到忽略。

　安德森的理論在企業實務上的應用

　安德森引用拜倫霍夫森、胡與史密斯三人（Brynjolfsson, Hu and Smith）早期的研究結果，點出亞馬遜網站上的銷售獲利，有一大部分皆來自實體書店沒有販售的罕見書籍。

　熱門商品的生產準備成本與失敗率都較高，所以利潤也相對較低。零售商互相競爭消費者口袋裡的鈔票，也導致熱門商品常常是以折扣價售出。相反地，利基商品不用降價求售，部分原因在於利基商品較為稀罕。舉例來說，零售商可能會將最新的哈利波特（Harry Potter）小說賠本出售以帶動買氣，而按定價賣出其他知名度較低的書。此時就不難想像零售商在獲利方面，可以從較不知名、銷量較低的書籍當中獲得較多利潤（每本單位利潤較高），虧本銷售的熱門書創造的利潤反而較低。

　長尾商品的整合者（Netflix、亞馬遜、iTunes）通常都在該領域獨占鰲頭。長尾現象不只出現在媒體與娛樂產業。eBay（實體商品的長尾整合者）、Google（廣告的長尾整合者）、葛拉敏銀行（Grameen Bank，金融服務的長尾整合者）都是長尾效應的例子。
(本文節錄自《大師觀點：一本書看懂28位全球頂尖商管大師的智慧》，商周，2012年12月15日出版 )

專題：思考，不要用蠻力；工作，不能只靠勞力

安宅和人/日本雅虎營運長(COO)

　根據我自身的經驗，對於一起工作的年輕人，我時常建議的還有一件事，那就是「千萬不要用蠻力」。

　工時長短根本不是重點，重點在於只要交出有價值的輸出（成果）就好。例如，就算一整天只工作五分鐘，只要按照預定，甚至比預定早一點交出所約定的成果，就沒有任何問題了。那些所謂「我正在拚命工作」「我昨天又熬夜了」的努力方式，在這個追求「有價值工作」的世界裡，根本沒有必要。最慘的類型是明明時常加班或連假日也上班，卻被周遭人認為「交出這種程度的成果，應該用正常的上班時間就夠了吧？」

　連我也是一樣，二十多歲剛進入職場時，總要工作到頭昏眼花的程度，才有做了工作的感覺，著實白費了相當多的時間。雖說年輕時體力充沛，像那樣的工作方式，也算有讓心情愉快的好處；不過，說穿了，其實也不過是自我陶醉而已，所謂的收穫可能也只是了解到自己體力的極限，成長只有在確實產生出有意義的成果（輸出）之後才能獲得。若能持續有價值的工作，並保持其品質，就算「偷工減料」也完全不成問題。如果是問人可以解決的事，那麼問人就好；如果有比現在更簡單的方法可以完成，就該換個方式處理。

　像這樣該以時間基礎做考量還是該以輸出（成果）為出發點做考量，就是「勞動者」與「工作者」的差異，以現代的詞彙來說則是「薪資族」與「企業人」，甚至可說是「上班族」與「專業人士」的差異。

　而所謂的專業人士，是指擁有基於特地訓練所具備的相關技能，並負責基於該技能提供特定價值，而由特定顧客獲得報酬的人。由於所提供的畢竟是對顧客而言的價值，即使是以時薪計費的律師或顧問，其對價仍依各自的技能水準而異，也就是說，各自存在所帶來的價值大小而有很大的差異。

　「工作到極限為止」「以勞動時間取勝」，這些屬於本書中所謂勞動者的思維，只要抱持這種想法，就無法成為「高價值、高效能的生產者」。如本書開頭所述「以相同的勞力與時間工作，能增加多少輸出？」，這才是生產力的定義。

　專業工作者的工作方式，與「勞動時間愈長賺的錢愈多」這種勞動者或薪資族的想法形成對比。不以勞動的時間，而是藉由「造成變化的程度」獲取對價或評價。或者可以說，存在的意義取決於「可產生多少有意義的輸出」。像這樣開啟專業工作者生存之道的開關，正是打下產生高生產力的基礎。(本文節錄自《麥肯錫教我的思考武器：從邏輯思考到真正解決問題》，經濟新潮社出版，2012年10月7日 )

Seth's Blog : Confusing lucky with good

Confusing lucky with good

This is why internet successes fade. This is why amateur salespeople so often fail to become professionals. This is why one-off sports analogy stories make no sense. Successful at the beginning blinds us to the opportunity to get really good instead of merely coasting.

The only thing more sad than the self-limiting arrogance of the confusion between lucky and good is the pathos of the converse: confusing ungood with unlucky.

Most people with a big idea, great talent and/or something to say don't get lucky at first. Or second. Or even third. It's so easy to conclude that if you're not lucky, you're not good. So persistence becomes an essential element of good, because without persistence, you never get a chance to get lucky.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/12/confusing-lucky-with-good.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Would you consider pre-ordering?

Would you consider pre-ordering?

At the end of the year, I'm bringing out three new books at the same time.

Copies of the books recently arrived at my office. Paging through them, I'm thrilled at how they came out, and together, they might represent my best ever effort at communicating the revolution we're living through. I hope you'll take the time to give them a read.

Three books at once might be crazy, but with your help, it might turn out to be a great idea. This is about making books for my readers, as opposed to finding readers for my books--and it all depends on whether you choose to read the books and to spread the word.

The first, the core book of the three, is The Icarus Deception. (BN) (5 pack) (outside US) It's about the death of the industrial economy, the need for art and the chance of a lifetime. You can read a free sample here.

(PS 1,000 copies of Icarus are hand-signed, and if you find one with a colored autograph, let me know, as I have a gift for you.)

The second is called V is for Vulnerable, (BN) It was created with Hugh Macleod, and it takes the last chapter of Icarus and turns it into a 26-spread illustrated book. I've been so delighted with the reaction this book has caused among the people who have actually touched it--changing the format turns out to be an effective way to get the message out. And it's fun.

The third is a big book, a high-value (plenty of pages per dollar!) collection of the best of the last six years of this blog. We named it Whatcha Gonna Do With That Duck. (BN) For those of you that didn't get a chance to get the limited edition behemoth, here's a smaller, abridged black and white edition that sits right next to Small is the New Big. I'm incredibly proud (and a bit amazed) to experience a volume that took this long to write.

