This blog is about 'Clear Space Thinking' which in turn is about your ability to think for yourself.

Your ability to think for yourself is what informs your future possibilities. Without thinking you will do what you did yesterday – if your environs are stable and your actions successful then this is a good strategy. When the environs are changing then the quality of your thinking is what determines your future possibilities.

When your environs are changing the quality of the minds you 'hang with' is important. You need to be challenged by good thinkers. You need to be exposed to new options, information, and possibilities. You need to be supported by mindsets that extend you. You need to find your own 'clear space'.

Clear Space Thinking has you constantly thinking about your future possibilities. What you think right now is adding or subtracting from your set of futures. Who you 'hang with' right now is adding and subtracting from your set of futures.

Who you 'hang with' influences your mindsets in positive and negative ways in terms of future possibilities. In his book 'The tipping point' Malcolm Gladwell demonstrates this point as he illustrates how contagion works in society. Contagion is spread through a common mindset and as such can be positive or negative – it can lead you to positive or negative future outcomes for you and your family. The latest research suggests if you 'hang with' people who are obese then you increase your chance of being obese too.

The basics of 'Clear Space Thinking' suggest you can optimise your future possibilities if you 'hang with' mindsets that challenge you to think beyond what sufficed for you and yours yesterday.

Where do you live and work in this digital world? Do you work from home? Do you work in a networked organisation? Do you consider yourself a success?

If you work from home you are probably already part of a digital village. Your digital village is no doubt a rapidly expanding universe. It is a digital community and as such has a very a different culture to most C20th workplaces. The way things are done in these virtual spaces requires new skills and disciplines. Colleagues are often no more than 'imaginary friends' who magically appear on your screen at any time of day or night. Collaborating and cooperating with these digital partners is a skill that has to be honed and honed quickly. Speed is the essence of this workspace. You are present to make decisions, to design new arrangements, or to automate continuities. You are present to provide 'use value'. Do you provide 'use value'? If so you are networked if not you are being shutdown.

You know when you provide 'use value' because you find you are being networked. You become an instant supplier to a networked organisation. As your network 'ramps up' you find you are being connected to clusters of users. These are revenue clusters for you and your work. These clusters support you. These clusters are usually not linked but they do tend to respond to the same offerings. As the numbers of clusters increase you will find that your need to automate your processing grows.

If you are spending about equal amounts of time automating the delivery of your 'use value' as you are developing new products or services then you are a huge success. The digital world loves you and especially it loves the 'digital you' it deals with each and every day.

You can trawl the internet, books, articles, youtube, magazines, etc looking for answers but there are only two answers you need.

You need to know if your current business or organisation is a 'success' and whether that 'success' is good for you. If you can hear yourself putting out a resounding “yes, yes” to that two part question then you are part of a good business or organsiation.

Let's explore this a little further.

Case # 1 - You are part of a business or organisation that is a huge 'success' and it suits your mindset, skill set, knowledge bank, ambitions, work ethic, integrity rules, etc. You feel you are an integral part of all that 'success'. You feel alive, present, energetic, etc because you are contributing to a 'success'.

Case # 2 - You are part of a business or organisation that is a huge 'success' and it does not suit you. You are working on one of the least successful projects around the place and so you are feeling frustrated, emply, resigned to your fate, tired, remorseful, depleted, angry with everything and everyone around, etc. You are in a place that is a huge 'success' for others but this is not your experience and so you tend to bag it. You are the one who gets those 'meaningful' glances from colleagues, friends, and family. You are not seen to be credible. You are forced to leave.

Case # 3 - You are part of a business or organisation that is a huge 'success' and it does not suit you but your colleagues know that and have shifted you onto a new project. You find that you and your new cohorts are being asked to 'design' the next big 'success' for your business or organisation. You have found your way into a space where you are partly responsible for the future possibilities of the place. You are working to achieve a future 'success' in line with or exceeding what has gone before. You are a 'success' but your new business or organisation is yet to prove itself. You have half the answer to the riddle and this time the power to achieve the other half is within your sphere of influence. You have a clear and present purpose and that is to provide a future 'success'.

