The Most Dangerous Lie Entrepreneurs Tell Themselves

Life is short. Depending on your reference point.

We learn more from our failures than our successes. Maybe.

Humankind employs simple aphorisms to provide guidance. And sometimes to make ourselves feel better about our weaknesses and mistakes. But the results can be misleading.

Google Ventures leader serial entreprenuer Joe Kraus explains how thoughtless application of timeless wisdom is not always helpful. JL

Joe Kraus comments in Forbes:

One of the things I’m fascinated by are the small lies we tell ourselves. They usually take the form of aphorisms that seem to be true. Or more to the point, they have an important subtle message, but they’re perceived as whole truths. And, often they’re so ubiquitous we don’t even give them a second thought. But, these small lies end up having a pretty distorting effect on our behavior or our perceptions.

One example of this is the statement “life is short.”

Proving Your Opponents' Point: JP Morgan's $2 Billion Loss Came Amid Its CEO's Campaign Against Regulation

If you are going to embrace the role of spokesperson for your industry. Of poster boy for the post-financial-crisis, no-apologies banking lobby, you had best not take your eye off the risk metrics. Or begin to believe your own windy rhetoric. Let the financial press do your bidding. But don't fall for your own invincibility mantra.

The London Whale has been harpooned. The London Whale being the nickname given to the London-based JP Morgan trader whose strategy - and the size of whose movements - was deemed so vast and so brilliant a few weeks ago that global markets were moved.

The curious thing is, this is not the same old story of rogue traders gone bad. This guy had the full faith and confidence of his management. Which is maybe even scarier. We thought these guys knew things the rest of us didnt. Supposedly the reason why they get the ginormous bucks. But the larger point, for managers great and small, is that all that talk about disruptive innovation, of Black Swans and inherent risks, is still pertinent. If you have to talk publicly, measure your words. Consider the possibility, however remote, of a potential downside. And remember that no one out-thinks the markets for too long. JL

The Huffington Post reports:

Oh, the irony.

After roundly criticizing regulations aimed at preventing banks from taking huge and unsustainable risks with their own money, Jamie Dimon's bank may have done just that -- and lost.

How Hewlett-Packard Lost Its Way

The HP Way.

To an entire generation of tech entrepreneurs, nay, an entire generation of business managers, that phrase meant something.

Integrity. Quality. Teamwork. Service. Commitment. Valuing your people.

The original Silicon Valley garage startup. Founded by two unassuming engineers. Intelligent. Visionary. Practical.

They thought they had built a legacy for the ages. And then. Within a decade of their deaths. The company they founded and the values they embodied had curdled. Their trajectory a cautionary tale.

It is sometimes astonishing to see how quickly how the rot of poor management and bad governance (in this case, shamefully, epically bad)can destroy a once iconic company. Four CEOs in less than five years. Three of them ejected in board room coups - by the board that had vetted and selected them.

The lesson is that all of those bywords and standards and values and ethics, almost painfully simple in meaning, matter. But as simple as they are to understand, just as difficult to implement and execute. They can not be taken for granted. It can not be assumed they will automatically regenerate. They can not, when discarded in favor of euphemistically-articulated but convenient short-cuts to quick and dirty financial results, be resuscitated. This is a company that was destroyed from within, mostly by poor management decisions and even worse board oversight. The company still exists. And good people are trying to revive it. But substantial value has been lost - and it may never regain its former glory. Which is sad, because the founders had it right.

Successors must, of necessity, make changes. But the elements that comprise a company's core are there for a reason and there is much to be learned from them. If only. JL

James Bandler and Doris Burke report in Fortune:

A few months after she took over as the CEO of Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) last September, Meg Whitman held one in a series of get-to-know-you meetings with employees. To say the audience, a group of software engineers and managers, was sullen would be an understatement. As Whitman spoke, many of them glared at her. Others weren't making eye contact with their new boss. Their heads were down, and they were tapping furiously on handheld devices.