[PS we just added a three-book bundle, all in one click]

Of course, you can wait until January and wait until your friends have copies and wait until it's already being discussed, but I'm hoping you'll do me a favor and show your favorite bookseller your support and order a copy now before the holiday craziness distracts us all.

Thanks, as always, not just for reading, but for doing something important with the ideas. I appreciate your support more than I can say.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/12/would-you-pre-order.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

專題：創造出最好的產品，才是我們的終點

桑原晃彌/日本CULMAN公司顧問

　我們的終點，不在於何時。創造出最好的產品，才是我們的終點。

　在工作或人生這種長期抗戰中，會因為終點設定的地方，而產生極大的差距。

　賈伯斯重回蘋果的隔年，在產品發表會的演說尾聲，加上了「危機解除了。營收增加中」這句話，被視為是曾經面臨倒閉危機的蘋果，正朝著復活之路前進的宣言。

　但是，賈伯斯卻認為，這不是所謂的終點。

　一九九八年出席某場會議的賈伯斯，被台下的聽眾問到這個問題：

「您是何時感覺到蘋果已經重新站起來了呢？」
「我們的終點，不在於什麼時候之前要改善蘋果的經營狀況。推出眾所期待的好產品，才是我們的終點。創造出最好的產品就是終點。」

　業績的回復，不過是漫長路程中的一個里程碑。業績是否恢復，交給第三者判斷就好了。蘋果的策略都必須以「創造世界上前所未有的東西」、「創造出最好的產品」為起點。(本文節錄自《賈伯斯撼動世界的142句話》，天下雜誌出版，2013年1月4日 )

專題：最重要的是，下一個要描繪的夢想

桑原晃彌/日本CULMAN公司顧問

　賈伯斯的創意來自「夢想」。但這絕非癡人說夢。賈伯斯的夢想，是能夠賭上自己一生的遠景。孕育並實現這些夢想的自由樂園，便是蘋果。

　「我們以自己所描繪的遠景作賭注。與其跟別人做一樣的東西，不如以自己所描繪的遠景作賭注。大家都做得出來的東西，就交給其他公司來做就好了。下一個要描繪的夢想，對我們來說，才是最重要的。」

　「必須不斷思考下一步。」

　賈伯斯的宿敵比爾．蓋茲所創立的微軟，可說是藉由不斷改良Windows而致富的公司。相對於此，蘋果的策略絕非改良，而是不斷地推出新產品。

　因此，拿過去「熱賣商品」的銷售數字與現在相比，並沒有太大的意義。比起已成定局的過去，更重要的是未來該如何改變的自由創意。

　特別是在草創期的蘋果，金錢與生活安定等現實問題都是次要。

　「夢想」這種貨幣，能買到所有東西。(本文節錄自《賈伯斯找到生存力量的94句話》，天下雜誌出版，2012年12月5日 )

周末文選：物品愈少愈能善加運用

荒河菜美 /時間設計師

　與其擁有十個杯子，倒不如一個杯子使用十次

　物品變多，一點好處也沒有。整理起來費工夫、使用時也得花時間選擇、房間的空間也被壓縮⋯⋯。正因為現在是個放任不管，物品就會慢慢增加的時代，所以思考盡可能不增加物品，用少少的物品生活，才是聰明的生活方式。

　物品一少，就變得會去思考運用的方式。暢銷書《少少的物品富裕的生活》（大和書房）的作者，同時也是料理研究家的大原照子女士，聽說她曾經用一個行李箱體驗英國的生活，而她也真切感受到，即使是少少的物品，也能過著富足的生活。所以，她就幾乎把家中大量的調理道具、家具等物品都處理掉了。

　正因為物品少，才得以運用

　像學習也是，參考書、教材等都應盡可能地聚焦，反覆學習，才能增加實力。在短期間學好英文的人曾經這麼說：「如果能夠做完一本教材，就僅會留下不會的部分。換言之，可以明確顯示自己究竟哪邊還不懂。一明確，就可以針對不會的部分徹底擊破。」

　聽說英語會話也是如此，並非要記很多單字，而是訓練使用一個單字能夠衍生出多少會話。

　物品也一樣，少量的話，就會試著活用現有的東西。沒必要把大量的東西閒置在手邊。(本文節錄自《人生要清爽物品 時間 人際關係整理術》，天下雜誌出版，2012年12月5日 )

Seth's Blog : In a hurry to be generous

In a hurry to be generous

We're often in a hurry to finish.

Or in a hurry to close a sale.

What happens when we adopt the posture of being in a hurry to be generous? With resources or insight or access or kindness...

It's an interesting sort of impatience.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/in-a-hurry-to-be-generous.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Persuade vs. convince

Persuade vs. convince

An anonymous copyeditor working on my new book unilaterally changed each usage of "persuade" to "convince."

I had to change them all back.

Marketers don't convince. Engineers convince. Marketers persuade. Persuasion appeals to the emotions and to fear and to the imagination. Convincing requires a spreadsheet or some other rational device.

It's much easier to persuade someone if they're already convinced, if they already know the facts. But it's impossible to change someone's mind merely byconvincing them of your point.

If you're spending a lot of your time trying to convince people, it's no wonder it's not working.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/persuade-vs-convince.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

服務業專題：一次專注滿足一種顧客的真心期待

史萊渥斯基(Adrian J. Slywotzky)、卡爾．韋伯(Karl Weber)/奧緯國際管理顧問公司(Oliver Wyman)合夥人商業與當代事務作家

　美國頂尖交響樂團設法去除需求絆腳石對於有意成為需求創造者的人士而言，最微妙也最重要的一項挑戰，就是「一般顧客的迷思」。

　以美國頂尖交響樂團的行銷經理為例。這項職務的工作非常困難，因為要設法吸引消費者，讓他們願意購買高價的入場券，並且奔波到市區去聆聽現場演奏的古典音樂，而不是將時間與精力投注在其他各式各樣的娛樂上，特別是其中還有許多是免費的。

　長久以來，這項挑戰總是令人望之生畏。不過，現在終於發現為古典音樂開啟未來需求的祕訣，就在於揚棄「一般顧客的迷思」，正視世界的真實狀況，即所有人以及他們的需求，其實都各自不同。

