Rockstars and Innovation: Stairway to Heaven

A friend recently posted a link to an article^[1] by Francois Marchand of The Vancouver Sun that covered a portion of the Kennedy Center Honors - specifically the tribute concert for Led Zepplin^[2]. Being a big fan of the Kennedy Center Honors, I watched this particular celebration when it aired on my local CBS affiliate, but the article brought something back to mind that I had temporarily forgotten - a question I had nearly every year when I watched the program - do stars realize they are creating something epic when they are creating it?

We know a lot about stars (divo or diva, if you will), especially in the US where we're constantly fed minutiae, from what they wear and eat to the foibles of their children and the sins that will be visited upon them - we even know about their demanding, uncompromising fits of rage and a little about how their attitude might be handled^[3]. It would be dishonest to imply that all the stars are thespians and musicians, after all, we in the technology industry have our share of stars (some of which, Steve Jobs for instance, have notable rants). However, we might say that all the stars consider themselves artists. It's with this area bordering aesthetics^[4] that I'm particularly interested.

First, I would posit that people, stars in particular, never realize the true nature of their creation - they may have visions of a possible future, but never fully grasp the import. Even some of the (arguably) most brilliant of minds do not realize the most minor consequences of their actions until they see the first glimpse of their creation come to life^[5]. One reason for this is that we simply cannot foresee the future. We cannot anticipate the many ways in which our creation will be re-arranged, re-interpreted, or re-worked.

A more important reason for this disconnect between the recognition of the impact a creation has and the birth of the creation, however, is in the very act of creation itself. The two events - the birth and the post-birth impact are bound to different understandings of time. Where the birth is held by kairos^[6], the impact - whether or not something is epic - is held in chronos^[7].

Some artists are entirely comfortable with this difference, willingly surrendering the telling of the story or the composing of the song to the moment and leaving the remainder to time and even going so far to say that they are driven only to create - storytellers have stories that they feel must be told, or in some cases, tell themselves, and musicians have songs they feel must be sung. It is the purity of this brief moment - a brief moment in which things are possible - that births what is epic, and even though we strive for perfection, we cannot intentionally create anything truly epic, for all of our planning and working - logos - is bound to chronos.

What does this say about pleas for organizational leadership for 'innovation' then? As we've begun to see, innovative has suddenly come to mean not only 'changed' but also carries the connotation of the change being epic as well. Innovative is revolutionary, evolutionary is passe.

There are only two directions in which we can move from this false understanding of innovation - recognize that striving for 'innovation' is irrational and therefore counterproductive, or move to the original understanding of 'innovation'.

Given that epic creations are rare and cannot be crafted through striving, strive instead to innovate in the true sense - change things, especially through small, non-fundamental (evolutionary) changes - changes like adding a choir to your arrangement of an iconic song. Not only does this approach involve less risk than major or fundamental changes, it can just as easily give birth to something epic - something that even the creator didn't imagine^[8].

Notes:

1. Heart plays Led Zeppelin’s Stairway To Heaven, makes Robert Plant cry, The Vancouver Sun, 27 December 2012.
2. Heart - Stairway to Heaven Led Zeppelin - Kennedy Center Honors
3. Robert's Rule #6: when working with rock stars, get your M&Ms ready
4. The branch of philosophy dealing with the creation, appreciation, and nature of art, beauty, and taste.
5. Oppenheimer, in recalling reaction to the first test of the creation produced by the Manhattan Project, said that he, and his fellow scientists realized the world would never be the same, and called to memory a line from the Bhagavad Gita, "now I am become death". [Video]
6. In mythology, Kairos (opportunity), was the youngest son of Zeus. He is described as running swiftly, balancing on the razor's edge, unclothed and with only a forelock - so that if you grasp him from the front, you might be able to hold him, but once he has moved on not even Zeus himself can pull him back. Because of this tie to mythology, kairos is the brief moment in which things are possible, and is a qualitative measure of time.
7. In mythology, Chronos is the personification of time and the serpentine consort of Ananke (inevitability) who co-creates the cosmos. He is not unending time (represented by Aion), but is the one turning the wheel of time and is, therefore, not a brief moment, but a quantitative measure of time.
8. Make note of the reaction of both Plant and Page throughout the video of Heart's rendition (see note 2).