Over a long lunch yesterday my friend was talking about his need 'for more meaning in his life'.

He is very good at making money and he enjoys what he can do with his wealth. BUT he told me he feels the need for 'meaning' in his life. He is currently addressing this need by volunteering his services to his Church and its community. However he is failing to meet his needs. He is frustrated by that fact.

I said “you need some success!” He laughed with the pure joy that comes with the instant release of tension and nodded in agreement. I went on “success provides meaning”..... I told him he is starved of success in his 'faith based' ventures. This point was clear to me because he is slowly but surely being drawn into even bigger and bigger money making schemes. BUT he feels empty. He still feels a compelling need for 'meaning'.

That conversation got me thinking – ie 'Clear Space Thinking' - about this issue on my walk this morning. The starting point is that this is a common complaint from people of all ages and strata within my circles. People often say they are 'searching for meaning in their life'. Each one brings a different context, personal circumstance, etc but the longing for something they do not have and can not seem to attain is very much the same.

What do they want and what advice do they usually get?

The advice usually goes like this..... Do what you love to do. Do what you would do for free but do it for money. Make mistakes, make them often, make them fast, and thus become 'potentially' the best at what you do in your industry. Make sure you work with people who are innovative, risk takers, etc. Welcome change. Change all your bad habits. Be agile, flexible, and multi-talented. Just do it. Be like me because I am famous. Be focussed on what is good in your life. Be family orientated. Get your work and life balance right. And so on and so on....

My friend does all that and more. He knows what he is good at and he loves doing it. He knows how to make money by doing what he would happily do for free. BUT he is still searching for meaning in his life.

Are you searching for meaning in your life? If so can I suggest you need to be around success, enjoy your own successes, learn from other people's successes, and wherever possible ensure that all those around you feel they are successful.... In summary “be a success yourself and spread that feeling of success to your cohorts” and you will have all the meaning you seek in your life.

Global business is about to feel the full impacts of digital compression. Compression of time, value chains, processes, and information. These challenges are best met by a new business model I call 'Business Direct'.

Connect and do business direct with consumers. Allow them to pull your products and services to them. Be at ease and comfortable with the fact that digital business is very different. Timelines are compressed by clever use of Information Technology. Value chains are compressed by prosumers (i.e. consumers who are also producers). Processes are compressed by self-service systems. Information is compressed by automated systems, machine to machine transfers, and broadband Internet.

Compression brings new challenges to organisations. The challenge of linking machines to machines (m2m), groups to groups (g2g), clusters to suppliers (c2s), etc. Compression is complementary with digital networking that thrive on the 'inclusion principle'. Compression is a threat to brands, exclusion, protection of Intellectual Property rights, etc. that work on the 'exclusion principle'.

Business direct is here and here to stay. Why? Because it works. It works for the consumer and for the business. Once the parameters of supply of a product or service are set then the consumer can self-serve and the business can automate the information, delivery, and payment processes.

Do you find you have almost nothing to complain about these days with customer service? If you do lodge a complaint you find it is often because you are having a 'bad day' and so it has little to do with the actual service provided. Sure there are still silly mistakes, mix ups, and minor annoying events along the way but usually you and I are being well served by C21st business.

Public Service comes from people in many different forms – career, volunteer, philanthropic, etc. Increasingly people are volunteering their labour to public service. But the mainstay of the public sector is salaried officials. These public servants have a full-time paid job, they have a career, and they probably serve under many different political administrations. Most have a 'public service branded mindset' otherwise they would not survive the rigors of such a career. Their mindset is geared to public service, it is geared to the use of taxpayer's funds for the public good, it is geared to preserving and improving any given sense of community, and it is geared to continuity.

