Mention you’re about to start a business and you’ll get plenty of advice. Everyone you know will suddenly turn into an expert on financing, marketing and sales strategies, technology and innovation. At least that was my experience.

But what you don’t hear is what it’s really like to be in charge, even if you’re the CEO of just yourself. Knowing the buck truly does stop with you is a subject that leaders and bosses rarely share. Some do, but not as many and they should, as it’s vital.

That’s where Jim Whitehurst, the president and CEO of Red Hat, one of the largest and most successful providers of open-source software, comes in. Before joining Red Hat, Jim was the COO of Delta Airlines, so you’d assume he knew exactly what he was getting into – but that’s not the case.

Here are some examples that Jim sights. Read on.

You will, in fact, still have a boss, in fact lots of them. Most people assume you don’t have a boss when you’re the CEO. If you’re the sole owner that is, strictly speaking, true … but you still have plenty of “bosses.”

And that means you have to consider the different objectives of all those bosses when deciding what to do. In certain cases there is a board, major investors, government officials (if a public company), Wall Street, employees – lots of bosses.

Having greater latitude is one of the fun parts of being a CEO, but never assume you’ll have free rein to do whatever you want.

The input you receive will often conflict. Some investors may want you to focus more on short-term results than longer-term growth. Different customers may want very different things. Even individual board members can have very different opinions and objectives.

Your job is to continue to tell the story of your company, continually make judgment calls, and continually balance personalities, needs, and goals. That’s one of the most challenging things about the job; since you have multiple bosses with multiple agendas, you constantly wonder, “Am I doing the right things?” (or doing things right?)

Sometimes you will have less latitude than when you only had one boss. When you have investors or a board or employees whose future is at least partly in your hands, even though you’re in charge, you sometimes (quite often actually) need to seek permission. And unlike when you had a boss, often there’s not just one person you need to ask.

Everything you do will be under a microscope. As a CEO or business owner, you’re constantly on display, not just for the job you do but for things like what you wear, whether you use a paper cup instead of a mug and what that says about your environmental consciousness, what kind of car you drive, etc.

For example, an employee was talking with my wife at a company event and said, “One of the things I really like is that Jim is family oriented. That’s important, because I have kids.” How did she decide that? During a meeting I took a call from my wife — she rarely calls me at work and I wanted to make sure nothing was wrong.

But what if for some reason – say I knew she planned to call at that time to leave me a message that wasn’t urgent and I had hit “Ignore”? Would that employee have thought I was not family oriented … and that Red Hat was not a family-friendly company?

Possibly so. When you’re under the microscope, it’s amazing what can be read into the smallest things. One interaction doesn’t necessarily send a major signal, but when your business is large enough and employees only see you occasionally, that one experience can form their entire opinion.

Being in charge is like a double-edged sword. You get to lead by example, but you can set tons of inadvertent examples. You can’t have a bad day.

You will be the worst boss you ever had. Becoming your own boss theoretically frees you from being controlled and micromanaged … but your conscience is probably the most exacting taskmaster you’ve ever worked for.

Take today for example, in theory I could have not scheduled anything, and just “goofed-off.” But almost all the individuals who make it to the CEO level or who start their own company are fairly competitive, driven to do well, committed to performance. They’re their own toughest boss.

While you do have more control, with that responsibility comes a sense of obligation that pushes most people harder than any boss possibly could.

Your job will definitely be different from what you imagine. I came to Red Hat thinking my job would be quite different than it actually is – not better, not worse, just different. Even though you’re given a title, you still have to earn trust, earn latitude from shareholders and employees … you still have to do all the things you have to do as an employee to gain credibility and respect.

Six years ago I came from doing an operations-intensive job in a low-margin industry. Red Hat is a high-growth company with incredible opportunities that result in incredible ambiguity – my job is a lot more about developing strategies, inspiring people, inspiring creativity, and pivoting from driving numbers and executing to something totally different has been an interesting challenge.

That can happen to you even if you start a new business. Many people tell me what they thought their business would do – and what that meant their role would be – turned out to be very different from what they imagined.

… But it will also be the best job you ever had.