　大部分的音樂行銷者向來認定，說服潛在的新聽眾嘗試聆聽交響樂乃是擴大需求的關鍵。幾乎每個交響樂團的行銷人員都常把這句話掛在嘴上：「把人拉進音樂廳的大門！」他們認為，只要民眾走進當地的音樂廳聆聽一場音樂會，音樂本身的優美就足以吸引他們再次回來。

　這項理論只有個問題，那就是實際上並非如此。每年都有數以千計潛在的新聽眾受到說服而聆聽了人生中的第一場古典音樂會。音樂廳富麗堂皇，演出令人驚嘆，音樂也令人陶醉。然而，絕大部分的初次聽眾卻都不再回到音樂廳。若是再邀請他們購票入場，得到的反應通常是漫不在乎的聳聳肩，甚至是強烈的敵意。

　因此，交響樂團的行銷人員每年都必須努力找尋更多的新顧客，說服他們走進音樂廳裡，藉此維繫樂團的生存。「試用」的需求引爆點雖然為奈斯派索產生了絕佳的成果，對於交響樂團卻不是這麼一回事。

　問題在於所謂的「顧客流失」——也就是稍縱即逝、反覆無常且毫不可靠的需求。由於交響樂團的團員薪資頗高，位於市區的音樂廳也需要高昂的維護費用，因此交響樂團必須激發強烈而穩定的需求，才能生存得下去。顧客流失率若維持在高檔，創造需求就像是努力要填滿一只底部破了個大洞的水桶一樣。

　交響樂團為什麼沒有辦法讓初次聆聽音樂會的聽眾成為長期支持者，是個令人不解的謎。美國各大交響樂團的著名演奏家，難道才華還不足以讓聽眾感到滿意嗎？不太可能。還是說，對於現代的聽眾而言，古典音樂就是太過「自命高雅」或者「過時」了嗎？這種說法未免自暴自棄，認定交響樂團的滅亡是不可避免的結果。

　真正的問題在於「一般顧客的迷思」。為了迎合典型顧客而設計的產品，只是無謂的浪費而已。這種做法不免導致過剩(提供許多顧客不想要的功能)、不足(缺乏他們想要的功能)，以及不精確(藉由猜測概略挑選功能，而不是以真實狀況為依歸)。

　需求創造者會將焦點放在需求差異性上，設法找出不同的顧客有什麼樣的差異，並且思考自己如何能夠因應這樣的差異。接著，他們會在必要的情況下盡可能將顧客劃分成許多小群體，以精確了解個別顧客的感受、體驗與需要，而不是把他們視為某種虛幻的一般群眾。「去除一般化」可以是複雜的挑戰，卻也帶來龐大的機會。這就是為什麼傑出的需求創造者都熱愛需求差異性。比起傳統的「一般顧客」做法，需求差異性提供的機會可讓需求創造者服務更多人，不但更加精準，通常也更有利可圖。

　二○○七年，九個交響樂團互相合作，聘請一群研究人員分析交響樂團面臨的行銷挑戰。這項「聽眾成長計畫」(Audience Growth Initiative)在二○○八年中於丹佛發表研究結果，共有數百位專業音樂人員出席這場簡報會議，分別來自全美各地的交響樂團。

　研究證實，顧客流失的確是委託研究的這九個交響樂團所面臨的一大問題。交響樂團每年的顧客平均有五五％是新面孔，問題相當龐大而且代價高昂。在初次參加音樂會的聽眾當中，流失率更是嚴重，高達難以想像的九一％。「把人拉進音樂廳的大門」顯然沒有什麼效果。

　不過，當研究人員統計完平均數據，而開始將注意力集中在顧客差異性上時，就會逐漸浮現出可能的解決方案。他們發現，交響樂團的聽眾可劃分為幾個對比強烈的族群，包括：核心聽眾——樂團訂戶，長年保有聆聽音樂會的習慣，每年都會參加多場音樂會；嘗試性聽眾——初次聆聽音樂會的聽眾，只參加一場表演；隨性聽眾——一年可能參加一兩場音樂會；特殊場合聽眾——一年只參加一兩場音樂會，但每年都固定出席；消遣式聽眾——每年固定參加少數幾場音樂會的長年訂戶；以及高潛力聽眾——這類聽眾雖然參加了許多音樂會，卻還沒成為樂團訂戶。

　因此，交響樂團的顧客至少有六個不同種類，各自也都大幅不同。舉例而言，波士頓的核心聽眾在全體顧客當中只佔二六％，購買的票券卻佔了五六％。相較之下，嘗試性聽眾在全體顧客當中佔了三七％，卻只買了一一％的票券。九個交響樂團的數據都呈現出極為類似的模式。核心聽眾是當今需求的關鍵所在。他們在全體顧客當中雖然只佔四分之一，美國的現場演奏古典音樂賴以存活的營收卻有一大部分都來自這群人。據營收分析顯示，在五年的期間裡，一個核心家戶平均會透過買票與捐款為樂團貢獻四千八百九十六美元。

　因此，滿足核心聽眾是不可或缺的做法。所幸，最佳的交響樂團都精通此技能。訂購資料證實，若聽眾成為當地交響樂團的固定支持者，通常就會每年不斷續訂，經常持續長達數十年。(本文節錄自《引爆需求：讓顧客無可救藥愛上你的6個祕密》，天下雜誌，2012年11月7日出版 )

專題：你在混亂中釐清次序的能力有多強？

賈斯汀．曼克斯(Justin Menkes)/高階主管能力評鑑專家

　想像一下，你目前為一家大型醫療產品供應公司工作，業務團隊目前正使用的公務車，三年租賃合約馬上要到期了，你在考慮改租油電混合車。不過，雖然油電混合車很具吸引力，但它們的租賃價格比一般汽油車高出二○％。你有個直接部屬做了下列評論，你會如何反應？

1.在某些車禍事件中，已知油電混合車的電池會裂開，造成人員受傷。
a.沒有交通工具是絕對安全的。
b.如果油電混合車發生車禍傷亡事件的整體比例較高，那這點很值得考慮。

2.我朋友也有一台油電混合車，電動馬達常出問
a.我們應該比較一下油電混合車和一般汽油車的修理費用。
b.我們考慮選擇的這款油電混合車，會比我們選擇的其他一般汽油車款更不可靠嗎？