Do you work for a major brand? Nike, Starbucks, Virgin, Apple, Google, Microsoft, GE, etc. All these organisations cast a huge brand footprint over the globe. These brands are undoubtedly an asset for the shareholders. Are they an asset to people who work there? The obvious answer is yes. They work for a known brand and they dine out on that fact. Consumers want to buy their products so the marketing and selling of them is fun. You have a job that you love and the place is 'rocking' with success.

Most people assume that working for a known brand is a dream come true but is this always the case?

Nike has been in trouble for its labour practices in the third world. How does one cope with that? Apple sacked Steve Jobs and the culture changed to one not unlike Pepsi Cola – but he is back now with the iPod and with a whole new brand image. Virgin is a brand built around the “risk taking and marketing exploits” of Sir Richard Branson so there are always challenges to be met living within that brand. Google is the current darling of the internet but those Googlers who are not 'front and centre' working on brand shaping projects like Street Maps, Youtube, Google Gears, Google News, etc do not always feel so connected to all that success. Microsoft was hauled into court for its business practices – how does that sit with you if you work at the big Redmond Campus? The rise and rise of Starbucks has had its critics lately – does it still feel just great to make coffee on 42^nd Street in New York for your regular commuters? GE has changed its focus and so the long serving plastics division has been let go – GE is suddenly a new brand with a new direction but are you comfortable with all this change?

Brands develop into mindsets and as such they can be both an asset and a liability for all concerned.

Clear Space Thinking has you 'design future possibilities' just beyond the reach of your best competitors.

Hard, sustained, and determined thinking is the root cause of good design.

Problem is most people do not like to do 'the thinking' and therefore do not produce 'the design'. What you will see is people advocating superior design through storytelling about creatives, or mouthing slogans, or reciting criptic quotes about the creative process, etc.

Marissa Mayer at Google is a heroine of mine because she is at the coalface when it comes to 'designing future possibilities' and she advocates working with really intelligent people who can think for themselves. She advocates hard work. She advocates a constraint such that your creativity and design potential is put between a 'rock and hard place' so the practical aspects of your thinking come through. She advocates attention to detail. She advocates being stuck on 'purpose' – for Google that means search, search, and more search.

People often ask me why their organisation is so inept at “this and that” yet so good at “that and this”. The answer is simple – in some areas of their organisation is well designed while other areas are not. In some areas 'a hard and fast commitment' has been made to do the thinking required to produce quality 'future possibilities'.

The interesting thing about conventional management is that all the hard thinking is done by the same people (ie consultants from McKinsey, Booz Allen, etc). These consultants do their thinking with a group of talent or a skill set that is geared to their revenue model. These consultants all come up with the same thinking. These consultants all come up with the same business and organisational models. These consulting firms keep most businesses and organisations 'locked into mediocrity' because they limited their 'future possibilities'.

Organisations that let consulting firms do the hard thinking about their vision, mission, strategies, structure, leadership, etc tend to limit the 'design of their future possibilities' to growth, growth, and more growth. There is organic growth, growth by merger or acquisition, growth by product/service line extensions, etc. Their plan is to be successful through growth rather than by product or service innovations. It is not surprising to discover therefore that all these organisations are inhabited by conventional thinkers who embrace conventional design. This means their future possibilities are matched to the economic cycles they ride out during their existence. Good times bring success and poor times brings struggle.

Organisations where the hard thinking is focused on 'a clear and present purpose' tend to continuously enhance their future possibilities. These organisations do well in good or poor economic cycles. These organisations are full of ideas, prototypes, simulations, etc which constantly expand their quality 'future possibilities'. It is not too surprising to find that such organisations, large and small, are inhabited by radical thinkers who embrace radical design. This means their 'future possibilities' are dictated by their inventions, innovations, and superior quality products and services not by their prevailing environs.

What did you make money on today and what did you give away – free?

Did the “use value” exceed the $ value you charged your customers?

Did the “use value” exceed the $ cost of your free gift?

How much of your passive income comes after you provide goods and services for free?

Can you increase the free component of your business?

Can you greatly increase the free component?