 

Alastair
MaxCo Advisors
November 18th, 2015

As a child, I remember getting regular magazines and beautifully illustrated Cartoon Annuals (The Beano, for example), carefully type-set out in hard-back form. I always looked forward to reading these, backwards and forwards, and end-to-end. Today, some of these sit on my desk, right next to my devices. And while it certainly has sentimental value, it also reminds me of a time when we didn’t face quite so many distractions.

Today, we’re bombarded by requests for attention on every device imaginable, from every digital channel to Facebook notifications, and even ring-vibrations. With so many messages demanding our time, how does a company stand out? To me, the answer is simple – unified, cohesive connectivity. Hmmm, doesn’t sound that simple.

Stated somewhat differently, I think that success in an overstimulated world arises from creating short, seamless interactions. Of course, this isn’t a new concept – Google Search and Amazon One-Click Buy were pioneers of fewer clicks on our laptops and desktops. The critical difference today is that we tap and swipe on devices that are constantly interrupting us. Looking at Uber, this concept of short seamless experiences is core to the product. Mina Radhakrishnan the former Head of Product at Uber has commented on this, and goes on to explain specifically that it shows itself in three ways: location, choice and payments.

Location

One of the most time-consuming (and critical) parts of calling a car is making sure that your address is correctly set. One thing that was pioneered at Uber was the idea of moving the map as you moved your finger rather than moving your pin. At first glance, this felt strange because your actions weren’t directly moving you to where you want to go. However, as you swiped, the feeling of movement and placement quickly became intuitive. Now, this idea of moving the map as your centered location stays constant is a common practice across on-demand apps. By using places data, setting a pickup requires even less effort.

However, it’s critical to think about the best provider for this data across the world. Initially, using a single provider for all location data was the natural choice. However, as Uber expanded, this approach quickly became infeasible. Inaccurate map and places data led to confusing and frustrating calls between riders and drivers who couldn’t find each other. Ultimately, Uber had to find the appropriate providers for data around the world and automatically switch based on the location.

Additionally, using saved favorite locations, address setting becomes even quicker and cleaner. In fact, Uber now suggests destinations as you’re waiting so once you’ve made your request, there’s no need to ever open the app again once you’ve made a decision to request a car. At least, not until your next ride!

Choice

Another key component of calling a car is determining which type of car. While there is a default selection, as Uber continues to expand across product lines and delivery, the on-demand decision becomes more complicated. This was a key example of where naming was a critical component. What does UberX mean? How do you know what you’re getting when you request an UberExec?

Creating the right descriptions consistently around the world meant that the Company had to consciously consider how people would respond as the options continued to expand. And as Uber came up with these taglines, they also had to make sure that all the choices were clearly defined and organized. Hierarchical menus, consistent iconography and descriptive text at a glance reduce the analysis paralysis. Similarly, if you tap an option, you can get more information but there’s never a need to tap or swipe at all. And as you travel around the world, you always know what Uber means, whether it’s classic luxury or a reliable low-cost option.

Payments

This harmony is echoed in the way that Uber handles payments. Adding payment information is a high-friction activity and often one of the largest drop-off sources in sign-up conversion. As Uber thought about this, they considered what was unique to mobile. The first thing that came to mind was the camera. A natural evolution was the idea of scanning the card, which no-one had implemented as part of the sign-up process. At one point, 40% of users scanned their card, and Uber’s sign-up times were reduced by more than one minute.

Requiring payment information at sign-up seems counter-intuitive because the user hasn’t even experienced Uber yet but this was a guiding principle of the first time experience. In fact, it’s one of the reasons that using Uber for the first time feels magical. The Company went back and forth about it numerous times but without more data, ultimately felt that the seamlessness of the first ride trumped all. There’s no fumbling with wallets, or trying to figure out what to pay or worrying about whether it’s appropriate so all your other apps can interrupt away.

Fundamentally, instead of a transaction, Uber becomes an experience. I always held the opinion that Uber are not in the technology business, not even in the transportation business, but are in the entertainment business.

Of course, it’s not enough to just create an uninterrupted experience and expect to win. But when we’re faced with distractions from all directions, I propose that short and sweet is a great guiding principle.