Doing the impossible (with Robert's Rule #31 & #32)

This post is not going to be a 'how-to', or an example of critical thought applied to a current topic, but rather a prosaic reflection with career advice mixed in - somewhat like earlier posts.

When I was a young child, we were discussing poetry in primary school and I pulled a book of American poets off the shelf and found It Couldn't Be Done by Edgar A. Guest^[1]. I still recall the note my schoolteacher sent home saying how much the poem reminded her of me, even though I cannot find the note - of course that was quite a number of years ago.

I would not encourage anyone to be excessively optimistic (I would say pollyannaish, but I believe that unfairly associates optimism with feminism), there have been a number of credible studies that demonstrate the benefits of positive thinking^[2]. Yet,  there is something beyond even positive thinking that I feel is crucial to our survival in a corporate environment - an indomitable will. For some, an indomitable will manifests as an "incorruptible patience" or "a destructive pursuit of perfection"^[3]; for others, there are other ways - but they have this in common - they are not skill related and won't be found on the Programmer Competency Matrix^[4] - in fact, it's those times that we're faced with a situation that we know is beyond our bounds that this applies, and it's what made Bert Bell's belief that on any given Sunday any team could beat any other team in the league real. (Robert's Rule #31 - success is about more than skill - is based on that belief.)

A personal story - several years ago I was preparing to fly to California for an in-person interview for a position that I considered a dream job when I found out that my sister, who lived 2000 miles away, was critically ill, and a few hours before I was to leave for my day-long interview, I learned she had died. My grief was beyond anything I had borne before, but I also recognized that the only thing I could do at that point was request PTO and book a flight - and one more day would make little difference in the grief or support that I, or anyone else in my family, could offer.

Even though I knew a rigorous interview process was beyond my bounds in that circumstance, I went and did my best. After I returned home, I contacted my employer and booked a flight, and left the next day. After I secured the job (yes, I did get it), I discovered that some who interviewed me noticed (what they interpreted as) a lack of enthusiasm - several commented to me that interviewing in that situation was something they thought couldn't be done, yet it was done - and well enough to secure the job.

So, here's the lesson I learned that day - if you want something enough and your will is indomitable, you will likely succeed - success is not guaranteed, mind, but very likely.

There was another lesson I learned that day - one that's probably more important
that I carry with me, especially every time I interview a candidate - on any given day we see only a part of a person, and like in jazz, the important bits might be those not heard, so make allowances for what you don't see (Robert's Rule #32).

Or, in the words of Bill (in Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure), "be excellent to each other".

Notes:

1. If you've never read this poem, do so. I recognize as a (more cynical) adult that it's a bit trite, but it's somewhat uplifting and motivational, and there are times we all need that.
2. The article How the Power of Positive Thinking Won Scientific Credibility is an interesting read regarding the evolution of thought and research in this field, and has links to a number of those studies.
3. These are two traits of a fantastic programmer from Signs that you're a good programmer.
4. http://sijinjoseph.com/programmer-competency-matrix/

It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop (Robert's Rule #29)

Years ago...and I suppose I might more precisely say decades ago...I climbed rocks. Granted, they were rocks that were very large and were the sides of a gorge that was hundreds of feet deep, but they were still rocks. Anyway, one of the concerns that people often expressed went something like "aren't you afraid you'll fall" or "you could die in a fall". Being young, and convinced of my immortality because of my youth, I was not concerned about falling...after all, I was careful and, as I often replied, "falling doesn't kill you, it's the sudden stop at the end that kills you". In essence, it isn't a fall that kills you, it's the not falling.