3.綠色和平組織的調查指出：消費者向環保導向企業購買商品的可能性高出三○％。
a.這項數據的來源明顯有其立場，可能要再考慮一下。
b.如果我們業務開油電混合車，會讓顧客對我們留下好印象的話，那這項數據很值得參考。

4.最近有測試顯示，政府公布的汽車油耗表現，和實際上路的油耗表現並不相符。
a.這是新科技炒作如何模糊我們判斷力的絕佳例子。
b.政府發表的油耗表現正確性與我們的決定無關，特別是因為真實的油耗表現數據很容易取得。

　現在，請停止作答。回頭檢視你回答「a」的所有問題，仔細思考你為什麼選這個答案。再想像一下，你是個負責為小考打分數的助教，在每道問題旁寫一段簡短的解釋文字，向學生說明為什麼「a」會是個更好的答案。然後，同樣在回答「b」的問題旁，寫下為何這個答案更好的說明文字。請持續琢磨這些文字，直到你覺得其中一個答案絕對比另一個更好為止。請問，在你原本回答「a」的問題中，有幾題後來決定將答案改成「b」呢？就你最先回答出來的那個版本，若回答「b」的次數愈多，表示你愈能保持清晰的思考。若是在後來的撰寫解說練習中，你將答案「a」改成「b」的比例愈高(比方說，將三個「a」改成了「b」)，表示你解決難題的動力就愈高。(本文節錄自《壓力下竟能表現更好：為什麼有些人一路向上，有些人卻原地打轉？》，天下雜誌出版，2012年11月5日 )

專題：網路學習─達人教學網站Udemy的故事

鄒景平/總裁學苑專欄作家

　大規模網路公開教學(MOOC)這股風潮中，主要有兩大類教學網站，一類以名校名師為號召，例如Coursera、edX等，另一類是以達人為號召，如Udemy，Lynda等。只要你胸中有料、有熱情，又想開課，那麼隨時都可透過Udemy，達成這個願望。

　因為我曾使用Udemy的網站功能，嘗試編寫一門課，Udemy常寄些訊息給我，教我一些如何開課和吸引學生的招數。這種關係給我的感覺，是很商業性的，直到最近我收到Udemy的創辦人Eren Bali的來信，他分享自己的創業故事，突然讓我產生出一種全新的感受。

　我感覺自己變成Udemy的朋友，很希望看到它順利成長，也希望自己能幫上一點忙，看來說故事的力量真的很大！

　Eren Bali說他自己是土耳其人，出生在土耳其的小鄉村。村里的小學只有一間教室，聚集五種不同年級的孩子，一個老師要盡力教好這些不同需求的孩子，真的很難。所以孩子們必須想辦法自學，或透過書本來學習。

　Bali對數學和科學很有興趣，而且非常有天份，可是鄉村的環境很難讓他再進步。但自從他爸爸幫他和妹妹們買了電腦之後，情況開始改觀，尤其當他連上網路，他發現自己找到新的學習之路。

　他發現網路上有好幾個數學論壇，大家會在論壇中交換難題來挑戰並尋求解答。他還發現有幾個網站上面，有奧林匹克數學競賽的考題集，雖然這些網站做得很笨拙，也沒有好好規劃，但它們為Bali的人生，帶來巨大的影響。

　Eren Bali透過網路自學數學，他終於在土耳其的奧林匹克數學競賽中脫穎而出，獲得金牌，接著在國際奧林匹克數學競賽中獲得銀牌。

　後來，他在大學裡攻讀計算機和數學，遇到一位好朋友Oktay Caglar，兩人一起探索和實驗網路新世界，他們運用網路的高效能並結合過去的學習經驗，期望創造一個「任何人都能跟專家學會任何事」的世界，所以共同籌劃創業。

　但這條創業之路，走起來很不容易。六年前，他們先在土耳其開發出與Udemy願景近似的產品，卻失敗了。他們只有收拾行囊到矽谷，積極找創投公司的支持。他們曾被超過五十個以上的投資者拒絕，最後才創辦Udemy.

　Eren Bali說：「雖然經過很多挫折，但我們從未放棄，因為我們堅信網際網路的巨大能力，一定會改變人類的學習方式。 我們從所面臨的挑戰中學習，也得到辛勤工作的報償。」

　Udemy目前的學生人數，已經超過五十萬人，也因為Udemy的驚人成長，再次獲得矽谷第二輪的投資資金一千兩百萬元美金，這顯示大家對Udemy的信心。

　Udemy的創辦人原是土耳其窮鄉僻壤的小孩，卻靠著網路突破求學困境，自學成為奧林匹克國際數學競賽的亞軍，也因為這個經驗，他努力讓Udemy成為「任何人都能跟專家學會任何事」的網站，也經由他的故事，讓Udemy增添了豐富的人文意義和價值。

　好故事能強化顧客與網站的關係，增加網站的吸引力，Udemy就是一個好例子。(本文原刊於總裁學苑)

Seth's Blog : Vendor shout out

Vendor shout out

Yelp and other sites make it easy to honor a favorite restaurant. Amazon lets you praise the author of a book that touched you.

But what about the hard-working and insightful organizations we work with to make our businesses succeed? We spend all day with them, and bet our reputations on them, but it's not often we get to highlight the vendors who bring humanity to their work. It's so easy to focus on the broken software and the broken promises that take up so much of our time, but it turns out that it's the miracle workers that actually make our best work possible.

As I finish up my huge Kickstarter project, I wanted to share the names of some of the folks I counted on to make it work:

Michael Quinn is a print broker who keeps his promises, no matter how complicated the job is.

Hugh Macleod is a genius.

Pirate's Press is my favorite choice for producing and packaging LPs. They care and it shows.

Alex Miles Younger runs Unozip, a graphic design firm that will both make you look good and help you enjoy the process.

Robyn and the team at Global are a patient and wise fulfillment house.

Dan runs a classic letterpress shop in Brooklyn, and does it with generosity and talent. Go take a class and bring your coworkers.

And Brian continues to deliver professional web work with his team at Viget.

I'm also delighted to be able to work with caring, insightful people like my copyeditor Catherine E. Oliver, my agent Lisa DiMona, librarian Bernie Jiwa, artist Lori Koop, connectrix Michelle Welsch, rights guru Teri Tobias and the editorial duo of Adrian Zackheim and Niki Papadopolous.

