Jason Griffin

Imagining Our Next Future

Jason Griffin — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 01:48:27 +0000

A fictional dipiction of a video call in the year 2015 from the movie "Back to the Future II" (1989).We live in the future. Twenty years ago when you asked, “I wonder what things will be like 20 years from now in the future,” you were, indeed, talking about right now.

Interesting how that little thought exercise plays out, isn't it?

Perhaps more interesting is that when you really think about it, our future looks a lot like how we imagined it. A lot.

When you think back to television shows and movies that depicted the things we would have today, quite a few are true. Some might be impractical, but they are possible nonetheless.

Videophones? Easy to do through the computer. Handheld, portable video communication? Many of us have that app on our smart phones. Flying cars? Not exactly, but that seems to be a problem based more on logistics than anything else.

There’s a quasi-metaphysical theory called the “Law of Attraction” that, simply put, states that what you think about is what will manifest itself in your life.

New Age or not, it’s a theory that contains quite a bit of truth, especially when you consider that almost everything man-made placed in front of you today had to first be imagined in the mind.

When you recognize that a large part of our current future is the result of how we once imagined it, you realize that the time for creating our next future is right now.

So, what’s next? That’s the million dollar question, really. It’s a question that’s just as relevant for you as an individual as it is to society as a whole. Where are YOU going to be in 20 years? Where are WE going to be? What problems will we have solved? What will we have created that’s amazing?

Let the dreaming begin. Things aren’t too shabby here in 2012; living in the future does have its perks. Our next future has the possibility of being even better, and if the Law of Attraction is any indicator, our next future is already being created today.

Like this blog? Keep posted on my latest insights & analysis. Follow on Facebook, Follow on Twitter, or Subscribe with RSS. Share with your friends through one of the links below.

Gingrich South Carolina Victory Means Republicans Playing with Fire

Jason Griffin — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 00:05:15 +0000

Perhaps it’s a harsh critique, but one cannot say that Conn Carroll of the Washington Post is using faulty logic when he writes that America hates Newt Gingrich.

His theory is backed by 3 separate polls that measure favorable vs. unfavorable ratings among voters. In Gingrich's best of the three, the number of people having an unfavorable view of Gingrich is 27 percentage points higher than those who hold a favorable view.

With Newt Gingrich’s South Carolina primary victory, Republicans are at a minimum at least flirting with the idea of handing him the nomination. Although Mitt Romney has long been presumed to be the front runner for the nomination, delayed results that handed the Iowa caucus win to Rick Santorum mean that Romney has won only one of three voting contests. That’s the same as Santorum, and now Gingrich.

To say that Republicans are playing with fire with Gingrich is an understatement. His South Carolina victory seems to be the result of a Mitt Romney implosion; a reaction of disapproval from voters on the heels of attacks against Romney that highlighted layoffs and company closings he oversaw as the CEO of Bain Capital, not to mention Romney’s waffling on releasing his tax returns and his own revelations that, despite his massive wealth, he pays a lower tax rate that many Americans.

The underlying concerns Republican voters have with Romney, however, will not be mitigated by a Newt Gingrich nomination. Republicans concerned with how Mitt Romney will be able to stand up to Barack Obama on healthcare, due to Romney’s support of a similar health care overhaul while governor of Massachusetts, seem to have forgotten that Newt Gingrich has supported the main bone of contention among conservatives against the program: individual mandates requiring health insurance.

If Republicans are concerned about Romney’s wealthy CEO background fueling Democratic characterizations that he is out of touch with ordinary Americans, those charges may seem like nothing in comparison to the criticism Gingrich will receive over his $500,000 Tiffany’s bill. If voters aren’t reacting well to Romney’s wealth, one can only imagine how they will react to a candidate who may not be quite as wealthy, but is more careless with his own money.

Then there are the questions about character, including charges of marital infidelity. Gingrich was able to successfully fire back against CNN’s John King in a debate setting when King brought up allegations from one of his ex wives that he wanted an open marriage. It’s a strategy that works among a conservative electorate that distrusts the mainstream media, but one that likely won’t work with independent voters in a general election.

Failed marriages are just skeletons in the closet that we know about. There are yet-to-be known issues lurking under the surface as well. Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi hinted as much when she said that there are thousands of pages of information from a 1990’s ethics investigation that she’ll talk about when she feels the timing is right.

Analysts still say Romney has an edge in Florida, but Gingrich has the entire momentum heading into the January 31^st contest. Florida is the fourth most populous state in the Union, and an upset victory by Gingrich would give him the lead in primary / caucus wins and establish him as the new frontrunner. Republicans may be looking past Gingrich’s negatives, but voters as a whole aren’t doing the same, and the polls prove it. What will happen next rests squarely with Republican voters. They should know that they are playing with fire indeed.