So, how does this apply to technology, or more specifically, to application development? If we rephrase this idea, by replacing "fall" with "fail" (which doesn't really change the meaning - after all, a fall while climbing is a failure - at least to climb), then we can say that it isn't the 'failing' that kills you, it's the 'not failing'.

If it's still not clear, then let's look at a concept from extreme programming (something that was in vogue a few years ago) called "test-driven development". Here's the basic idea: write a test that you know will not pass, write the minimum amount of code that you think will make the test pass, run the test, modify the code and run the test until it passes, refactor the code to make it conform to standards. (You can find a more thorough description of test-driven development at Wikipedia.) Note: I suppose it's a bit of semantic gymnastics, but even though we generally say the test 'fails', our expectation is that the test 'fails' - so what we really mean is that if the test returns a negative result it has succeeded.

As I've mentioned in previous posts, more code is not the answer, and writing code is similar in many ways to other forms of writing - it should be clear and concise. The easiest way to develop clear and concise code is using test-driven development. Of course this also means that since you develop unit tests at the same time as your code, quality is much easier to ensure - which is important in itself.

Granted, there is much more concerning this topic that we could explore...there are rabbit holes to go into all over this landscape, and I would encourage you to follow one or two of those to see where they lead. As a practical matter, however, I am solidly behind test-driven development and have combined two widely accepted engines to facilitate test-driven development for web developers writing JavaScript. This tool (called GARDA) is free to use, and will soon be available for download so you can run it locally. So, use test-driven development to climb to the heights of your ability, remembering "don't fight stupid, make more awesome".

Following the eight-fold path

Following your passion is probably not the worst advice ever, but it's easily not the best. For most of us, it's simply impossible. Oh, we all dream of being a rock star/athlete/astronaut when we're kids, but seldom do we even find the energy or opportunity to fulfill one passion. So, what do we do? How do we find fulfillment and happiness while at the same time settling for something that pays the bills?

1. Find your one thing. What is it that you want? Deciding to follow your dreams can be a terrifying, thrilling, and dangerous activity - but then again, deciding to abandon your dreams to the dustbin is too. It's helpful to keep in mind that your 'one thing' is not a specific plan, like to be a rock star/athlete/astronaut, but is a more general idea, like living simply, having power and influence, or making a difference.

2. Be flexible. There is seldom 'one perfect job' - but there are often a few not-quite perfect jobs, several workable jobs, and countless run-away-as-fast-as-you-can jobs. Flexibility frees you from the need to find 'the job', helps prevent you from chronic (and frequent) job-hopping, and it also lets you select jobs that encourage you to focus on you (more on this next). Since job-hopping can be an effective career killer, this is pretty important, but this last bit is really the more important of the advantages, because it gives most any job the potential to be one in which you can find and grow your passion.

3. Focus on you. Simple, right? A few really interesting studies have shown that competence and autonomy yield higher rates of job satisfaction than other factors. (Check out Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us for more information.) To keep it simple, ask yourself "how do I get better?" By answering this question, you'll increase competency (keep in mind Robert's Rule #1) and as a result, you'll most likely increase your autonomy. Just keep focusing on you.

4. Look to the stars. This is the companion to focus on you. This will answer much of the question about how you get better. The stars who do the same work you do will show you the skills you need to hone to become better. Often, they will enact those skills without even noticing what they're doing, so asking them "how do I get better" will most likely not yield the results you expect (see Robert's Rule #3). Instead, observe them - note what situation they address and how they address it, ask them to mentor you, ask them questions about their skill that make them think, but don't ask them "what do I need to know" or "how do I get better" - those are your questions to answer.

5. Become visible. There is a theory that if you're invisible, you're less likely to become redundant, "riffed", or otherwise "terminated". Perhaps there was a time that line of reasoning was true; however, job security of that sort is truly an anachronism. While it may be that the squeaky part gets the grease (or gets replaced), very few employers are a pure meritocracy, and even in a meritocracy there is the concept of 'winking in the dark' - so increase your visibility.