"Your comments are being live-blogged," one employee told her defiantly. Whitman challenged the man. "You all have taken leaking to a new art form," she said. "It's a sign of an unhappy company. You wish HP ill." The tapping suddenly stopped, and as the room fell silent, the mobile devices were lowered

Aspire to the 1%? Geography is Destiny

Geography is destiny.

Yes, Virginia (and Oklahoma and South Carolina...)there is a difference. Demographic data is increasingly pinpointing ways in which a variety of factors, including geography, can affect economic opportunities.

Some of these patterns have been evident for decades - or longer. There is a reason why cities like London, Paris and Beijing have long been magnets for immigration. But only recently have researchers been able to quantify the impacts.

Educational quality and attainment within certain boundaries remains strongly correlated with upward mobility. So, it would seem, does access to finance and the other services which grow around successful businesses and centers of trade. Seats of government, with their ability to provide jobs, patronage and funding are also assets.

Ultimately, in whatever culture, people are drawn to the nexus of power and money.

Resentment, as always, to follow. JL

Catherine Rampell reports in the New York Times:

Reaching for the American dream? Your best chances are probably in New York, New Jersey or Maryland.

Those states are best at helping Americans move up the income ladder, both in absolute terms and relative to their peers, according to a groundbreaking new study from the Economic Mobility Project at the Pew Center on the States.

Innovation, Income and Growth: The More Things Change

The changes wrought by the financial crisis and recession may not be as dramatic as some had hoped or feared. Rather, they reflect longer term trends whose impact may have accelerated.

If anything, the weak have gotten weaker and the strong, stronger. The strength of ideas and human capital continue encourage the urbanization mega-trend. As traditional energy resources become scarcer and more expensive, those economies based on their extraction, refinement, distribution and finance will benefit in kind - for as long as they last or as long as the rest of the world is willing to pay for them - whichever comes first.

The larger question is why as a civilization we seem so unwilling to tackle the big problems. Complacency and the aging of the population probably have some impact. But it may simply be that we are uncertain about the future and sufficiently comfortable to postpone decisions that could be unsettling.

Society will continue to benefit from the generation of new ideas. Investing in education and the people who may create them seems the most sensible course. JL

Edward Glaeser reports in Bloomberg:

How has the Great Recession reshaped America? Does the decline in New York’s financial sector herald the “demise of the luxury city,” as Joel Kotkin has recently suggested? Or instead has this watershed meant “the death of the fringe suburb,” as Christopher Leinberger speculates?

In fact, none of America’s diverse living styles is about to perish

Facebooking Fashion Design: Socially Sartorial

Shopping alone without your friends to offer suggestions? No problem.

Retailers and clothing designers are collaborating to offer electronically enabled clothes hangers that tally Facebook 'likes' so you can see what the other 600 million friends think. While some people have a highly developed sense of style, many of the rest of us are less certain about our choices (just look around you...).

This innovation marries that very human insecurity about how we look with our deep-seated love for instant communication with the social network. There will, of course, be occasional glitches - like who makes sure the clothes were put back on the correct hanger after trying them on (this may not work during holiday shopping seasons) - but the trend is to carry our friends with us and to consult whoever is plugged in whenever we can.

The larger issue is that in what often feels like an increasingly distant world we prefer feeling connected. Merchants who address that conviction are tapping into a strong set of needs. JL

Sam Laird reports in Mashable:

Do you love to shop for clothes, but worry what people will think of your sartorial choices? Now some real time fashion feedback has arrived in Brazil via Facebook.

Retailer C&A has started a marketing push there that marries online groupthink with real-world decision making. Called FashionLike, it works like this: Whenever sometime Likes a clothing item online at C&A Brasil‘s site, that thumbs-up is tallied on a screen embedded in clothes hangers on the store’s physical racks.

49% of Americans Are Saving Nothing for Retirement

The golden years?