Did you like what you read? Keep posted on my latest insights & analysis. Follow on Facebook, Follow on Twitter, or Subscribe with RSS. Share with your friends through one of the links below.

The Five Levels of Change Engagement

Jason Griffin — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 02:41:53 +0000

If there's one thing that is certain, it's that change is happening. How you engage change can have a dramatic impact on your life. In this video, we identify the 5 levels of change engagement and what they mean for you.

Broaden your perspective with the latest thoughts on business, politics & life. Like on Facebook. Follow on Twitter. Subscribe with RSS.

Business & political lessons from the Cain campaign

Jason Griffin — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 04:50:59 +0000

The campaign may be over, but the public sentiment that put him near the top isn't going away. Three lessons both businesses and politicians can learn from Herman Cain's campaign.

Herman Cain’s campaign is over. Charges of sexual harassment & marital infidelity were simply too much for him to overcome. His opponents are gloating, his supporters disappointed and the Republican establishment is relieved.

Herman Cain’s campaign shouldn’t be simply written off as a fluke. There are important lessons to be learned for both politicians and businesses looking to get ahead in today’s cultural climate.

Lesson 1: Outsiders are in vogue

Herman Cain didn’t simply defy the typical Republican profile for a presidential candidate (a black conservative as a serious contender), he defied every profile. He had never held public office, not even on a city council. Yet he turned what many in the establishment considered to be a weakness into part of his appeal. Even after misstatements that caused some to question his foreign policy credentials, he was still on top in many national polls for the GOP nomination. Oftentimes when an organization is broken, someone from the outside has to be brought in to fix it. Voters bought into the idea that someone doesn’t have to know all of the answers if they can look at a problem from outside of the box and make good decisions.

Being part of the establishment is not a benefit in today’s world. Just like establishment politicians, Bank of America, General Motors and Fannie & Freddie are seen as the bad guy. It’s those who are seen as outsiders who have the hearts and minds of the American people.

Lesson 2: People are ready to shake the status quo

Herman Cain’s major policy proposal was his 9-9-9 tax plan, which would have simplified the tax code by imposing a 9 percent flat corporate tax, 9 percent flat income tax and 9 percent national sales tax. His tax plan would have completely changed the way our federal government collects revenue and would have actually cost many people more money. Despite these facts, it was his 9-9-9 tax plan that was his major draw as a candidate. People don’t like the current system, and people are ready for a major change to the status quo, even if it means some negative consequences and unknown risks.

In both politics and business, America seems to be lacking in new ideas. Fixing both our political problems and business challenges within the framework of the past doesn’t seem to be working. Voters and consumers are begging for new bold new ideas, and they will flock to those who provide them.

Lesson 3: Keep it simple

Many politicians and businesses try to be all things to everyone, with carefully crafted plans designed to appeal to as many people as possible. It can certainly be argued that this is the case with Mitt Romney, who is as polished as any presidential candidate in recent memory. Romney has carefully crafted his positions on everything from the economy to social issues, defense & foreign policy. Cain, on the other hand, certainly wasn’t everything to everybody. In fact, his foreign policy positions were confused if not non-existent. But Cain didn’t pretend to be an expert on everything because he didn’t need to be. The economy and our national debt are what are on peoples' minds today, and Cain was still able to go head-to-head with Romney both nationally and in key battle ground states.

Focused and disciplined strategies win in politics and they win in business. A simple message that everyone understands allows you to stand out from the pack and be known for something. It’s easy to be all things to everyone when times are good, but when times are tougher people want a specialist. Those who have the right specialty for the right situation will often get picked over those who have a longer-established track record overall.

Final thoughts: Authenticity is key, and character still matters

All of the excitement in the world for a red-hot candidate couldn’t overcome the negative effects of questions about character. As important as anything else to the rise of Herman Cain was a sense that he was the real deal. The fact that he was unpolished and unashamed of it caught everyone’s attention and only drew people closer to him. Whether the allegations against him are true or not may never be known, but just the idea that he might not be who he presented himself to be was enough to doom his campaign.

Like politicians, a business is doomed if it doesn’t deliver what it promised the customer. If you say values matter, live them. If you say you’ll give an amazing customer experience, deliver on it. Authenticity matters. Character matters. It’s an important lesson for everyone to remember.

Broaden your perspective with the latest thoughts on business, politics & life. Like on Facebook. Follow on Twitter. Subscribe with RSS.

Are You Creating an iPhone or a Casino

Jason Griffin — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 22:44:08 +0000

In your job, your career or your life, is the sum of what you have created more like an an iPhone or a casino?

Perhaps an explanation is in order.

