If you keep doing what other people want you to do, and thinking about what other people want you to think, what do you suppose is likely to happen?

Repeating the successes of the past, preserving tradition, doing things as they are “supposed” to be done, will- at best – produce results like those had before.  Except that in this new future – our present – those results can’t possibly be as good, as productive, or as powerful as they once were.  And probably not as much fun, either.

I watch a lot of movies – all sorts, but in my movie tastes I’m not that evolved. I especially like eighties and nineties action pictures.  I really like movies like the Die Hard series and Lethal Weapon, even the new version of the Bourne Ultimatum.  And what I’ve learned from watching of these kinds of movies is that the hero – the one who kills all the bad guys – does not win by hunkering down, staying in hiding and waiting for them to come to him.  He wins by running right out in front of the villains – charging towards them with everything he’s got and screaming at the top of his lungs.  He lunges towards the competition firing – as they say – with both barrels.   He puts himself at tremendous risk and doesn’t quit until it’s over.  That’s the unreasonable approach.

Your number one job as an extraordinary entrepreneur is to have an extraordinary vision.  Your number two task is to execute until that vision comes to life. 

If your vision is important enough you most likely can’t do it all yourself.  That’s why you build an organization in the first place. If you’re more of a lone ranger you have contractors, or outsource relationships, or joint venture partners.  Problem is, once you have these relationships, these people must be in action or you get nothing.

Key question: Does anyone do anything meaningful without someone asking him or her to, and without them promising to it in return?

I got an email this morning that asked the following question:

I read your article on Value Proposition and ROI. Your examples deal with physical products. I coach people in so-called ’soft skills’ – presentations, speaking and listening, enhancing imagination. I can detail many positive outcomes but do not know how to quantify the results of such training. Therefore I don’t know how to use the methods you suggest. Can you help me?

Since this is such an important question, I thought I’d post my response here:

Just got back from a trip to the Dalmatian coast in Croatia, and while en-route and in-situ, I made a little distinction about lines. Lines of people, that is. In Germany, lines are quite robust. People get on that at the rear, and they maintain their structure – in other words, the people who get on the line first, get off it first. In America, most people respect lines – but those who don’t – the line cheaters – are often the subject of vocal and occasionally martial conflict. In other words, people who cut the line get yelled at and into fights. “Hey buddy – the line starts back there!” In Croatia, I discovered that lines are simply a suggestion. Line form, and some people follow them, while many others ignore the lines completely and simply push to the front.

Anyone who has read Be Unreasonable knows how I feel about price cutting and the best response to it, so I was happy (and surprised) to read McDonald’s founder Ray Kroc felt the same way.  In 1960, one of his Knoxville franchisee was being hammered by a competitor offering five hamburgers for thirty cents. Can you imagine, thirty cents! Even so, the customers still came over to McDonald’s for the fries and shakes. So the competitor hit harder – with a hamburger, milkshake and fries for ten cents.  The reasonable response would have been to cut prices and at least match the other guy’s offer  – following him down the road to pricing ruin. 

I heard this while speaking with my friend Mark Levy, who heard it from some branding guy, he couldn’t remember whom. “Positioning is dead,” the guy said. Since both Mark and I are positioning people this was of major interest.

He said that positioning was dead because the people, the users, the community… they were creating the positions of companies by participating in Web 2.0. He believed that companies’ positions were defined by what was being said about them in the infosphere.

This is total nonsense. While Web 2.0 gives people a voice and amplifies the conversation, you have to ask where the conversation comes from in the first place.