That is what retirement used to be called. But that was when many people had pensions and health care. Concepts that have already been consigned to the history books for the majority.

The good news, we suppose, is that the number of Americans not saving anything for retirement is still below 50%.

The problem is not that they do not want to but that they can not put money aside. Several decades of offshoring jobs, reduced benefits and declining public sector employment have led to declining household incomes. If people can not pay the mortgage or are deferring health care expenditures in order to make current ends meet they are unlikely to be able to save for retirement. In fact, retirement itself may become illusory. It is not clear what all those people will do, but the increasing numbers working in the fast food industry, with its 100%+ turnover rates, suggests what the outcome may be.

From a public policy perspective, this may be a case of self-fulfilling prophecies. If those ideologically opposed to government programs make it impossible for people to contribute to them by promoting austerity policies that reduce their ability to do so, it will, by definition, make it harder for current sums to meet future needs.

At the same time, short of societally-sanctioned mass starvation, it is hard to imagine the demand for such programs decreasing. Which suggests that at some point ideology and reality are going to have to kiss and make up. JL

Blake Ellis reports in CNNMoney:

America has a serious problem saving for retirement.

About 49% of Americans say they aren't contributing to any retirement plan, according to a new survey conducted by LIMRA, a trade association for the financial services industry

Biodiversity and Conservation May Be Good for Your Health

The environmental benefits of biodiversity have been extensively studied and confirmed.

But could it be a two-fer?

New research suggests that these attributes extend not just to environmental sustainability but also to human health. Particularly for urban dwellers and especially now. The rise in chronic immune ailments has become so significant that it has devolved into parody. From peanut-fee airplanes to perfume-free offices, the scope and variety of medical problems confronting the restless global population challenges categorization.

It may be that as a species we have simply eliminated too many inputs for our own good. Literally. JL

Katharine Gammon comments in Fast Company:

Could exposure to biodiversity keep the doctor away? If you live in a city, you will find out soon. This allergy season may be a whole lot worse for city-dwellers living in areas where they’re not exposed to many different species of plants and animals.

That’s what a new study, which was carried out in Finland, found. The scientists behind the study tried to figure out whether reduced human contact with nature and biodiversity influences the composition of skin bacteria and allergen sensitivity.

Are Smart Phones the Fastest Spreading Technology in Human History?

Maybe. But tablets might be even faster.

The only technology with comparable growth rates was television in the 1950s. Which may actually tell us something about the impetus for technological sources and uses if growth is a primary objective.

Landline telephones took almost 100 years to achieve the penetration that smart phones have achieved in 20. That penetration rate has achieved saturation levels in the US and Europe. The key to future growth is globalization. The spread of 'dumb' or simple mobile phones has established the infrastructure and economic model for the follow-on demand smart phones are expected to enjoy.

The trend lines suggest that consumers want optimal functionality of surpassing quality at the lowest possible price. They will start small but incremental enhancements such as that offered by the tablet appear to be an evolutionary upgrade whose time will come. Unless something better comes along. JL

Michael Degusta comments in MIT Tech Review:

Today's technology scene seems overheated to some. Apple is the most valuable company on earth. Software apps are reaching tens of millions of users within weeks. Major technology names like Research in Motion and Nokia are being undone by rapid changes to their markets. Underlying these developments: the unprecedented speed at which mobile computers are spreading.

Economic Power Shifting to Emerging Markets: Brazil to China via Mid East Funding

The changes were imperceptible at first. Then merely subtle. Now, they are proudly publicized and promoted.

The emerging markets' growing economic clout has been evident for a decade. But the gradual disappearance of US and European influence is a newer phenomenon. And it portends a more serious shift in performance, power and payoff.

The BRICs, primarily Brazil and China, are actively exploring means of furthering their already substantial bi-lateral trade. To help finance this expansion, Middle East sovereign wealth funding is playing a role. The role of bankers in New York or London and the authorities in Washington and Brussels? Thanks, don't call us, we'll call you.