Every day I'm amazed that I have the privilege of doing the work I do, and I know that I wouldn't be able to do it without the combined efforts of literally thousands of people who do more than they have to. From the infrastructure that gives us the stability we need to dream to the person who says yes instead of no, I'm grateful. [Don't forget Arlo.]

I guess that's what we all we need. People with a point of view who do more than they have to.

And thanks to you, of course, for reading and for cheering us all on.

Thank you.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/vendor-shout-out.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Four questions worth answering

Four questions worth answering

Who is your next customer? (Conceptually, not specifically. Describe his outlook, his tribe, his hopes and dreams and needs and wants...)

What is the story he told himself (about the world, about his situation, about his perceptions) before he met you?

How do you encounter him in a way that he trusts the story you tell him about what you have to offer?

What change are you trying to make in him, his life, or his story?

Start with this before you spend time on tactics, technology or scalability.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/four-questions-worth-answering.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : The cycle of customers who care

The cycle of customers who care

Organizations that grow start by selling their serices and products to people who care.

These organizations are staffed by people who care making something that demands "caring-about" for people who have chosen to care.

It can be colored shoelaces or vinyl records or handmade medicine balls. These aren't for everyone, and they require effort to find, to buy and to maintain, but for those that care about the cutting edge or innovation or style, they're perfect.

Then, over time, many of these organizations start to make products and services that are carefree. The people who produce them care so much about what they're making that they get good at it, the design becomes simpler, the pricing becomes better, and more people use it. The result is efficiency and distribution.

Until soon, the product or service is used by people who don't care so much about the original intent, they just want something easy and functional and available and cheap.

This is the classic diffusion of innovations process. (Learn more about this key concept here, here and here). Those in the mass market choose to be the mass market because they're too busy or distracted or bored to be the innovators and the geeks. They don't care enough to be on the edge.

Some examples: ebooks were first sold to just a few people. They were tricky to download, they weren't cheap and they required more effort. Over time, the price of the reader comes down, more books are available and it becomes more attractive to the mass market.

Or the car transforms from something for millionaires and hobbyists into the Honda Civic. You don't buy a Civic because you want to do your own tune ups. You just want it to work, and to be inexpensive.

Or the charity that starts out on the bleeding edge of technology, raising speculative money from a few philanthropists, but then moves into the mainstream and becomes an easy cause to explain and support.

Or the musician and his band and his label who goes from hand-crafting music to mass-producing live spectacles.

Apple, of course, is the classic example. The Mac was, for the longest time, only bought by people who cared a lot about which computer they bought. And the iPhone transformed the market because it became a phone for people who wanted to care about their phone.

The recent launch of the iPhone5 disappointed the geeks, but that was on purpose. Apple introduced a phone for their target market, which is people who don't care as much about the phone as the geeks do. They introduced a phone that worked, not one that was fascinating because it was loaded with untested new features.

But here's where it gets interesting...

The first step is people who care making a product for people who care.

The second step is people who care making a product for people who don't care.

And the third step, so difficult to avoid, is that the growing organization starts hiring people, not necessarily people who care, to grow their ever-industrializing company. And since they are servicing customers who don't care, those employees who don't care can get away with it (for a while).

Think General Motors, 1986. No one pushed back on the horrid design and build quality of the Cadillac. No, the people who cared all bought a Mercedes instead, and those that didn't care, didn't care. Until it was too late.

You're not going to have hordes of disappointed mass market customers cursing you out about quality or design. They don't care enough to do that.

It's totally okay for an organization to have the mission of making a carefree, ubiquitous product or service for people too busy or focused elsewhere. Totally fine to make something that's popular largely because it's popular. The danger creeps in when your team listens to their (mass) market and stops caring as well. When that happens, a new company comes along to care again.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/12/the-cycle-of-customers-who-care.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Bad performance, good performance and the other two kinds

Bad performance, good performance and the other two kinds

In the industrial age, the boss defines a good job as one that meets spec. If you do what you are told, on time and on budget, it's a good job.

A bad job, then, is one that requires repair or rescheduling or produces a shoddy output.

In the connection economy, the post-industrial age we're moving into now, there are two other kinds of work worth mentioning:

A remarkable performance is one that exceeds expectations so much that we talk about it. (Remarkable, as in worth making a remark about). In just about every field, it's possible to be remarkable, at least for a while, and thanks to the increasing number of connections between and among customers, remarkable work spreads your idea.

It's difficult to be remarkable every day in every way, though, because expectations continue to rise. Which leads to a fourth category:

A personal performance.

A good job is largely anonymous and forgotten (but still important). A personal job, on the other hand, is humanized. It brings us closer together. It might not be remarkable, but it stands out as memorable because (however briefly) the recipient of the work was touched by someone else. Often, remarkable work is personal too, but personal might just be enough for today.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/bad-performance-good-performance-and-the-other-two-kinds.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Broken events

Broken events

People who don't want to listen, being forced to sit through speeches that the speakers don't want to give.

If that sounds like a graduation or gala or corporate event you recently attended, I feel your pain.

If someone starts by telling a joke that they know is lame or starts going through all the tribulations they had finding something to say, if the audience is checking the time or secretly tweeting, then the event itself is broken. The speaker who discharges an obligation is not a speaker you are hoping to hear. 

Maybe obligatory speeches used to have a point, maybe they used to serve a vital function, but they no longer do.

Here's a thought: Let the students run their own graduation. Cancel any speeches that could easily be delivered instead via an interactive website. Put the credits and the thank yous into a beautiful document that you hand to everyone and switch the entire dynamic to:

People thrilled to be listening to people who are excited to be speaking.

Why not?