Are you ready to have passive income totally exceed your ability to give money away?

Are you having fun yet?

Clear Space Thinking is about breaking the continuities in your life that keep you miserable and poor.......

Multiframing means managers have a structure to handle all environs. This structure is a mix of systems, technologies, processes, and people. The structure is geared to change and change quickly whenever the environs change. The structure is both agile and flexible because it is networked. It is a complex network of systems or of people as appropriate for the prevailing context and environs.

An amazing thing has happened to business and organisations models in the early C21st. They are becoming more complex and larger than ever before. They have broken the shackles of C20th business and organisation models. The shackles began with vision which led to plans, which led to structured leadership, which led to competitive strategies, which led to growth by acquisition, which led to brand dominance, which led to exclusive distribution networks, which led to.....

The new unshackled business and organisation models are both more complex and simple because they all work as purposeful networks.

Purposeful networks are complex because they are inclusive not exclusive distribution networks, they are populated by “prosumers”, they are quick to form and to disperse, they are transparent, they are robust for both small and large numbers of users, they are.... Purposeful networks are also simpler because they are centred on you, they are pull systems, they dis-intermediate layers and layers of the old business models, they are information based, they are reusable, they are.....

We have transitioned into the era of "multiframe organisations". These organisations are efficient and effective in ways that we are not accustomed to seeing. They have customer service levels that were simply not achievable just ten years ago. They can become huge in very quick time. They can become truly global.

Transforming Google into iGoogle looks like hard yards.

Google is about online activity while iGoogle is about off line activity - the breakout tool is Google Gears.

Google was about “the best search results” while iGoogle is about “my search results” - again the breakout tool is Google Gears.

Why is this transformation likely to be hard yards? Well I could be wrong but I sense the Googleplex culture is not a very good fit with the needs of iGoogle. One bad sign is the recent appointment of a “Chief Culture Officer” to retain key elements of the original culture.

Surely what iGoogle needs is a new culture – so where will this spring from? There is no obvious answer to such a question for an outsider like me. There is no way for me to tell who has the courage, determination, respect, and ideas to forge a new culture for iGoogle. But with the talent assembled within the place there are sure to be plenty of candidates. Will a few of them step up to the plate and take on this role? Will they be allowed to break the mould? It is impossible for me to say because the Googleplex is locked down and definitely not open to outside scrutiny.

All this raises some key questions in my mind about Google/iGoogle.

Should Larry Page go off and do other things, like putting tourists into space, in a similar way that Steve Jobs took a break? Is Larry Page able to walk away from the Googleplex for five to ten years? If he chooses not to walk away can he maintain his focus on search while letting others build a new culture for the new off line capabilities of iGoogle? How much longer will Marissa Mayer stay at the Googleplex? What will happen if Google icons such as Page and Mayer start leaving the Googleplex? Who will step up to forge the new business models and organisational culture required to sustain iGoogle? If released from the current mindsets and strictures of the Googleplex what will Google Gears bring to personalised search and enquiry on the net?

Finally the hard yards question. Can Google transmogrify into iGoogle with the current Googleplex team?

Big Red Boat organisation is all about new business and organisation theory and practice.

The “driving purpose” within a Big Red Boat business is to provide greater “use value” than $ charged.

When your business is based on “low cost of entry” then the Big Red Boat way to do business is clear.

You need to provide a broadly based fellowship (systems led people).

You need a process culture designed to fit the prevailing mores of your feeder communities.

Your low cost organisaiton will feature:

• self-service

• micro-managed execution

• “state of the art” automation.

The “tipping point” for your organisation is pull systems. Systems2people (s2p). This tipping point is attained when you “deploy” technology to link people within and beyond your organisation. You need to facilitate self-service and automated processing as much as possible. You enable “fellowship” to form because people are delighted with their outcomes. They are aware of the “use value” you provide them.

The classic example of building a new business through “fellowship clusters” was Skype. It built a VoiP communication link to replace conventional telephones for its users who belonged to a broadband “fellowship cluster”.