Brazil and China became each others' largest trading partners almost three years ago. Western observers could console themselves with the notion that this was a crude raw materials feeds cheap manufacturing relationship. No longer. Now, the service industries like finance, law and accounting that the west has dominated and from which, for decades, it has extracted substantial fees are also shifting south. The education and experience by American and European institutions are being applied closer to home. By way of illustration, in a conversation some colleagues and I had in Beijing last year, two senior Chinese officials engaged us in a spirited dialogue about the prospects for intellectual property development. In fluent English. As we were concluding, I asked where they had honed their skills. The more senior one chuckled and said, "I got my Ph.D at Berkeley and he got his at Wisconsin."

While these trends may occasion some hand-wringing in cloistered board rooms, the shift may portend global advantages. As the events of 2008 demonstrated, the management of capital markets in the west may have become complacent and, arguably, sclerotic. Embracing the illusion of reward without the effective imputing of risk has proved destructive. Further benefits may accrue from the broader distribution of skills, experience and knowledge. This may well stimulate innovation and new sources of growth. But perhaps most importantly of all, this may serve as a reminder that elites not mindful of their own self-service - and intellectual in-breeding will eventually fail. Diversification increases strength and longevity. JL

Francesco Guerrera reports in the Wall Street Journal:

"That's what happens when you give an engineer time to dream." Eike Batista's rapid-fire delivery slowed down just enough for him to sum up the daring ambition of his latest project: a mega port to ship Brazilian natural resources to China.

Let's recap: A Brazilian entrepreneur builds a gigantic port to meet China's demand for commodities and receives financial backing from a Middle-Eastern sovereign-wealth fund. Notice anything missing? Not one of these transactions involves the West.

Social Silos: Companies Embrace In-House Networks

Gyms. Cafeterias. Lounges. You mean you have time for that stuff at the office?

Or more to the point, you still have an office?

Global business operates wherever it finds itself. Hopefully with wifi and an electrical connection. Going out to lunch? A game of squash? Hanging out at the water cooler? Who has time - and who can find anyone to join them?

So companies are attempting to bring what remains of office culture to where the people are. Which means the road, the home office, the client site. And the best way to do that is to create an in-house network that replicates - apes may be the better word - elements of the social networks that people are using anyway. The idea is to capture on a dedicated, secure (they hope) network some of the human interaction that used to get shared in person.

Aside from promoting what is left of old-school bonding, the strategy is to get people to share tips, leads, institutional knowledge and, let's be honest, gossip that may be helpful in generating business. There are plenty of third party providers eager to help. Will it work? Not yet clear. But the cost is relatively low, no training is required and given the already attenuated lifestyles most salarymen and women lead, a little electronically enabled human contact in an era of chronic right-sizing might actually improve performance. JL

Quentin Hardy reports in the New York Times:

The market for corporate social software must be getting big: the purveyors are following each others’ strategies, and talking each other down.

More than a gimmick, workplace social software is an increasingly necessary tool to hold together modern organizations, said Jive Software’s chief executive, Tony Zingale. “Organizations are more fractured, fragmented and mobile than ever. There has got to be a better way for them to be more connected,” he said.

The Venture Capital Industry is Broken: Now What?

Scale.

That was the question every VC asked of every entrepreneurial supplicant seeking financial support. Could this company scale. The implication being that the bigger the company 'scaled' the bigger the pay out for investors.

And so the same irreducible logic was applied to the venture capital industry itself. If the amount of money available for investments could be scaled, profits would follow. Except, of course, that it didn't. And quite possibly won't in the foreseeable future.

This is a variation of The Greater Fool Theory that drove Wall Street into the financial crisis. There would always be a greater fool to scoop up some originator's miscalculations. We have learned, the hard way, that reliance on this strategy has its disadvantages. And that growth is not inevitable. Nor is it forever.