6. Understand what you value. As you focus on you and become more visible, those you work for will begin to see your value. As the organization sees your value, they will (most likely) push you toward those roles and activities which they value. It stands to reason - after all, who wouldn't want their best employees on their most important projects, right? Keep in mind, however, that what an organization values may not be the same thing that you value, and following what someone else values may take you off your path.

7. Be relentless. Passion is called passion for a reason. If the potential you see does not drive you, if it is not a goal you can taste without which life would be a miserable, empty shell, settle. The work is too hard and your ambition is not enough. On the other hand, if there is a single thing you want more than anything else, then in the words of Yoda, "do or do not, there is no try".

8. Leverage your value. As you follow the path, it can lead you to a point where you can leverage your value. Here's the payoff for all your hard work. Here's where you get to follow your passion. You may not the rock star/athlete/astronaut who gets to sing the national anthem before the championship game where you score the winning point before the manned mission to Mars, but maybe, just maybe, you'll be able to follow your passion, and like friends of mine who have become the surfer-web developer, the hiker-photographer, and the UI engineer-disc golfer.

Practice does not make perfect (Robert's Rule #1)

[Tweeted 2011-04-25]

I know it's an idiomatic expression, but it's never made sense to me...practice makes perfect? Really?!? If that's really the case then why have instructors at all? All of those teachers, coaches, mentors, et cetera, et cetera. Why not just follow Nike^® and "Just Do It"? In what was even worse, I had the mistaken impression as a young man that, since I was the only one who ever seemed to notice this rather odd inconsistency, I was horribly, drastically, wrong. Everyone knew practice makes perfect and said so, repeatedly. Then, in my first year of a graduate program in Management of Information Systems, one of my professors said "contrary to the popular idiom, practice does not make perfect; perfect practice makes perfect". Considering that I remember his exact words more than two decades later I suppose one might say the event held some sort of impact.

Now, I should probably mention that this thinking, this idea of our "practice" needing some element of perfection in order to be effective, came from someone who did not grown up in what we refer to as "Western civilization", but rather from someone born, raised, and educated in the "East". I feel I should mention this because the opposite idea, that any practice makes perfect, implied by our idiomatic expression has dominated our thought, as evidenced by the following experience.

When I was starting, long, long ago in a galaxy far away, I installed payment systems that used both computers and what we now call Point-of-Sale (POS) terminals and did the training. (For those who don't know, POS machines are little credit card machines that you now see everywhere.) In order for the system to work, it had to be connected to a telephone line so the little 1200 baud modem could dial out, connect to the company server, and transfer all the payment records. All easy peasy for the time...until it wasn't.

In one instance, everything appeared correct. All systems were up and running, training had been completed, a day's business was recorded and it was time to initiate the data transfer to complete the training and verify the system was working as designed. Unfortunately, the modem in the POS wouldn't work, so I began troubleshooting. Telephone handset worked, but none of the POS devices I had would work. When I asked the lineman from the telephone company to switch the tip and ring (polarity) on the circuit, I was not-so-politely informed that he had been installing telephones for more than 40 years and it was installed correctly. After he verified that the line had dial-tone, he departed, I took out my screwdriver and switched the tip and ring and bang, pow, the POS modem got a dial-tone, connected, and transferred the data in under 5 minutes.The lineman's practice was not perfect, and in fact, it was likely that the majority of his 4 decades of practice was incorrect.

So, when I look at what these two experiences (the professor confirming my long-held belief and the lineman confirming its opposite) teach me, this is what I am left with: practice does not make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect (Robert's Rule #1) and its corollaries that (1) we learn from mistakes, so perfect practice is not possible and (2) anybody, even an expert with 4 decades of experience can make a mistake that a n00b can fix.

Three simple statements that everyone in the tech industry should recognize, and one simple idiomatic expression that we should all stop using.