How much of your Intellectual Property have you given away today?

Why do you keep it so tightly guarded?

What are you saving it all for?

How will it wreck your current revenue models if you just give it all away “free” today?

What exciting new IP can you create once you give away the stuff you cling to today?

Why not have a clearance sale on all your IP for today only – give it away “free”?

What will you be doing tomorrow apart from benefiting from your sale and creating a better future?

I had you imagine you were a Googler at the Googleplex facing a tough decision about your future because iGoogle is coming with its Google Gears, YouTube, Street Maps, etc. You faced a tough decision because you might not be a good fit with the new revenue models around the place. I asked you to consider your options by mapping them out and preparing to choose one of them. You did that and now you are wondering about your real job. You are wondering whether to stay or to go. You are wondering about the comfort factor between you and your team. You are wondering about the robustness, reliability, and scalability of the current revenue models you and your team are attached to and what to do to strengthen them.

You and your team are not in a Big Red Boat organisation – well guess what almost no one is. You and your team are struggling to stay competitive. Your team is struggling to make the current revenue models work efficiently and effectively. Your team is under stress to perform. Your team is not clear about its purpose. Your team is fatigued. Your team is going through the motions. Your team is beginning to “finger point” when even small things go wrong. Your team is being asked to change as part of a larger culture transformation.

Start to build your own Big Red Boat organisation within this train wreck. You know where to begin to fix things if you have been reading these riffs. Get started today. Build yourself a Big Red Boat team. Once you have a Big Red Boat team you can choose to stay or to go. Perhaps your whole team can go to along to iGoogle and help them out.

Where to begin? For those who may have just joined in this Big Red Boat conversation – there is a simple but surprising answer. You begin with your revenue models. What do you avoid? You avoid spending any time on anything to do with culture, leadership, strategy, vision, teaming, etc. Just do the money thing first.

The Boeing 747 was dubbed the “jumbo jet” because it was way beyond what most air travelers thought possible. Now “jumbo organisations” are coming. Like the jumbo jets before them these will be huge in all respects. They will be a quantum leap on what we think of as big organisations today.

Jumbo organisations will redefine work and workplaces. First they are networks not traditional organisations. Second they are based on the new network economics of inclusion. Third the more they scale the greater the benefits to each consumer. Fourth they thrive on prosumers (ie producers and consumers). Fifth they are based on the notion of abundance not scarcity. Sixth they are based on self-regulating clusters of supply and demand. Seventh they treat intellectual property as a free good. Eighth they are cooperatives. Ninth...

The important question is will a jumbo organisation suit you? Will it suit the ways you do your best work?

Let us see. All you need do is answer the following questions.

Are you open to new ideas?
Do you like managing virtual assets?
Can you hold two contradictory ideas in your mind at the same time?
Do you enjoy changes at work?
Are you easy to share with?
Are you comfortable working in small groups in which no one is the designated lead?
Are you comfortable with the notion of your intellectual property being shared with peers, colleagues, consumers, etc without any direct compensation for you?
Are you comfortable with the impact of new revenue models on your work?
Are you looking for new challenges?
Do you enjoy cooperative workplaces?
Do you speak more than one language?
Are you comfortable with new technologies?
Are you ready to work in a jumbo organisation?

Once you answer those questions please ask someone who knows you well to answer them on your behalf.

Compare the two sets of answers and you will know if you are ready to work for a jumbo organisation.

Googlers face a unique challenge. Why? They are helping to shape a change of purpose at the Googleplex.

When an organisation changes its purpose everything changes – revenue models, culture, mores, etc. In this case everything will change as Google becomes iGoogle (see earlier riff). At the leading edge of this change will be a master process for “networking the Googleplex”.

The core of iGoogle is the cooperation and participation by its users of search and associated applications.