In fact, developments of the technological sort that continue to create value have actually reduced the need for greater sums - and greater scale. What will follow is unclear. But less may well be more. JL

Stacey Higginbotham reports in GigaOm:

The investment team at the Kauffman Foundation believes the venture capital industry is broken and they — or rather investors in VC funds — are partially to blame. The report condemns venture firms for being too big, not delivering returns, and not adjusting to the times.

But then it blames the situation on a misalignment of incentives: Namely, limited partners that invest in venture firms have done so in a way that encouraged VCs to raise huge funds at a time when huge funds weren’t really warranted. And now, for the Kauffman Foundation at least, the chickens have come home to roost.

Rating Romance: The Scientific Flaws of Online Dating Sites

C'mon. You knew that sooner rather than later someone with the kind of math skills you despised and resented in high school would do a scientific, statistically significant examination of the algorithms on which online dating is based.

And you suspected, could just feel, they would tell you it was all a sham. The quantitative web equivalent of those Three Card Monte street con artists.

But cheer up. The good news is that the findings are not totally dismissive. Yes, all the sites appear to exaggerate their claims - welcome to the business world - d'uh. But the overall effort is probably worth pursuing. Just like putting on some slick threads and going out to a bar on Friday night.

The problem is that all of the nuances science has identified as crucial to successful long term relationships are excluded from consideration by virtually every site. Literally. Every one. This is because those factors can be hard to quantify and then used to construct comparable data. It will eventually be possible to incorporate this kind of information in a useful format. But potential online daters probably aren't enticed by the use of the word 'eventually.'

In a frantic, attenuated, hit-or-miss world, humans, as a very social species, are looking for all the connectivity assistance they can get. Online dating is, on balance, a net positive. And it will get better. In the interim, tight jeans and slinky t-shirts R US. JL

Eli Finkel and Susan Sprecher report in Scientific American:

Every day, millions of single adults, worldwide, visit an online dating site. Many are lucky, finding life-long love or at least some exciting escapades. Others are not so lucky. The industry—eHarmony, Match, OkCupid, and a thousand other online dating sites—wants singles and the general public to believe that seeking a partner through their site is not just an alternative way to traditional venues for finding a partner, but a superior way.

Is it?

The Anxiety Economy

Here's the good news: the fact that we can afford to pay for life coaches, dating companies and wantologists means that there is still lots of excess cash flow in the American and European economic system.

In Haiti, North Korea and India? Those are probably not advisable career choices.

The problem, however, is that for many citizens of affluent societies, the present doesn't feel hopeful and the future does not appear filled with promise. In a post-industrial economy, people have a lot of time to think. Because thinking is what they do for a living. Some have called the worker bees of such highly evolved systems, 'symbolic analysts' due to the fact that they spend much of their working lives manipulating and analyzing symbols, either numerical or narrative.

In historical terms, we are only a baby step into this new, new thing. So the system, such as it is, does not function smoothly. There are fits and starts. Advances and setbacks. Ups and downs. Employment may be episodic. We are embracing change - but it is not always embracing us back.

The result is anxiety. You think markets abhor uncertainty? Try your garden variety 29 year old. China looms. Jobs are scarce. Incomes are down. Americans used to pride themselves on every generation making more in material terms than their predecessors. Now, moving back in with mom and dad could be as good as it gets. With no guarantee you'll be able to afford the increased property taxes if and when you inherit the homestead.

We could say 'get used to it.' But that seems unnecessarily smug - and heartless. A more thoughtful and productive approach? Understand and empathize. No one is going to escape the reality for long. JL

Derek Thompson reports in The Atlantic:

I want a wantologist.

On Sunday, I learned that a "wantologist" -- what, you don't have one? -- is somebody paid to figure out what you want. Arlie Russell Hochschild, writing in the New York Times, quotes Katherine Ziegler, wantologist, helping a client to figure out what it is that she wants. Two generations ago, there was no such thing as a wantologist, a dating company, a nameologist, a life coach, a party animator, or a paid graveside visitor, Hochschild informs us. Today, they're everywhere. Is that bad?