MaxCo Advisors
November 16th, 2015

Something a little lighter for today, Thursday.

New Definition of a Management Consultant: someone who borrows your watch, tells you the time, keeps the watch and sends you a bill for it.

---

Spotted in the mail room and on the HR noticeboard of a local publishing company/website:

“This department requires no physical fitness program: everyone gets enough exercise jumping to conclusions, flying off the handle, running up expenses, flogging dead horses, knifing friends and colleagues in the back, dodging responsibility and generally pushing their luck.”

---

To all my friends who maybe familiar with the local transportation infrastructure in London and its close surroundings, here’s a cracker.

Hendon Central Prayer.

Our Farnham which art in Hendon,
Holloway Turnpike Lane,
Thy Kingston come,
Thy Wimbledon,
In Erith as it is in Hendon

Give us this day our Maidenhead,
And lead us not into Penge Station,
But deliver us from Esher,
For thine is the Kingston,
The Tower and the Horley,
For Iver and Iver,
Crouch End.

MaxCo Advisors

November 11th, 2015

When it comes to work, we’re all expected to do more with less. Less time, less resources, and oftentimes less guidance (absence of leadership, inspiration and mentorship.) It’s no wonder the Gallup poll on employee engagement spits-out such low numbers on this issue.

People thrive based on the environment they’re in. In negative environments where criticism, finger-pointing, the launching of virtual “heat-seeking missiles” as I like to call them – when people seek to immediately bring-down creative ideas BEFORE even thinking about them (drives me nuts!), and general negatively lurk, it’s easy to assume similar behavior.

Conversely, the opposite is also true.

Laughter is contagious. Positivity is contagious. Genuine enthusiasm is contagious.

In “The Optimistic Workplace: Creating an Environment that Energizes Everyone”, author and leadership consultant Shawn Murphy addresses the challenge of increasing positivity in the workforce and contends that there are six symptoms that lead to destructive work environments (and ultimately crush employee happiness). Having experienced this directly myself, I wholeheartedly agree:

Symptom 1: Blind Impact. A leader who is unaware of how her actions, attitude, and words impact others damages any opportunity for workplace optimism. She consistently underestimates people’s value and often fails to connect the dots between their work and organizational direction.

Symptom 2: Antisocial Leadership. An antisocial leader lacks the ability to encourage, build, and evolve a community of people united by a shared purpose. Autocratic and sometimes distrustful of people, this leader dictates what workers should do and rarely praises or credits them for good work. Creating a void of connectedness, this symptom tends to leave people feeling used and abused.

Symptom 3: Chronic Change Resistance. If there’s one thing that plagues individual and organizational growth, it’s resistance to change. However, change is what keeps us relevant. Without change, we won’t learn; if we don’t learn we can’t grow; if we don’t grow we don’t get any better and the competition usurps our pole position. For leaders who are chronic change avoiders, they either A) avoid change altogether or B) change too late, which means only incremental change is possible at this point.

Symptom 4: Profit Myopia. Leaders with profit myopia cling to the outdated belief that profit is the only success measure. Yes, making money is a good thing, for sure, but if people are unhappy in their work roles then they’re just not going to work optimally, which means profits suffer.

Symptom 5: Constipated Inspiration. Boy, doesn’t it just. When a leader is too focused on her own needs and insecurities, she gives little attention to what her employees experience at work. As a result, she doesn’t see what inspires or demotivates them. This symptom stems from ignorance to personal values and a lack of self-awareness. When a leader knows what she stands for, she has greater capacity to learn about the people on her team. You can’t lead others until you know how to lead yourself.

Symptom 6: Silo Syndrome. A leader afflicted with silo-syndrome cannot see beyond his immediate responsibilities or see how work affects life outside company walls. They resort to cognitive biases of availability and confirmation bias, to form their judgments because there’s limited exposure cross-culturally. For instance, people in marketing know nothing about sales, so it’s easy for a marketer to take a mental shortcut and assign a label to sales as whole, thus degrading optimism.

Over and out.