The iGoogle business is still centered on search but its focus is on you and me. It is about what you need from your search results. What you intend to do with your results. What you have learnt from your current search activity and what you want to store away for future reference (eg an iGoogle feature that gives you a personal search memory like “learning FAQS"). What other applications you need to fully apply or to exploit your search results (eg YouTube). What means of communication you need to share your search results with peers, colleagues, family, and friends (eg enhanced Gmail). What applications you need to integrate your search results with your content creation (eg Google Gears).

The iGoogle business has potential partners, you and me, that Google did not have. These partners will form into “iGoogle Clusters”. They will cluster on use. They will cluster on revenue generation. They will cluster on participation – some of these clusters will include people who could could become “volunteer" iGooglers. All these clusters will eventually become an integral part of the new iGoogle network.

The iGooglers (ie those living within the Googleplex ) will therefore have to build a networked culture. What is a networked culture? It is “a way of doing things” that benefits from any increase in scale. It is a simple case where big is beautiful and jumbo is magnificient. The scale of iGoogle in 2020 could be truly mind blowing. The old notions that “small is beautiful” or that “the next big thing is small” are about to be truly tested.

This emerging iGoogle business could be the first in a new league of extremely large organisations. These “jumbo organisations” will force you and me to invent our own management theory and practice. They will force you and me to adopt new mental models of organisation. They will force you and me to rethink the meaning of work and workplace.

Jumbo organisations will be networks rather than organisational entities as we have known companies to be in the past. These massive networking entities will link large self-forming clusters of users or prosumers (ie producers and consumers) in ways we have not seen before.

The new iGoogle culture therefore needs to be as innovative as Google was in the beginning but not the same. Google built a culture from scratch around its unique search engine. It was the culture of "the development shop" with a counter-culture element (eg Stanford University and Burning Man) to sustain it.

The iGoogle business needs to be different. It needs to become a development network. A network that enables you and me, as its users, to participate in its future progress. It needs to be a networked culture that can reach way beyond what made Google such a successful entity. It needs to ensure the iGooglers are “networking the Googleplex”.

The key for Googlers to understand about this change from Google to iGoogle is that it is all about “purpose”.

Google was all about creating a “search engine” that could cope with the ever expanding universe on the Internet. Google began life therefore as a grub with a very specific purpose. It survived because its food supplies – ie the passive revenue models attached to search – were abundant. The Google grub was innovative, minimalist, determined, playful, and moral. This combination saw it grow and grow and grow.

As Google grew it formed a cocoon – its Googleplex. The Googleplex was important because it is a controlled micro environment for Googlers. The Googleplex is the hub of the Google grub life and culture. The Googleplex is the laboratory within which Googler's can create, innovate, and consolidate. The Googleplex is the hub of the Google networked economy that supports all its Googlers. The Googleplex is the hub of “a culture of discipline” that keeps all Googlers' sights firmly fixed on their clear and present purpose.

The Googleplex is the cocoon from which iGoogle, the emerging butterfly, will slowly emerge.

What an amazing butterfly iGoogle will become if it can emerge intact from the Googleplex. However breaking out of the cocoon could prove a major challenge for Googlers. When you invent a whole new economy as a mere grub it must be difficult to let go of so much of what made you so successful. But success as a grub does not imply success as a butterfly.

The biggest challenge for Google right now is the one posed by a change in purpose. Whereas Google was about generic search results iGoogle is about “your search results”. Sounds a simple change but it is not. It will demand a new culture. It will demand a life changing “breakout” from the Googleplex mentality. It will demand a commitment to a new purpose from “iGooglers”. It will demand a transmogrification from Google at the height of its powers – to put that into perspective this was never achieved by Microsoft. Microsoft is increasing the size of its battle hardened cocoon not breaking out from it.

The iGoogle butterfly will focus on you and me as individuals who use “search and linked applications” to fulfill our current and future needs. As this butterfly emerges you will link your Gmail, Google Gears, YouTube, Google Street Maps, etc as you become a fully fledged iGoogle user.

If iGoogle is to succeed at the level of its antecedent, Google, you will become and active participant in its evolution.