Let’s face it all computers crash. There are so many points of failure, that there is not one computer, which will not crash. Sure, we can get close, triple 9’s, maybe even quadruples, but not 100.00%. However, are there any mechanical devices we have that wonÂ’t eventually fail?

The difference is, that you and I can’t afford to keep our computers even in the high 90%. Once again, there are many points of failure, and many of them open for our manipulation. Imagine if we tinkered with out stoves as much as do our computers. You see, I want to install a super toaster attachment to my stove, and its stove plug and play compatible. Then I’ll probably burn down the house after I choose the wrong cable or driver, One of the main powerful features of computers are their flexibility, but it is also perhaps one of its main sources of trouble.

I propose a new style of system, the retro-system. The retro system is a limited functionality appliance that has superior network interoperability. These reduction function computers are engineered to have no moving parts. They come pre-installed with all of the functionality the need or ever expected to have. I imagine that 90% of Microsoft Word users ever need 40% of the functionality. There will floppy, no CD, and no DVD. With the exception of a data area for work, the OS will be completely protected. The user will not be able to configure anything other than minimal basic non-invasive options.

The retro-system will become the first true information appliance. You turn it on and it instantly is available for use. With no configurability, booting becomes elementary; you only need to have a limited OS kernel.

If we wanted hardware peripherals, then manufacturers would need to build to generic specifications, so that the generic support capable from the retro-appliance can be met. This is the only way to enable stereo-like functionality. The high-fidelity system can consist of many different peripherals, but they only require the proper connection in order for them to work. Tape player, no problem; reel to reel, no problem, VCR, also no problem. All of these devices may offer different functionality, but where they interconnect, there is no comprise.

Is this level of standardization possible? It is only possible, if the market drives the effort. As long as we continue to accept software and systems that are prone to failure, then we can never expect manufacturers to change. We provide the fuel to keep the cycle going: better hardware means better software; better software means better hardware, and so on. Sure no computer manufacturer wants to make an information appliance that lasts 5 to 10 years instead of 2, but IÂ’m sure my wife would want one. If IÂ’m not mistaken, I believe millions of other people would too.

It’s the people stupid! Business is about people. Success is about people. Happiness is about people. The more effective we are with people, the better we will do in all of those areas. Unless you have a goal that strictly relies on ourselves, like spirituality, physical fitness a we are linked to others. There is no avoiding the idiosyncrasies, the broken communication, or the thousands of different obstacles that limit our ability to communicate effectively, influence consistently, and behave congruently.

Therefore, there is no way to avoid people if we want to reach many of the goals we all set for ourselves. That means that of all the skills we desire, of all the technologies we need to master, and all the million excuses we use to explain our limited results, what we need first is master our inter-personal relations. This one focus will take us father towards our dreams than anything else.

Trust, is a delicate condition. How much are the engines of creation driven by trust? I would guess quite a lot. However, it is quite sad to contemplate, that many of those engines are powered by misplaced trust; or what you might say is one-sided trust. How many have heard your superiors say something along these lines “I’m not going to pay to train them, they’ll probably just leave once they have the training to get a better paying position. Does any part of that statement illustrate trust? I can’t begin to describe the many ways it is wrong, but since the topic is trust let’s stick to that one. Can you imagine what a front-line employee, who is trying to learn something newly assigned, would feel if they heard their superiors say that; wouldn’t they say their trust was broken? Hmm.

Just to remind myself I had to look it up. The interesting thing about trust is that it relates back to confidence and reliance. In my words, it is the confidence in someone that they always have your best interests foremost in your relationship. However, perhaps the greatest teacher I have ever had said “Never trust anyone!” Largely, I agree with that, I mean let’s not fool ourselves. In this me-first world that we live in, who can really comply with my or the dictionary’s definition of trust.

My point is not to judge the world, but to remind everyone that our perception of what true trust is, is hardly ever found in the business world. There will always be subtle nuances to relationships that we need to factor into our decisions. We also need to remember what business relationships are about, business. Business is about making money for you, your boss, the shareholders, but it is about making money. What I don’t understand is everyone seems to play his or her part. Employees know that management can’t tell them the truth, so management doesn’t. I guess that is a kind of trust.