The iPhone is a powerful invention. It's legacy will be more than just a product that is bought, consumed and discarded. It has changed lives. People are more connected with the world around them. We communicate in new ways. Email can be checked and written from the road, photos and videos of important moments can be snapped and shared from anywhere. People use it to do things faster, better or just more uniquely.

The iPhone adds value to society. It is a contribution.

The casino, on the other hand, contributes nothing. Some casino customers may leave with more money than they brought in, but most will leave with less. The casino will say that they provided the customer with entertainment, but while people often say, "That concert / movie / football game was amazing," nobody says, "I really enjoyed losing money at the casino."

No wealth was created from the casino, just a transfer of money from many to a few.

There is money to be made in providing products & services with positive customer benefits, just as there is in creating the next big scheme. Schemes are easier, but you give back nothing at the end of the day.

So what are you creating? Is it more like an iPhone or a casino? Both can give you personal wealth, but only one can create lasting greatness. When your work is all said and done, if you want to leave a positive legacy, choose work that leaves a positive impact on everyone.

Broaden your perspective with the latest thoughts on business, politics & life. Like on Facebook. Follow on Twitter. Subscribe with RSS.

The Opposite of Meeting Needs: Trying to Gouge Your Customers

Jason Griffin — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 21:13:00 +0000

In an earlier post, we wrote about one of the main keys to business success: recognizing the needs of others and taking action.

What happens when a business tries to grow revenue without taking that route? They resort to simply trying to get more money from their current customers.

It’s a move that sometimes works, but often times backfires. For an example, look no further than Bank of America’s move to charge a $5 monthly debit card fee.

Every enterprise wants revenue. That’s just a simple law of business.

Bank of America, in order to accomplish this goal, could have found new products to offer their existing customers. They could have found ways to get products to people who had traditionally not been able to get access to them. They could have explored different business models.

Instead of using imagination and ingenuity, however, they decided that their current customers should simply give them more money for the same service.

These moves don’t always backfire. Companies raise fees due to increased costs all of the time. In fact, we predicted on this blog that other banks might model Bank of America’s fee if they get away with it, and even though Bank of America has backtracked on their debit fee, they’re still trying to increase fees.

All too often, however, these moves fail. Increasing fees on existing customers only work as long as there are no other alternatives, but it is the increased fees themselves that make the opportunity ripe for competitors to see the incentive in finding a way to do it cheaper and more efficiently.

It’s harder (our current economy is proof enough of that), but using imagination and research to determine unmet needs and meeting them will always work out better in the end. There’s always the risk that a competitor will take your idea, run with it, do it better and ultimately be the winner, but the bottom line is this: those who are the most tuned-in to the needs of others will always be the winners in the long run.

Broaden your perspective with the latest thoughts on business, politics & life. Like on Facebook. Follow on Twitter. Subscribe with RSS.

How to be More Successful: Recognize Needs & Take Action

Jason Griffin — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 20:00:00 +0000

Slate asks the question in a recent article, “What’s behind Univision’s remarkable success?”

Univision, for those who are unfamiliar with it, is a Spanish-language network that broadcasts in the United States.

The Slate article is a great read for media buffs, and cites Univision’s consistent nightly programming as one of the keys to its stellar ratings. For those who aren’t media-industry critics, however, Univision’s secret to success is much more simple: they recognized a need and took action.

Regardless of where you stand politically on issues such as immigration or English as a national language, the fact remains that there are over 35 million native-language Spanish speakers living in the United States. That’s over 10 percent of the population and almost equal in population to the entire state of California.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that most native Spanish speakers would rather watch television in their native language, regardless of their fluency in English. Imagine yourself as a native English speaker living in Latin America. Even if you were fluent in Spanish, wouldn’t you much rather watch television in English?

Univision’s success is all about recognizing needs and taking action. It doesn’t matter that the vast majority of people living in the United States are English speakers. It only matters that there are enough people who speak Spanish who will use the product and help make it successful.

Recognizing needs and taking action really are the first keys to success. As the United States struggles to create jobs and business executives everywhere seek to expand their business, we should all be asking ourselves where needs are not being met and take action to meet them. If Univision is any example, the money is sure to follow.

Broaden your perspective with the latest thoughts on business, politics & life. Like on Facebook. Follow on Twitter. Subscribe with RSS.

Consumers, not businesses, determine value

Jason Griffin — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 21:14:55 +0000

We’ve done our fair share of picking on Bank of America and their botched move to charge customers a $5 monthly fee for the use of their debit card, but there’s an important lesson for businesses in this story.

Consumers, not businesses, determine value.

It’s easy to predict how the decision to roll out this fee was made in the board room, because corporations, small business owners and individuals get caught up in wrong-headed thinking all the time.