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/broken-events.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

專題：打破傳統習慣觀點

蓋．川崎(Guy Kawasaki)/

　俄亥俄州首府哥倫布市的第一銀行和美國退休協會聯合發行「退休老人信用卡」。第一銀行採取的其中一項做法是：以退休老人的淨資產、而不是之前的信用紀錄或目前收入，做為核發信用卡的標準。

　這個做法幫助了很多本身並沒有信用紀錄的寡婦。負責執行企畫案的第一銀行副總黛比．薩雷諾表示：「比起一般產業的平均信用狀況，這些寡婦違法的可能性要低很多，因為這是她們自己的信用卡，所以她們更可能按時繳款。但其他銀行不會核發信用卡給這些寡婦，因為她們名下沒有任何信用紀錄，但這卻是一群非常忠誠而且負責任的人。」

　因為打破了一貫的傳統觀點，第一銀行打開了一個新的市場，並且在退休老人圈裡提升了銀行形象。只要你想個十秒鐘就會發現：利用淨資產做為核發信用卡的標準，對這些顧客來說其實是相當合理的方式。

　第一銀行的政策給了我們兩個教訓。首先，它重申了第五章的主題：「以顧客為重」。傳統信用分析的做法一向將顧客擺在第二位而不是第一位，因為通常他們首要的考量重點是：金融機關必須確保顧客會支付款項。但如果你想逼瘋競爭對手，這個思考順序就錯了，因為只要將顧客的需求擺在第一位，就很容易打破傳統觀點了。

　第二，這個例子闡明了傳統思考習慣和直覺之間的關係。讓我跳脫商業思維箝制，引用一段康乃爾大學地質系教授傑克．奧立佛的陳述：

　祕訣就在於打破傳統思維，而不是認定「直覺反應」就一定不正確。大多數新觀念在成形之際，和當時傳統科學觀點產生的衝突，遠比直覺要多。(本文節錄自《行銷戰術全書》，大樂文化出版，2012年11月27日 )

Seth's Blog : When you don't know what to do...

When you don't know what to do...

That's when we find out how well you make decisions.

When you don't have the resources to do it the usual way, that's when you show us how resourceful you are.

And when you don't know if it's going to work, that's how we find out whether or not we need you on our team.

Making instructions is harder than following them.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/when-you-dont-know-what-to-do.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Why vote? The marketing dynamics of apathy

Why vote? The marketing dynamics of apathy

Here's what political marketers learn from people who don't vote:

Nothing.

If you don't vote because you're disappointed with your choices, disgusted by tactics like lying and spin, or merely turned off by the process, you've opted out of the marketplace.

The goal of political marketers isn't to get you to vote. Their goal is to get more votes than the other guy. So they obsess about pleasing those that vote. Everyone else is invisible.

Steakhouses do nothing to please vegetarians who don't visit them, and politicians and their handlers don't care at all about non-voters.

The magic of voting is that by opting in to the system, you magically begin to count. A lot.

If you don't like negative ads, for example, then vote for the candidate who ran even 1% fewer negative ads. Magically, within a cycle or two, the number of negative ads begins to go down.

One reason that people don't vote (a real, usually unspoken reason) is that they don't want to feel responsible for the person who wins. The other reason is that they don't want to live with the disappointment of voting for someone who loses. Both of these reasons ignore the marketing reality: not voting doesn't make marketing or politics go away. It merely changes the person the marketers are trying to please.

Vote tomorrow. Bring a friend. If enough smart people start voting again, things will improve, because billions of dollars in political marketing will suddenly be trying to please you.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/why-vote-the-marketing-dynamics-of-apathy.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Avoiding "I'll know it when I see it"

Avoiding "I'll know it when I see it"

This is a waste for the buyer and the seller.

When you have a business or individual waiting for you to bring them custom work, it can lead to an endless cycle of, "hmmmm not quite right." If the architectural drawings, high-heeled shoes or ad campaign doesn't meet their unstated standards, you're back to doing it again.

Sometimes you can make a handsome profit on all the fees you charge to redo things that indulge the ego of the customer, but more likely than not, your time is wasted until they're happy. If you have a client who feels the same way, you can work together to save time and money by being clear with each other about what's wanted.

I think helping a client say what they want before they see it is a worthy endeavor.

1. Do it on purpose. When engaging with a new client, intentionally create an environment where personal taste is described in advance, and as much boundary-building as possible is done when it's cheap to iterate, not at the end when it's expensive.


2. Demand benchmarks. The world is filled with things that are a lot like what you've been asked to create. So mutually identify them. Show me three other websites that feel like what you're hoping to feel like. Hand me a hardcover book that has type that reads the way you want yours to read. Walk me through a building that has the vibe you're looking for...


3. Describe the assignment before you start. Using your words and the words of the client, precisely state what problem you're trying to solve. "We're trying to build something that does a, b and c, and not d..."


4. Then, before you show off your proposal, before you hand in your work, restate the problem again. "You asked us to do a, b and c at a cost of under X. What I'm about to show you does a, it does b and it does c... and it costs half of X." This sort of intentional restatement of the scope of work respects your client by honoring their stated intent, at the same time it focuses your work on the stated goals.


5. Make a decision about whether you want a reputation for doing this sort of focused work. If you do, don't work for clients who don't buy into the process. Over time, you'll earn the kind of clients you want.

Of course, this isn't going to work every time. Sometimes the client loves the power of saying no. Sometimes the client isn't articulate enough to describe what she wants. And sometimes the goal is magic, and no one knows how to describe that in advance.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/avoiding-ill-know-it-when-i-see-it.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Thank you, Zig

Thank you, Zig

My teacher Zig Ziglar died this morning. He was 86. 

Thanks for teaching me how to sell and why it mattered.

Thanks for reminding me how much it mattered to care.

Thanks for telling us a fifteen-minute story about Johnny the Shoe Shine Genius, so compelling that I flew to the airport just to meet him.

Thanks for 72 hours of audiotapes, listened to so many times I wore out the cassettes twice.

Thanks for that one day we spent backstage together in Milwaukee.

Thanks for making goal setting so clear.

Thanks for elevating the art of public speaking, and making it personal, not something to be copied.

Thanks for believing in us, the people you almost never met in person, for supporting us with your voice and your stories and your enthusiasm.

Thanks for teaching so many people, people who will continue to remember you and to teach as well.

You'll be missed.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/thank-you-zig.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : The attention paradox

Online, where you can't buy attention as easily as you can with traditional advertising, most commercial media has the imperative of interestingness built in. The assignment is to make it viral, make it something people will watch or click on or even better, share.

This is hard for mass marketers, marketers who are used to making average stuff for average people and promoting heavily in media where they can buy guaranteed attention. And so, we see organizations buying likes and pageviews, pushing for popovers and popunders and all sorts of new ways to interrupt online.

Smart advertisers, though, are realizing that they have to make content that people decide is worth watching. Some have very good indeed at making media that's so entertaining that we not only want to watch it, but spread it.