Unlikely Allies: Why Hollande and Merkel May Be Strong Partners

Merkozy is dead. Long live Merllande?

Commentary about the French election of Socialist President Francois Hollande has focused on the potential conflict his philosophical differences about economic policy with German Chancellor Angela Merkel may engender.

But there is another, more positive, interpretation of what may now emerge between the two countries and their leaders.

The reality is that the harsh austerity program favored by Ms. Merkel and accepted by ousted French President Sarkozy is not producing the results its adherents promised. Not just in France, but in the UK (where Prime Minister Cameron's party was routed in local elections), in Greece, in the Netherlands, in Spain, in Italy and across the European Union, austerity's protagonists are being voted out for a policy that has provided, to date 'pain with no gain.'

Merkel's problem is that her German electorate still favors austerity because they believe they were paying for the rest of the EU's lifestyle with their hard work and frugality. The questionable veracity of that perception aside, Germany's economic success depends in part on their sales to these other polities. The austerity program is now EU policy, but the advantage of Hollande's election is that it gives Merkel an excuse for supporting a somewhat more expansionist growth strategy. Just as Merkel's presence provides Hollande with a reason to cooperate with some of the more basic austerity tenets even as he promotes his less austere fairness doctrine. C'est la vie. JL

Quentin Peel reports in the Financial Times:

François Hollande’s victory in the French presidential election was greeted in Berlin with a Gallic shrug – at least in government circles.

“Oh well,” was one of the more revealing responses to the Socialist’s success. It was neither heartily welcomed nor cursed, but seen as something one has to live with.

End of the Geek; Rise of the Brogrammer

Inevitable.

That is the only word adequate to describe the changing programmer demographic.

The combination of money, celebrity, status and - did we mention money? - could only lead to one conclusion: that tech's 'Revenge of the Nerds' era would eventually devolve, unleashing the steroidal offspring of 'Animal House' in the 'Social Network' context.

For this increasingly global culture, the anthropological signaling is not hard to decode. People are attracted to opportunities for advancement, wealth and prestige. In certain increasingly proscribed areas of New York and London, finance still attracts moths to the flame. But in the wider world, what job is hotter, cooler, more exponentially incandescent, than working for Google, Facebook or any one of dozens of tech start-ups?

The result is that the smart and talented wishing to maintain that aura of invincibility can do the math, literally. Law is being downsized and outsourced. Corporate advancement takes decades. Government can't pay enough. Finance has all those sticky ethical and regulatory problems. The main chance for the 'best and the brightest' is in tech. And the very technological advances that have attracted them, particularly in the app era, also make it somewhat easier to make one's mark.

Money, talent and notoriety have fueled the fun. The downsides are that self-parody is a risk - and the boom-boom-room culture that enveloped Wall Street is a concern. Women in positions of authority remain scarcer than their census numbers warrant. And adult supervision can be fleeting. But ultimately this is about making money for investors, who will only tolerate that which provides a return. JL

Doug Gross reports in CNN:

On campus at Stanford University, a hot startup attracts recruits with a poster asking if they want to 'bro down and crush some code.'" And the world's largest Internet registration company entices Web entrepreneurs with a Super Bowl ad in which two female celebrities paint its logo onto the body of an apparently naked model.

Forget what you think you know about the benignly geeky computer programmer who lives for the thrill of finding a single misplaced semicolon in thousands of lines of code. And welcome to the world of the "brogrammer."

Other People's Money: Stock Trading Volume Slows as Speed Increases

Despite economic stabilization and even rising prices, investing in US stock markets has continued to fall since the darkest days of the financial crisis in 2008.

The reasons? Loss of faith in the efficacy of the markets themselves and of trust in those who make them function. Which, when you are asking to manage trillions in Other People's Money, is not a helpful selling proposition.

