Naivety vs. Experience

We all like to hear stories about how an outsider was successful with an innovative idea and they claim "I was too naive to know my idea couldn't work - ha ha". These stories are common mainly because we like them, but also because they really do happen. Experienced people learn the accepted way of doing things and are hesitant to innovate, in particular they are hesitant to take on wild ideas that will probably fail. So there is value bringing outsiders into projects who can see possibilities experienced people dismiss--and which outsiders can pursue them without ruining an established reputation.

However, let's not be too quick to lionize the outsider. What I see more often than great out-of-the-box ideas is outsiders inventing a mundane approach that experienced people know won't have impact. An outsider is more likely to re-invent an old mediocre idea than a fresh excellent one.

The trick is drawing on the strengths of both insiders and outsiders. For example, getting the experienced people to kill ideas if they are mediocre already-in-the-box ideas and not toss out wild, improbably out-of-the-box ideas that might actually work.

Valuing Questions

Many people have noted that asking the right questions is often a more critical skill than coming up with the right answers. For example, if back in the 1990s Kodak was asking "How do we build our market share in the film business?" then that question wouldn't have been nearly as useful as "What is digital photography going to do to this industry?"

However, the value of questions goes beyond that. There are questions with no firm answers like "What is the right balance between rewarding the team and rewarding the individuals on the team?" The value of the question is that it keeps this polarity or predicament clear in our mind so that we continue to manage it.

Peter Block probably goes further than even this in valuing questions for their own sake. He likes the question "How valuable an experience do you plan for this to be?" Here it is not so much about the answer or even keeping an important predicament in mind, it's about changing the relationship between presenter and participant. It is a kind of speech act that has force rather than just conveying information. It puts the onus of creating value on the participant not just the presenter.

So there we have 3 different ways questions can be of more importance than answers, perhaps you can think of more.

Carat Blunder

If you've ever made a dumb HR mistake you'll feel better after reading what Carat's Chief People Officer did. She accidentally sent out news of an impending layoff to all the agency's employees.

Ad Age Story

It's a mess-up but perhaps the outcome will not be bad. There is no good way to announce layoffs. After employees get over the initial shock they may be in no worse a mood than if the communication had unrolled as planned.