The challenge is that all those hoops you need to jump through to attract attention might be precisely the opposite of what you need to do to cause action, to get someone to change her mind or to connect.

A squadron of singing ferrets might make your video spread, but that approach isn't going to cause the action you seek.

And, alas, you have to do both.

Seth's Blog : "Here, I made this," is difficult and frightening

Hey, even the headline is a bummer. The first thing that they teach you at business book/blogging school is that "fun and easy" are the two magic words, followed, I guess, by "dummies." Difficult and frightening are not part of the syllabus.

Alas, the work we're being asked to do now, the emotional labor we're getting paid to do, is frightening. It's frightening to stand up for what we believe in, frightening to do something that might not work, frightening to do something that we have to be responsible for.

Tonight is the first ever Icarus Session, a worldwide event that might just be happening near you (click here to find the local event, and here to find out what it's all about). There are more than 360 communities signed up so far, with thousands of people around the world getting together in small groups to speak up and to support each other.

Two things might hold someone back from sharing the art they've got inside: The fear of telling the truth or the lame strategy of hiding the truth behind a sales pitch. 

If you can, find a way to come to a session near you tonight. And if you can find the voice, stand up and tell people what you care about.

Your art is vitally important, and what makes it art is that it is personal, important and fraught with the whiff of failure. This is precisely why it's scarce and thus valuable—it's difficult to stand up and own it and say, "here, I made this." For me, anyway, writing a book is far easier than handing it to someone I care about and asking them to read it.

Throughout the USA, there are bookstores (Barnes and Noble as a notable example) hosting piles of my new book, The Icarus Deception.

Here's something you might do today: Go to this site, scroll down and find the laid-out bookmark and print it out. Take the bookmark and write on it. Write down your project, your feelings, the thing you're making--share your art. Tell us your URL if you have one, or draw a picture if you like. And then go to the local bookstore and carefully put the bookmark in a copy of Icarus. (It's great with me if you support your local bookstore by buying something while you're there).

One day, someday, someone will buy the book and find your bookmark. A karmic connection will happen, and you'll be connected to a stranger. Your art will be in the world, and perhaps one day, this stranger, this reader, this fellow traveler will continue the chain, putting her bookmark into someone else's book.

Right now, the urgency is real. We have to create more art, create better art and build more substantial connections. 

 

Click above for a small film about what it means to make and share your art. The last line from Sasha is worth the four minutes. My publisher's book trailer has also just gone live.

Seth's Blog : Sooner or later

Tomorrow is the biggest day of the year for charitable giving in the US.

The reason is clear: if you make a donation Tuesday, you have to wait a whole year to get a deduction. Make it today and you get it right now.

Of course, charitable giving shouldn't be driven by the search for a tax deduction, but the knowledge that now is your last chance short-circuits the sooner or later decision.

So, today, before it's too late, why not help build a platform for those that need it, a platform that generates a hundred or a thousand times more pareto-optimal joy. Not because there's a heart-tugging pitch or an external urgency, but because sooner is better than later.

Room to Read, The Acumen Fund, Juvenile Diabetes, DoSomething, Afaya

Sooner rather than later. We'll get there if we all head there.

Seth's Blog : You can't argue with success...

You can't argue with success...

Of course you can. What else are you going to argue with? Failure can't argue with you, because it knows that it didn't work.

The art of staying successful is in being open to having the argument. Great organizations fail precisely because they refuse to do this.

周末文選：具備堅定的信心

戴西．魏德蔓(Daisy Wademan)/

　人生或事業變幻無常，也無法保證能有一定的結果。我們常在資料不足或錯誤的情況下做決定——通常是關鍵而危險的決定，世界上也充滿各種擾亂情緒的噪音，讓人無法專心完成手邊工作。

　要在極不確定和劇烈變動的局面下——這是所有商界人士愈來愈常遭遇的情況——為某個企業或事業勾勒發展路線，正如同要你們在考卷上描述一隻無法辨認形體的鳥類標本。除了運用過去的知識、經驗和直覺，所能依靠的資訊極少，阻擋視線的因素卻很多。生活和事業中的創造行動，都得依靠勇氣和信心去完成。尋找各種理由不去求創新、不去做決定、不去起而行，往往活得比較輕鬆；衝出考場或安於現狀，也比較容易辦到。但要改變現狀，則要對自己的智慧、能力、操守懷抱信心。操守就是心中那根重要的指南針，它會從企業、經濟、道德及倫理各個層面告訴你們什麼是對的。

　在人生的旅程中，你們會遇到種種可以贏得大好前途與機會、但不太確定最佳行進路線的狀況，也會經常面臨類似那場期末考的難題，你們必須運用身邊少許資料做判斷、下結論。一旦發生這情形，就要發揮勇氣和信心——對自己的才賦有信心、對事業夥伴的才幹有信心、對創新的潛力有信心、對世界上形形色色的機會有信心。

　最後，我只想給各位一句簡單的訓勉：保持自信。不要因為擔心做錯決定而浪費大好時機，也不要因為得過且過而錯失改造世界的機會。別去理會身邊的噪音，拒絕接受別人的煽動。鼓起勇氣循序漸進，忠於自己熱愛的事物，遵守個人的是非標準，思考自身和人類的處境，然後做件轟轟烈烈的大事。(本文節錄自《記得你是誰：哈佛的最後一堂課（修訂版）》，天下雜誌出版，2012年11月5日 )

Seth's Blog : Writer's block and the drip

Why do we get stuck?

Writer's block was 'invented' in the 1940s. Before that, not only wasn't there a word for it, it hardly existed. The reason: writing wasn't a high stakes venture. Writing was a hobby, it was something you did in your spare time, without expecting a big advance or a spot on the bestseller list.

Now, of course, we're all writers. We put our ideas into words and share them with tens or thousands of people, for all time, online. Our words spread. 

With the stakes higher than ever, so is our fear.

Consider the alternative to writer's block: the drip. A post, day after day, week after week, 400 times a year, 4000 times a decade. When you commit to writing regularly, the stakes for each thing you write go down. I spent an hour rereading Gary Larson's magical collection, and the amazing truth is that not every cartoon he did was brilliant. But enough of them were that he left his mark.

You can find my most popular posts of the year right here. My new collection, Whatcha Gonna Do With That Duckis now available at finer bookstores online and off. I could never, ever have signed up to write this book, never sat down to create it. But since I had six years to write it, it created itself.