It’s not at all implausible that the conversation in the board room went something like this:

“Customers are not paying for their debit cards, but they should be. There’s real value in that debit card product. It’s made it easier for consumers to do business and pay for products, and they don’t have to visit ATM machines or carry any cash at all. Why shouldn’t that be something that customers pay for?”

For consumers, however, there isn’t value in that debit card. Other banks have made it available for free. In the minds of consumers, they shouldn’t pay for it. It’s just something a bank has to provide if they want your checking account business.

One must understand that it is never the seller that determines value; it’s always the buyer.

Thinking otherwise is not just a problem with corporations or small business owners, it also affects individuals. Outside of the business world, the thought process might go something like this:

“These people only want to pay me [insert salary here]. For what I do for this company, and my skill set, I’m worth much more than that. I mean, I have a degree!”

The truth is, however, you’re only worth whatever amount you threw out if you can actually get that salary from someone. Otherwise, your line of thinking is no different than Bank of America’s.

If you want to get more, you have to offer more, and you have to offer more in the areas that are most important in the minds of the people utilizing your product. To ask for more under any other circumstance will quickly find you rejected by your buyer, whoever that may be, and in this world, the buyer is the only thing that matters.

Broaden your perspective with the latest thoughts on business, politics & life. Like on Facebook. Follow on Twitter. Subscribe with RSS.

Same Shows Every Night: Should the Networks Try It?

Jason Griffin — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 21:05:09 +0000

What would happen if network prime-time line-ups were more consistent? Consistent as in the same prime time programs every night?

Before you decry that thought as one that would result in fewer options for your prime time viewing, consider these three facts.

Univision (a U.S. Spanish-language network) has been wildly successful with this formula
Some of the most popular shows on television air nightly
You don’t watch everything that’s available to you anyway

Slate reports that one of the secrets to Univision’s success has been its consistent formula of airing the same three telenovelas (basically prime-time Spanish soaps) back-to-back-to-back every night of the week. The result: Univision beat every English language network in the United States with adults 18-49 during one-week in September, numbers any media outlet would die for.

There's also a much simpler reason for Univision's success: they were able to recognize a need and take action.

Why should this be unique to Univision? Some of the most popular English language television programming outside of major network prime time (i.e. early or late-prime or cable / satellite) airs consistently every night. Think NBC’s Today Show in the morning, or Leno & Letterman on late-night. Outside of the networks Jon Stewart & Bill O’Reilly pull in great numbers every evening, as does SportsCenter on ESPN. For sitcoms, look no further than syndicated Simpsons or Seinfeld on select stations every night. You don’t even have to go national for an example; just take a look at the evening local news.

You may claim to want variety, but chances are likely that you know what you like and seek to watch more of it consistently. It’s reflected in the ratings on Univision, it’s reflected outside of prime-time on almost every channel, and it’s reflected every time you stream complete seasons of your favorite television show on Netflix.

Is the idea of consistent prime-time programming crazy? Of course it is. Networks have been struggling to maintain their prime-time audience for years, however, and you can’t argue with the success of consistency nearly everywhere else you turn. If the networks want to save prime-time, perhaps a simplified, more consistent line-up is the key.

Broaden your perspective with the latest thoughts on business, politics & life. Like on Facebook. Follow on Twitter. Subscribe with RSS.

Obama: We've Lost Our Ambition, Imagination

Jason Griffin — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 17:12:01 +0000

Real Clear Politics is circulating a video of President Obama telling an audience in San Francisco that we've lost our ambition and our imagination. He goes on to say we've lost our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge.

It's a sound byte that's sure to anger some, especially Obama's critics. The question, however, is this: Is the president right?

Political agendas aside (projects like the Golden Gate Bridge usually involve a degree of government funding), can it really be said that the people of the United States are collectively using their imaginations in an ambitious manner to do something great?

Green technology, renewable energy, becomming a center of manufacturing, building better communities: it's hard to say those things are on the minds of most Americans right now.

Instead, we're in a mood of collective complaining. Occupy Wall Street protesters complain that the 1% have made too much, while Occupy opponents complain that only 53% pay taxes. Meanwhile, business leaders are concerned about too many regulations and just want business to go back to how it was before the recession.

Conservatives blame Obama, and liberals blame Bush.

Both are right; yet both are wrong. Blaming political opponents is easy; blaming ourselves is harder.

Perhaps we just need to get through the distraction of an election before we can get re-focused.

One can only hope that it's that easy, because on this point, Obama is right. We have lost our ambition and our imagination, and we can't expect things to get any better until we re-focus on putting those two invaluable qualities back to work for us again.

It's time to get back to focusing on doing something great - regardless of who wins the election.

Broaden your perspective with the latest thoughts on business, politics & life. Like on Facebook. Follow on Twitter. Subscribe with RSS.