For me, the problem with this situation is employees invest too much trust into the relationship. They subconsciously hope that corporations have their best interests at heart, but consciously know that they don’t. However, a great shift is coming. The shift will forever remove that hope from their subconscious. When employees finally understand they can’t trust corporations for their well being, then a new basis of trust will be formed. We will base the new trust on merit. We will base trust on the negotiated need within the relationship. When we mutually meet our needs, then trust will be possible. Until then, don’t give your trust away too easily.

When you get down to it, success in life equates to making choices. These choices will ultimately determine if we reach our goals. How can we consistently make empowering choices? How can we remember what is important and make the choices that reflect our most treasured values?

Because let me tell you, the voices will creep in when you are at your weakest. They will tell you exactly what you want to hear. When it is late at night, and your head is bobbing up and down, you can only imagine how powerful the suggestion of going to bed will be. For me, that instance when the voices come up and I begin to consider what they are saying is my moment of truth. In the long run, the more I am able to resist those suggestions, the closer I will come to reaching my goals. I know, because I know me.

However, there is another side to this dilemma. Sometimes, you will lose this battle. Very few people have such powerful control over their minds to combat these suggestions. I know that I certainly am not one of them. Some days I’m going to lose the struggle. However, we have to remember that just because we give in, doesn’t mean that we are going to give in the next time too. The most important thing to remember is that each time we face this struggle it is brand new, and as they say on those mutual fund prospectus, past performance does not indicate future performance.

Eazy Peeze, Easy Living, Easy Street, Easy Rider, or Easy Going, have you ever noticed how frequently we use the word easy. We gravitate towards things that are easy. Human nature, laziness, cutting corners, I’m sure there are many good reasons why we have this tendency. In fact, the reason isn’t even that important. What is important is for us to recognize that we do have this tendency. We like easy solutions because they move us out of pain and into pleasure more efficiently. We will even avoid a difficult task at all costs to find or wait for an easier task to appear.

Once we admit this tendency, it will crystallize how you should work. The more obstacles you place before someone the less they are likely to attempt, let alone complete, that task. We sense difficulty, we have developed over thousands of years the ability to perceive complexity and move away from . This applies across so many different interactions and activities that we need to always remember that old phrase “Keep it Simple Stupid.” I believe that if businesses could actually keep things simpler, we may be able to realize the great productivity gains long promised by computers. I recommend that everyone ask these questions every time there are designing, planning, implementing, modifying, etc a task:

- How can I make this task simpler or easier?
- Is there anything complex or difficult about this task?
- Is this task difficult to explain? (If it is, then it will probably be difficult to accomplish!)

Do you want to hear the grand paradox about why people don’t make things simpler? I’m sure you’ve guessed; it’s because it’s hard. It requires a lot thinking, it’s much easier not thinking things through, it’s much easier starting something if you don’t have to think about what exactly you want. How many idioms do we have that urge us to think, how much do we actually do it? So my suggestion it simple, if you want to more effective in any endeavor do the hard work and think about how to make it simpler.

A corollary to this rule of thumb is that when the first person you describe something to or they read a document of yours, and they don’t get a particular point or idea, it probably means it is too complicated. Before you attempt to communicate with the next person, revise your speech or document to simplify that area. I guarantee that it will be worth your effort and will drastically improve your effectiveness.

For more advice along these lines try a “Search For a Simpler Way.” I’m headed over there myself right now!

E-Books, Books on CD, DVD, Streaming Video, and the mother of all of them convergence. As a species, are we ready for what’s coming? Do we even want what’s coming? Who wants it, just a few who crave technology and who always lust after more? The five dominant uses of the Internet are Pornography, Gambling, Chat, E-Mail, and get rich quick through Internet marketing schemes. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Internet, I could spend 24/7 on the Internet given a fast enough connection. But I’m not Joe Sixpack or Juan Del Pueblo.

Here’s a quick reality check. The most popular television program here in Puerto Rico is about gossip. The number one magazine in Puerto Rico is about what, you guessed it, gossip. If convergence means improved access to gossip, then the sky has no limits. For me, combining TV, Internet, Advertising, Music, and Movies into one interactive device or experience is a solution in search of a problem. As they have been saying for the last five years, yes, it is coming, but I don’t expect to see any radical changes in any of the mediums mentioned for the next 10 years, maybe more.

I was reading today about Oracle Corporation and their Unbreakable Linux software infrastructure and I couldn’t help but wonder “Is Oracle going to be equally excited about MySQL when it begins to take significant quantities of sales away from them?” Oh sure, it is great to push open source when it is your outside of impacting your revenue stream, but it will be a very different story once MySQL grows up.