You don't launch a popular blog, you build one.

The writing isn't the hard part, it's the commitment. Drip!

Seth's Blog : The only purpose of 'customer service'...

The only purpose of 'customer service'...

is to change feelings. Not the facts, but the way your customer feels. The facts might be the price, or a return, or how long someone had to wait for service. Sometimes changing the facts is a shortcut to changing feelings, but not always, and changing the facts alone is not always sufficient anyway.

If a customer service protocol (your call center/complaints department/returns policy) is built around stall, deny, begrudge and finally, to the few who persist, acquiesce, then it might save money, but it is a total failure.

The customer who seeks out your help isn't often looking to deplete your bank account. He is usually seeking validation, support and a path to feeling the way he felt before you let him down.

The best measurement of customer support is whether, after the interaction, the customer would recommend you to a friend. Time on the line, refunds given or the facts of the case are irrelevant. The feelings are all that matter, and changing feelings takes humanity and connection, not cash.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/10/the-only-purpose-of-customer-service.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Where do you go to trade in the points?

Where do you go to trade in the points?

There are all sorts of actions we can take to earn points. We can earn points with our spouse, with a boss, with a customer... "Wow, you get extra points for that."

The question one might ask is, "what good are the points?" Hey, I'm earning all these points, what am I supposed to do with them?

When it comes to trading them in, they're actually a little like frequent flier miles. They're really difficult to redeem, even for an upgrade you'd like. Hardly worth the effort, it seems.

But for this kind of points, that's okay. The best part of earning points is earning them, not trading them in.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/where-do-you-go-to-trade-in-the-points.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Four questions worth answering

Four questions worth answering

Who is your next customer? (Conceptually, not specifically. Describe his outlook, his tribe, his hopes and dreams and needs and wants...)

What is the story he told himself (about the world, about his situation, about his perceptions) before he met you?

How do you encounter him in a way that he trusts the story you tell him about what you have to offer?

What change are you trying to make in him, his life, or his story?

Start with this before you spend time on tactics, technology or scalability.

 

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/four-questions-worth-answering.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

周末文選：成功容易讓人自滿，危機則讓人力求改善

賈斯汀．曼克斯(Justin Menkes)/高階主管能力評鑑專家

編按：在網路加速時間競爭的環境中，一次的成功不代表永遠的成功，如何取得持續性的成就，調整心態以及建立起完善的服務機制會是首要，以下的案例即為參考。

　W.W. 格雷杰公司(W.W. Grainger, Inc.)前董事長兼執行長凱瑟(Dick Keyser)，就是保持清晰思考的最佳典範，格雷杰是一家五金工具及工業設備配送商。當凱瑟在一九九五年出任該公司執行長時，一般認為在網際網路普及之後，像格雷杰這樣提供公司對公司的零件配送商會被時代淘汰，但凱瑟卻不這麼認為。他說：

　「毫無疑問，環境正在改變，競爭會愈來愈激烈。但因為格雷杰公司有很長的成功歷史，所以來自自滿的威脅，其實比任何像網際網路這樣的新興科技都要來得嚴重。這是為什麼急迫感可以變成重要工具的原因，它會讓人專注在真正重要的事情上。如果我沒有遇上真正的危機，我也會編造出一些來。」

　危機迫使領導者探究問題的本質、了解怎麼做才會成功，然後用重新凝聚的力道來解決這些事項。凱瑟說：「網際網路的興起，其實是一項很有價值的工具，讓我們認清企業存在的原因。」網路讓他了解，如果他們公司想要生存下去，他和員工就得提醒自己，客戶當初來找他們的原因。他們必須努力保持進步，才能達到客戶的需求。他說：

　「我們曾邀請一些營運顧問，來協助公司的領導團隊，他們認為降低成本可以扭轉局勢，但那通常行不通。沒錯，我們必須讓價格保持競爭力，但是我們賣的東西，像是螺絲起子、扳手、燈泡、馬達等，到處都能買得到，為什麼客戶要向我們買？而且還願意付給我們比直接向製造商採購的更高價格呢？」

　凱瑟說，那正是他們成功的關鍵——在每項事情巧妙地注入服務。
　
　「我們很快就接聽客戶電話，那是我們的祕密武器。我們確實做到，你可以試試看。我們有一套遍及全美的網路電話整合系統，確保客戶來電在響了兩到三聲左右，就會有服務人員接電話提供協助。每天二十四小時，全年無休。今天，就連電話公司自己也都不接聽電話了。

　確實提供服務、回答客戶問題，在他們需要的時候，給他們想要的訊息，這就是人們為什麼要付錢給我們的原因。像網際網路這樣的挑戰，能讓我們更專注在真正重要的事情上，打破我們的自滿。成功會讓人自滿，而危機則會讓你卸下自滿。」(本文節錄自《壓力下竟能表現更好：為什麼有些人一路向上，有些人卻原地打轉？》，天下雜誌出版，2012年11月5日 )

Seth's Blog : How I broke my nose (for the second time)

The first time was youthful bravery--I was playing hockey with people far better than I (not older, merely better) and they slammed me into the boards. That's something almost heroic, at least when you're twelve.

No, the second time was two days ago. I finished a delightful breakfast with a friend and as I walked out of the restaurant, I focused on the door to the street and the weather outside--and completely ignored the interior plate glass door, slamming right into it at full speed.

The important lesson: while it matters a lot that you have a goal, a vision and an arc to get there, it matters even more that you don't skip the preliminary steps in your hurry to get to the future. Early steps might bore you, but miss even one and you might not get the chance to execute on the later ones.

My nose is fine, thanks, better every day, but the reminder was a worthwhile one.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/how-i-broke-my-nose-for-the-second-time.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

Seth's Blog : Free range

Ways to improve your performance:

Compete for a prize
Earn points
Please a demanding boss
Make someone else's imminent deadline
Face sudden death elimination in the playoffs
Wear a heart monitor and track performance publicly
Go head-to-head against a determined foe
The thing is, all of these external stimuli are there to raise your game and push you ever harder. They are fences to be leaped, opponents to be defeated.

The alternative is to compete against nothing but yourself. To excel merely because the act of excelling without boundaries or incentives thrills you.

And the good news is that once you find that, you'll always have it.

 http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/10/free-range.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29