Failing Smarter.

Tim_harford_adapt_quote

Failure - not the most optimistic of subjects, but certainly one of the most interesting.

Nobody likes or wants to fail, but failure drives innovation and better solutions to problems. In the US and in particular in tech circles in Silicon Valley there's a a mantra "Fall Fast, Fail Often" meaning try something new and move on quickly if it doesn't work and repeat until you're on to something that works; they embraced a culture of "God job you tried, better luck next time".

In the UK, there's more of a stigma and bad smell associated to failure and this is effecting innovation and entrepreneurship in our country. In a business study conducted in 2007, mobile operator Orange discovered, that while 50% of British adults want to start their own business of project, 4 in 10 are too afraid to even start because of fear of failure. We think this is a great shame.

While we may have the quixotic view, that there's someone sitting in their bedroom harbouring an idea that could change everything and won't explore it because they fear they'll be ridiculed if they fail, it's not farfetched to believe that this is certainly stifling the progress of some really interesting and worthwhile ideas.

Our society is poorer if nearly 50% of people that want to start a project don't because they fear they might fail. 

People we see as geniuses like Richard Branson, Alan Sugar and James Dyson have had multiple failures before they found success and perhaps are seen as geniuses because these failures aren't as heralded nearly as much as they ought to. Perhaps if they were, we'd realise that these guys aren't geniuses and maybe we can find success if we give it a go too. Furthermore, it's precisely because of these past failures the aforementioned are as successful as they are today.

We want to try and change this negative culture and show that failure is as important as success and is directly linked to it. While we have a basic skeleton of a potential solution mapped out we would like to consult with fellow explorers (like the amazing Roxanne Persaud of the RSA and Glory of Failure and Stian Westlake of NESTA) of this issue to refine it into something that really works.

Answers on a postcard, please.

speaktous [at] createordielondon [dot] com

Making Money in 2012

Let's say the financial crisis in 2008/2009 broke everything. Let's say it was so hard, quick and deep that it forced us to start over.

Like it wasn't already invented, knowing what we know now how would we re-create money? 

In 2012, the idea that we are still exchanging pieces of paper and numbers on computer screens with a value attached to it seems increasingly absurd, especially when we attach so much importance to it. 

Surely, we could do better job if we were to make this two thousand year old concept again for today?

How could we remake money so that it maintains the link between something easily exchangeable and value; however something that also upholds the link between it's value and what you do to earn it; i.e. stolen money is virtually valueless, whilst money earned for great things is more valuable.

How would we make it more traceable and personal yet unobtrusive and easy to manage?

We're interested in re-imagining the means of exchange that money is and not necessarily the value attached to it - that's a whole other thing.

So if we could how would we remake money for a modern world?

Jobs on Life

When you grow up you tend to get told the world is the way it is and you're life is just to live your life inside the world. Try not to bash into the walls too much. Try to have a nice family, have fun, save a little money.

That's a very limited life. Life can be much broader once you discover one simple fact: Everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you and you can change it, you can influence it, you can build your own things that other people can use.

Once you learn that, you'll never be the same again.

- Steve Jobs

Platform Liveº by New Media Age

In July, create or die organised the first Platform Live event with some incredible partners. Special thanks to NESTA, (RED)™, BBH, McCann London, Grey and TBWA, without which this wouldn't be possible. Here's what New Media Age had to say.

Click here to download:
McCann Erickson to offer youth placements following Platform Live event | News | New Media Age.pdf (186 KB)
(download)

Start-Ups, HR People and Accountability

Isn't is strange that start-ups attract different types of talent than established, institutional organisations?

Most successful start-ups will tell you it's the team that's more instrumental to driving the company to success, than the talented founder or even the brilliant idea. Venture capitalists like Peter Thiel, early stage investor of facebook and Founder + Managing Parter at the Founder's Fund, will only invest in a company with a great team.

People that innovate and drive huge growth surely are an asset to any company. New or old. So why are large companies so bad at finding/attracting this talent or are they finding them but stifling them from being as good as they really are? We think it's a mixture but we'll focus this piece on the former. 

We've worked with some of the brightest and forward thinking people who are HR Directors or responsible for their company's recruitment. But what's stifling larger companies is their recruitment people's unwillingness to take risks with employees. They'd rather hire the young Oxbridge candidate as it's a no-brainer, than the unproven yet ambitious drop-out who's hell bent on creating something awesome. Because if their risk doesn't pay off they're accountable and have to face the wrath of their boss. And so, more very capable, but anodyne candidates find places at more and more companies. 

Start-ups don't have this problem, they can hire truly on a merit-only basis and take risks because they don't have a superior shouting at them if they make a mistake hiring. As such, while many start-ups fail, the successful ones usually create a diverse, world-beating team.