MaxCo Advisors
November 11th, 2015

The beauty and elegant simplicity of the Uber Business Model deals with a problem that has plagued many business sectors for years. *Anne Nicole addresses this in her terrific piece recently published in LinkedIn. She uses a rather nicer term, The Rise of the Bad Guy Premium.

Here you go.

For those of you who know me the Uber reference is very close to my heart, hence my love of this article and my desire to share.

---

Technology’s ability to track two-way feedback could allow companies to avoid or charge more for customers who behave badly.

Earlier this year, I was at Singapore’s Changi Airport at a transfer desk checking in for a connection to Thailand. It was an ugly situation. In front of me was a belligerent Western woman, hurling insults at an airline employee (who was responding with admirable patience). She called the employee stupid and pathetic while a crew of airline employees tried to work together to rectify the situation as quickly as possible.

At the end of the transaction, the woman received free lounge passes. Good Lord! Rather than being punished for her terrible behavior, the customer was rewarded, and there was no recourse for the abuse the airline employee had suffered.

Surely this level of abuse would have an impact on employee happiness, which would impact retention, which would impact the bottom line of the airline.

What if there was a way for the airline to make a record of this exchange? Then the airline would have a choice in the future: charge her a premium the next time she makes a booking or refuse her booking altogether. (“Yes!!”– right first air-pump with elbow bent and gently resting on lower torso.)

This could help the airline either weed-out bad customers or make them compensate for the additional costs that bad customers can cause to a business. It could even allow the airline to lower prices for the rest of us that treat airline employees like they deserve to be treated.

Enter the Bad Guy Premium

An acquaintance of a friend, let’s call him Adam, drank too much one night and took an Uber home. At the end of the ride, he vomited in the car and left the driver to clean up the mess. The next day, Adam tried to hail an Uber and had no luck. He could see the cars available on his app, however no one was taking his fare. He ended up hailing a cab. Weeks later, while traveling internationally, Adam still had trouble hailing Ubers.

When you take an Uber, you get to rate each driver. What I discovered from this story is that the driver also gets to rate you. Adam’s theory? Getting sick in the car caused his rating to plummet, and drivers no longer find his fare worth it.

I call his suffering the “bad guy premium.” This means that the Adams of the world will have to pay more, in either convenience or financially, to experience the level of service that good Uber customers have come to expect.

Just like slowly earning back someone’s trust after letting them down, Adam can rehabilitate his rating, but it will take some time and some good behavior.

Banks have been charging higher interest rates to risky borrowers for hundreds of years. Many businesses choose not to do future work with customers that don’t pay their bills or are difficult to work with. Why shouldn’t more companies leverage today’s technology to start penalizing customers that are bad for business?

Bad customers are on notice: if Uber can make this work for drivers, just think of what airlines, restaurants, call centers, and many other industries could do. Perhaps in the future the good guy will finish first.

Have you encountered a situation that made you wish there was a bad guy premium for your industry? Let me know in the comments section please.

Alastair
MaxCo Advisors
October 7, 2015

*Anne Nicole is currently a Relationship Manager at LinkedIn, where she works with clients to develop a professional brand, engage with insights, find the right people, and build relationships. Follow her on LinkedIn or Twitter at @annenicolesays.

I borrowed some of this, and then embellished a good deal, from a terrific article originally written by Betty Liu, and published in Leadership & Management, Public Speaking & Presenting in August, 2015.

---

Here are a few suggested tips.

People often say to succeed you need failure, taste the sweet you need the salty, and to understand true love you need heartbreak. In other words, the opposite of what is supposed to occur is sometimes exactly what one needs to achieve the objective.

As any good manager (or salesperson) knows, the way to connect with someone is to remember that the most important person in the world is them. This point is critical when it comes to connecting with someone. For the most part, people love talking about themselves and if you can make them feel like they are the center of your attention, then you’ve gone a long way in garnering their trust and favor.

But exactly how do you get them to pay attention to you?

Soft Conflict. Quiet Quarrel. Delicate Dispute, or even Obsequious Opposition (really?)