My prediction is that any attempts to corner and exploit the open source movement will backfire on a company. Also, any attempts to link a company’s brand to the open source movement, will fail. Since I am a recent convert to the open source community I hesitate to speak for them, however, I have spent over 17 years working closely with developers, and I don’t believe they are going to appreciate any company cornering in on what they essentially own.

I’m also very concerned with another precedent that Oracle is making. Human nature 101, tell anyone that they can not do something is one of the most inspiring statements you can make. Since I am not a security expert either I’m not qualified to say how much more secure UNIX or Linux is than Windows. However, I do believe that Windows suffers from Number 1 syndrome. When your number one, then every team you play thinks it is their title match. Therefore, every hacker hoping to prove himself aims at Windows and Microsoft technologies. My second prediction is that Oracle is setting the stage for Linux to become the new target. Imagine if you will that you are an up and coming hacker and you want to prove yourself, what more tempting target could you pick than one that claims to be “Unbreakable?”

You hear many companies talk about it. You hear the leaders of companies extol the value of their employees. I think they get it, but not quite. For me employees are like raw materials for construction. The true power of human resources lies in what we can accomplish collectively. Just as with cement, it has little value by itself, but when it is combined with other raw materials, we can create amazing structures that exceed our imagination. The structures that we can create with human resources are relationships.

I have long wondered why business was not more productive. We also see many reports about the lack of impact of information technology on productivity. I believe that these observations are symptoms of a bigger problem. How can we build relationships that make us jointly more productive? How do we create environments that foster empowering relationships that build participants up, instead of subjugating some and elevating others? Why do so many companies emphasize praising employees, but in practice rarely do so outside of token efforts?

We need a few good collaboration facilitators, configurators, diplomats, and enablers. We need professionals who focus on improving the process of creating powerful relationships. We need human resources that remove the barriers that impede our relationships. Traditionally, this role has fallen on to the shoulders of leaders and management, but unfortunately there are few who are up to this challenge. With the constant demand for productivity improvements and increased profitability, the most successful enterprises will be those that can find effective collaborators, incubate their skills, and train their managers on building empowering relationships.

Eternal Optimism – What a Concept! What a Necessity! What a Way of Life! As I type this my head is bobbing and my eyes are heavy. It has been another unfruitful day in the search for business. Or at least in the terms of measurable progress. Time will tell whether any intangible ground was gained. So many swirling plans, ideas, opportunities, contacts, and unanswered messages, but no offers, no contracts, and no sales.

Stay the course; it wouldn’t be prudent; a thousand points of light; read my lips, no new business. It is curious. With all of the discussions of the New Economy and Business at the Speed of the Internet, business still moves remarkably slow. Another of the challenging and perplexing aspects of being an entrepreneur is that many things you find yourself doing, you find yourself doing for the first time in your career. So, even though you may have an extremely broad experience base, most of the activities you work on, you must learn as you try them for the first time. That is, unless you have started a company before. Assuming that you haven’t, then every day is an adventure. Ultimately though, most of the time you are waiting for word from a prospect or the final approval.

What I need is more opportunities where I can develop the prospects need and a sense of urgency in taking action. Two sources I hope to draw from in achieving this are Neil Rackham and Tony Robbins. Both of these resources offer techniques and strategies to get people to take action. Both make it very clear that the difference between success and anything less is the ability to take action. This entry is a testimonial to the power of taking action. Here is to consistently inspiring others to take action and making a difference.

What is a personal brand? I think the best way to is to illustrate what I mean. So you are just starting your own company, and you’re aggressively building a network of contacts. You meet someone new at an event and you say “Hi, I’m Kevin Shockey and… (your tongue swells instantly and the words squeak out)… I’m starting my own business in raising gorillas.” Or whatever your business might be. It was at that critical moment I realized I needed to have a brand. I’m not just referring to a company name and logo. It goes way beyond a simple name. Just as a company such as Coca-Cola works to ensure that their brand Coke always projects exactly the perception that marketers want the public to perceive; your personal brand is your identity, it is the perspective that you want each person you meet to have after they meet you.

This is what brought me to this point. A slight mention to Tom Peters should be only fitting. You can read what he had to say in 1997 in The Brand Called You. I think I must have read this in an alternate life, because I can’t seem to find it my article archive. A Google search yields a plethora of brand consultants. I wonder if that is something I want to do or am I’m trying to become?