The salient issues appear to be rooted in technological innovations that have increased the markets' speed for those who trade in them. The problem being that those same mutations have increased the institutional risks while shifting the burden to those with the least current information. In other words, computerized high frequency trading and the regulatory bias towards market efficiency have enhanced the information asymmetries that give insiders their edge. All of which has given former, current and potential investors the sense that the proverbial playing field is decidedly tilted - away from them.

Still smarting from the losses they suffered during the crash and, perhaps, even more corrosively, sensing that others prospered from their bad fortune, investors' loss of faith and hope in a fair outcome have combined to stifle growth. That the market risk has also climbed for them, but not for professionals adds to the hesitation to get back in. The irony is that market appreciation for the value of intangibles over the false assurance of audited financials has risen just as the impact of those factors has fallen most heavily on the markets themselves. JL

David Weidner reports in the Wall Street Journal:

Do you trust the markets anymore? Do you trust regulators?

When you buy a stock or invest in a mutual fund, do you have confidence that the performance of that security is tied to the performance of companies, industries and the economy? If you don't, welcome to the club. It's getting crowded in here. If you do still have faith, well, maybe you also believe Accenture ACN -3.43%PLC was responsible for going from $41 a share to $5.34 in just 17 minutes, a swing that represented $20 billion, or 86% of it market value, during the flash crash last week. Like us doubters, you'll get what you deserve

Unplanned Obsolescence: What Happens to Business Models When Tech Cycles Become Shorter Than Corporate Decision Cycles

Exponential capability increases. Shortened business cycles. Declining stability. Diminishing returns to scale. Enhanced accrual to data and design.

Urgency and pressure characterize the new economic order. Making bigger decisions in shorter time frames with less information is the norm. And no one has time to apologize for the imposition - or the consequences.

Business models were a conceptual construct from a more contemplative age. When discussion was demanded, not just indulged. And commentary was solicited. Analysis could be tedious, which led, eventually, to confining one's thoughts to a single page or a 30 second 'elevator speech.' LOL.

The challenge now facing management in a high frequency trading environment, is the relative obsolescence of reflection. It is not that it isn't valued, but there is just not enough time. There is an app for that and if it can not be pulled up from the net, on your phone, it most likely will be done without. The need now is for accurate anticipation. And good luck. JL

Greg Satell comments in Digital Tonto:

What happens when technology cycles become shorter than corporate decision cycles? That’s the question I posed in an earlier post about Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram

Saul Kaplan takes it even further in his new book The Business Model Innovation Factory, when he points out that the concept doesn’t just apply to technology, but business models as well. That, if anything, is a much more difficult problem.

The Real Reason Verizon Doesn't Want You to Buy an iPhone

This is about speed. And more to the point, about the investment that enables it.

LTE stands for Long Term Evolution. It is the standard that supports 4G mobile phones. Er, sorry, devices.

Verizon, one of the two largest US telecom providers, has ploughed billions into its 4G LTE network, but relatively few of its customers have followed. To some significant degree, analysts say, because owners of 3G iPhones and iPads are proving reluctant to switch. Not that they wouldnt love to do so, but these things are expensive, the economy is uncertain, incomes are flat and well, people arent feeling the need to lay out $400 every year to get faster access to restaurant menus or shave seconds off finding out where their friends are this minute. And let's face it, that is the kind of less-than-Manhattan-Project type usage to which the majority of consumers are applying these babies.

So Verizon has a problem: it has bet the farm on growth of the 4G LTE network, but the lemmings are not being as compliant as necessary to generate the return on investment required to trigger stock price increases, bonuses and promotions. Which is how these metrics flow inside a corporate reporting framework. Incentives being what they are, Verizon employees - denials to the contrary - are only human. They will push what makes their bosses happy because ultimately that may make said employees slightly less vulnerable.