In other words, the way to get someone to pay attention to you is not by showering them with adoration and “yeses” but by creating a little conflict, tension, or dispute – just not too much. Doing so puts someone on alert and turns what could have been a pretty dull conversation into one that’s more lively and colorful, and one that can form the basis of a much stronger relationship.

You see this in television news interviews all the time. A guest who isn’t challenged on his or her views comes off as boring, or even timid, and isn’t memorable. Throw in some counterpoints and suddenly the interview turns into a debate where the guest looks smart (or dumb if he or she doesn’t come across well) and the viewer is engrossed. I’m sure there’s some sort of neurological explanation for why these tension-points feed the brain but for now let’s just call them “moments” that carry a far greater impact than a nice, polite conversation.

So why then does this foster a stronger connection?

For one, voicing a disagreement with a person’s opinion actually forges some common ground. Rather than drone endlessly on about the weather or kids, two people can find something to take a stand on. Now, this doesn’t mean you ought to start railing against each other’s views on gay marriage, but a dissent here or there around a topic is a welcome relief. Just make sure you deliver it with a smile.

Second, most established and powerful people are rarely challenged. They’re often surrounded by “yes people” who are afraid to disagree for fear or losing their jobs or being kicked out of the inner circle. So when they meet someone who knows how to speak honestly and voice an opinion that’s different from theirs or others, while still possessing a certain modicum of respect, then that is more often a welcome relief and is refreshing.

And finally, conflict and tension in any relationship is actually good for creativity. No successful partnership works when two people agree all the time. Usually when that happens, it’s because one person is afraid to disagree with the other, in which case that’s called something else: a dictatorship.

Being able to challenge each other can boost productivity and set a path neither party would be able to achieve without the other. The problem is few people can manage conflicts well, which is why founders often leave startups. Thrown in massive egos too and you’ll get the picture. Ask any venture capitalist and he or she will tell you that co-founders fighting is one of the top reasons a start-up fails.

So do me a favor, don’t act like Donald Trump and get everybody angry, but at the very least, the next time you meet someone new, don’t be afraid to pose a challenge.

Alastair
MaxCo Advisors
October 7, 2015

A generation ago it was “I Want My MTV”, but today’s CPG consumers–grocery shoppers to be exact–are asking “I Want My MBB – My Mobile Buy Button”.

We know from the various MaxCo Advisors Mobile Studies coupled with insights from other work we have conducted that while shoppers have been using their personal mobile devices to research products (and buy online for home delivery) the gap between looking and purchasing is still gaping in CPG compared to other categories.

Brands continue to build attractive and very functional websites as well as utilize all forms of social media to market their products, and engage consumer loyalty, but the ease and convenience of actually buying seems to be missing.

On many brand sites there simply is no “buy” button. Understandably individual brands cannot deal with issues of packaging and shipping (or do not want to invest in such infrastructure). Where the option does exist, the additional costs of premium price, shipping, waiting, and the total lack of sensory satisfaction issues – the need to see, touch and smell it  – can impede online/mobile CPG shoppers from buying.

But the forecast is optimistic. According to a recent Nielsen report the CPG category has significant upside with online CPG sales expected to grow at a 25% compound annual rate for the next three years, to over $32 billion next year. Our own insights tell us that factors such as exclusivity, better prices and same-day delivery will significantly impact this success.

Nationally, brands have turned to local click-collect-and-deliver services such as Peapod Delivery in the North East and other fulfillment services such as Diapers.com to help with such issues. The relationship between these companies and CPG brands will be increasingly critical to drive the conversion of shoppers to buyers.

According to a recent study by etailing Solutions, actions such as sharing shopper-insights, offering cross-merchandising opportunities and giving consumers auto-replenishment and shopping list applications on their sites are ways click-and-deliver services can help brands increase sales. New product launches and exclusive product offerings would drive CPG online purchasing according to such etailers. Exclusive web-only product offerings would also elevate consumer purchase behavior.

Imagine web-only offers for new the “Colgate Super Ultra-Whitening Toothpaste”, or new “Oreo-Triple-Layered Supreme Cookies”. Not so crazy.

A little over a year ago, who would have thought that a simple touch on our smartphone screen would enable a complete stranger to appear in their very own sparkly-clean car in a matter of minutes, or even seconds, at anytime, anywhere, day or night, and give you a ride to where ever you want, without having to pay cash, or even tip them. Huh? Uber.

We’ve also seen this before with numerous web-only exclusives for other categories such as media – music, movies, games, books (Amazon), home improvement (Home Depot and Lowes), and electronics and entertainment (Best Buy), travel and leisure (Expedia, Kayak), etc. Why not toothpaste, cookies, detergent or CSDs?

You may want to think about how best to answer the following important issues for your own organization?

• Will brands’ stronger involvement in e-commerce initiatives be the catalyst for stronger online sales in the CPG category?
• What is the true clickable path to purchase for CPG?
• What opportunities can brands create for shoppers to begin and end their journey online?
• What are the benefits for brands that do take control of their own ecommerce?
• What CPG categories that make more sense in the ecommerce space, or should brands consider ecommerce a necessity for every category?
• Is this all better left to e-retailers?

MaxCo Advisors can help you develop relevant, actionable and implementable strategies that will help you move the buy button closer to where your consumer is.

September 2015

Intrusively Coercive or Just Plain Nagging

You have to love this. It’s brilliant. PC at its absolute best.

Last week I attended one of those business management seminars that companies send their up-and-coming business managers to, with the purpose of providing them with appropriate and practical business management tools that were not taught at their respective business management graduate schools where they, in fact, studied for a master’s degree in, wait for it….business management.

Part way through one of the afternoon sessions, entitled something like, “Peer-to-peer conflict resolution in an open-plan office setting“, one of the participants, a very articulate young manager called Seth from Bangladesh, at least that what his name-tag said when we met over a plate of what looked like a pile of mashed yeast and alfalfa sprouts during the typically rushed lunch break, asked the question, “What about nagging?”

“Nagging?” questioned Dave, one of the ever-so-well-dressed but slightly clipped in his verbal response instructors. “Nagging?” he repeated. “Yes, how do I resolve being nagged at work?” Seth re-iterated.

“I am glad you brought this up, Seth“, Dave continued. “We like to refer to this as being Intrusively Coercive“.

What?

That got me thinking right away. Hmm. “Are you intrusively coercing me my dear, or just being a nag?”

Are You a Nag or an Intrusive Coercer? I actually like the term Intrusive Coercer, sounds little romantic don’t you think, or even a bit mysterious, “Hi, I’m an Intrusive Coercer.” I can just see it now. Dark walnut wood-paneled room. Fireplace. Barman, probably 70. Skinny. Polishing a glass with small starchy white towel. Purposefully. Knows everybody, seen everything. Ah, and there he is now, sporting an ever-so-slightly ill-fitting purple velvet smoking jacket, ciggy in one hand, dry martini in the other – straight-up with a twist – “Instrusive’s the name, Coercing’s my Game”.

A little nefarious maybe, but alluring nevertheless? It has a sort of obsequious magnetism (fail), it peaks your initial attention, but may not hold it for long, once you figure-out it means nothing more than to…

Force

Intimidate

Bully

Irritate

Annoy

Worry

Trouble

Torment

Irk

Disturb

Vex

Bother

Distress

Badger

Pester

Plague

Harass

Needle

Hound

Strong-arm

Or, Carp on at…

…maybe, just maybe, I’ll stay with just being Nagged, the old-fashioned way. After all, it does have an equine feel, and that can’t be that bad. If you like horses. If you don’t, it’s still just nagging.

ney-ey-ey-ey.

Hmm, recent blogging and commentary on Google’s corporate reorganization and subsequent new corporate name, Alphabet led me to think about unscrambling that name or, in essence, recreating such, as “they” did.

This has been the theme of several thought pieces recently. One of the best was penned by Toby Southgate, CEO of Brand Union, posted in LinkedIn on August 12th. I would encourage you to read this below.

Interestingly, the longest word you can make by unscrambling and re-arranging the letters in the word ALPHABET is, in fact, “HATABLE” – meaning capable of being hated, deserving hatred, or detestable. Nice eh?

Let’s not dwell on that, shall we.