We keep saying it: follow the money. It takes you in illuminating directions. JL

Sascha Segan reports in PC magazine:

A pretty hot story is going around, stoked by CNNMoney, that Verizon Wireless sales reps are steering customers away from Apple's iPhones in favor of 4G LTE-enabled Android devices. I absolutely believe this, Verizon's official denials notwithstanding.

This has nothing to do with the Apple/Android war. It has little to do with the huge subsidies paid on Apple products, little to do with Apple's power in the market,

Vocabulary LOL: Coining a New Language for Web Living

All elites are conspiracies against the laity, said George Bernard Shaw.

And he was in a good position to know.

An issue now facing society is figuring out who belongs to the so-called elite and who does not. The former has expanded to such a degree that membership in the laity is becoming an exclusive preserve of its own.

One means of defining membership in an elite is through vocabulary. Given humankind's predisposition to gather and communicate, words and their usage are among the most effective tools for determining who's in or out, up or down. Language, accent and usage offer shades of meaning discernible only to the elect.

With technology spreading - and its importance growing - the importance of understanding has grown. Exclusivity may have lost its allure as the potential benefit of clueing everyone in exceeds the value of keeping them out. Those who crave status may just have to find another way. JL

Jenna Wortham reports in the New York Times:

When a friend recently asked for advice about using social media, I excitedly embarked on a description of my daily routine — checking in on Foursquare to share my whereabouts with friends, posting tweets to Twitter, sharing screenshots from the latest “Mad Men” episode on Tumblr, and skimming through the stylized images on Instagram.

He shook his head. It wasn’t just that he wasn’t familiar with the microblogging sites I regularly use. “You’re speaking another language,” he said. And in a way, I am. It’s the vernacular of the Web.

Don't Like the Message? Maybe It's the Messenger

Do we listen more to those like or trust?

Seems obvious. But it may be that the predisposition to do so is based on deep-seated cultural affinities. Those inclinations can reinforce or undermine the purpose in communicating. Which is why advertisers have long searched for surrogate spokespeople who appeal to the basic instincts of those they are attempting to reach.

That effort has been complicated by the nature of credibility on the web. Perfectly reasonable avatars in one setting or on one channel or platform may be utterly counterproductive in another. We may decry the fickleness of the human condition, but those who wish to prevail commercially or philosophically had better adapt to it. JL

Justin Fox reports in Harvard Business Review:

We all like to think we can evaluate information and arguments rationally, regardless of where they come from. But we don't. As Yale Law School's Dan Kahan, who has studied this stuff a lot, puts it: People feel that it is safe to consider evidence with an open mind when they know that a knowledgeable member of their cultural community accepts it.

When the information seems to be coming from or favoring the other side, all bets are off.

Are We Born to be Religious?

What if the study of genetics, antithetical to the beliefs of some devoutly religious sects, turned out to provide important answers to questions of faith?

The contradictions, ironies and mysteries of life provide a significant basis for religious conviction. The study of science - and the more we learn about human development - may provide understanding that extends and deepens such beliefs.

In the 'nature versus nurture' debate, it may be that the answer is different depending on what age one studies. Children may be shaped more by the environment in which they live (religious or not) but adults' continued adherence - or not - may result from genetic predispositions.

This would appear counter-intuitive. It is assumed, by those who subscribe to such views, that children are born into a state of grace. The fall, if it happens, comes later. It may well be, however, that family and community influences are stronger for the unformed young, while more deeply seated drives emerge later when the personality is more fully formed. The underlying issue could well be that the human inclination to form or join groups is based on a deep-seated survival instinct. As more study is conducted, the larger point is that we remain open to learning, however contrary or challenging, so that we better understand and reinforce our choices for the good of ourselves and the societies in which we dwell. JL

Vassilis Saroglou reports in Scientific American:

A deep question pervades the debates surrounding religion—whether God exists, sure, but that one is mighty difficult to answer. Instead we can ask a related, more approachable query: Why does God exist for some of us but not for others? Theologians and ministers preach that faith is preeminently a matter of personal choice. Is it, really?