Here’s Tony’s thoughts.

————————————–

Recreating The Alphabet

Last week’s news from Google—the full implications of which are still being revealed—is one of the most incredible pieces of corporate brand communication I can remember.

It’s a brand name we all know. One of the biggest, newest, most successful, influential, imaginative businesses in the world. Truly global, tens of thousands of employees, billions of users, an unwavering vision to change the world. And they simply pick up and change the name of the business at the top of the tree. The publicly listed entity is now Alphabet, and Google is a wholly owned subsidiary.

By any stretch, this is a huge change. A remarkable one. And the lessons for our industry—for brand and communications professionals and marketers everywhere—are multiple.

Do you think they went through a laborious name generation exercise? Do we imagine months of sweating over post-it notes and whiteboards, exploring every possible embryonic option on the classic Interbrand / Lippincott / Siegel ‘proprietary’ naming spectrum from rational / functional to emotional / descriptive? And yes, by all means, include our agency in that list—surprise alert—we’ve all wheeled out the same tools on occasion, and anyone who pretends otherwise is lying. The gene pool of our industry is small and talent can be fickle. No news there.

Once they had a shortlist, do you think they shared plans and multiple ‘comfortable’ options with in-house and external legal? Did they seek guidance on trademark ownership and IP protection? Did they have endless discussions about whether or not Alphabet was ‘truly ownable?’ “It’s a proper noun, of course, so we can never really OWN it.” (Don’t lie, industry colleagues—you have uttered those words even if you did not want to).

Of course they didn’t.

Google speaks about thinking big, and does.

Google leads by example and by doing, not by theorizing and espousing.

Debate has merit of course, but action has energy, and creates more.

They believe in being bold, and that starts with decision making. Quick, accountable, clearly communicated decision making. And accepting that no decision is ever perfect or complete.

There will be more questions. There already are. “Where does Ventures sit?” “Will GoogleX still report to Sergey?” “Who’s this former McKinsey guy that’s now CEO?”

They will be dealt with and managed efficiently and rapidly. As Larry and Sergey wrote 11 years ago, “Google is not a conventional company. We do not intend to become one.”

We work in an industry and are surrounded by people who talk a lot, and often about big, bold stuff. Because challenging thinking is tough to embrace, it’s more often a topic of conversation than a reality. An agenda item and a meeting topic, too rarely a fact of our working lives. And because most people who claim to be brave and to want to do something different and radical often become paralyzed in the face of opportunity to do exactly that, we’re stuck in a world where most corporate and brand communication looks and feels—well—kind of the same.

So we have to move from conversations about doing, to actually doing. From generics to specifics, from comfort to discomfort. We need our ideas and our work to be brilliantly designed and beautifully connected. The same way yesterday’s news from Google is delivered and presented: perfectly consistent—regardless of scale, breadth, and subsequent achievement—with the promise its founders made when they set the business up.

Nothing else really matters. It’s noise.

I’ve spoken to two very senior Google execs in the last 24 hours. Neither of them had more than a few hours notice. They weren’t involved. They confirmed the speed and agility and privacy of the changes. They also applauded the bravery. In other organizations, they’d be posturing and defensive. “Why wasn’t I involved?” “Where’s the research?” “Will it translate in Asia?” “Alphabet—seriously?” At Google, it is embraced.

Speed. Bravery. Execution. Clear communication. Action over debate.

We have a lot to learn. And perhaps most challenging of all, we’d probably like to think we already know this is an effective way to build brands today. We probably talk all the time about doing things differently, but always end up with the same excuses. “Wait for next time.” “The client wasn’t up for it.” “The brief wasn’t right.” “We couldn’t sell the route the CMO really wanted.”

These are excuses. We have to find a way.

Tony Southgate, CEO Brand Union August 12th, 2015

Nyuk. Nyuk.

My boss phoned me today. He said, “Is everything OK at the office?”

I said, “It’s all under control. It’s been a very busy day. I haven’t stopped to take a break all day.”

“Can you do me a favor?” he asked.

I said, “Of course. What is it?”

“Pick up the pace a little. I’m in the foursome behind you.”

Ouch.