Visions of a Freeman - Brain Age - 1, June of 2014
Intelligence in the system.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Hi :) Ah now I understand why the BBC has so much dumb people. XD … :I Pff! LLOOLL!!!
SYD WEIGHS IN| 29 May 2014
The problem with smart people

When hiring, promoting, even just putting together your team, you should look for the smartest people in the room, right? Not so fast.

Intelligence is one of those characteristics where there is a minimum level needed to be in the game. Once past that, too much intelligence can be a drawback or worse.

The Enron management team, for example, were known as “the smartest guys in the room.” Consider how well that turned out. The former US energy trading company tapped its top talent to run some of its most-profitable divisions, almost without supervision. The managers, despite their smarts, were an arrogant, insecure bunch who took wild chances and lost billions of dollars. The company dissolved in 2001.

"The problem with really smart people is that they often think they know more than everyone else."

Certainly, the job for which you’re hiring makes a difference. I do want big-time intelligence for researchers, analysts, and coders, but you can lock those folks in a room and let them do their thing because they work on their own. If they lack emotional intelligence or interpersonal skills, any damage they do is limited because of their independent work.

But do I really need to find the smartest managers?

The problem with smart people

The problem with really smart people is that they often think they know more than everyone else. Maybe they do. But that doesn’t help them when they’re trying to get others to buy into whatever they’re selling. For example, I was coaching one senior executive who always seemed to be one step ahead of everyone else on her team. At least, that’s what she thought. One of the biggest challenges she faced was recognising that other managers didn’t necessarily view the world the same way. That meant she needed to invest the time to bring them along if she wanted to get traction on her preferred projects.

When you know the right answer, you often can’t believe that everyone else doesn’t just see the same thing, and fall into line.

Unfortunately, organisations don’t work that way. Especially when working with peers when you don’t have direct authority over them, the only way to get momentum toward your preferred outcome is to sell them on the idea. Imposing your “superior” solution just doesn’t work.

The irony is that sometimes the most talented person can make for one of the most ineffective managers. You can see this in sports, for example, where retired superstars often find it difficult to coach or manage successfully because they are now supervising lesser mortals that weren’t blessed with the same degree of innate talent.

Wayne Gretzky, the Canadian hockey legend who retired with more personal scoring records than anyone in the history of professional hockey, was remarkably ineffective as a head coach. The same may be said about Michael Jordan, perhaps the greatest basketball player ever, who has never been able to lead a successful basketball organisation whether as general manager, president or owner.

It could be just as bad when we let the A-level crowd go to market with what they see as the best product. I remember talking to managers at Singapore-based Creative Technology, Inc after the iPod had just been introduced by Apple. Creative had a technologically superior MP3 player, but customers preferred the iPod, to the utter dismay of the Creative managers. They just couldn’t understand how customers were so irrational!

But it turns out that the best technology doesn’t always win, just like the smartest people don’t always succeed.

It’s not just brainpower where more may also not be better. For example, is it good to keep reducing the time it takes for technicians to help customers requesting assistance via call-in centres? What about the quality of the advice, how the customer perceives the value of the advice or even whether it’s such a great idea in the first place to try to optimise on speed?

Zappos, the US-based online shoe store, actually rewards employees for spending more time with customers who call in with questions about products they are thinking of buying. For Zappos, customer experience on a call trumps any simple metric that, in its view, can actually detract from profitability.

When employees are motivated to cycle through customers as fast as possible, platitudes that the customer comes first are just that — empty, cynical slogans that mean nothing to sales staff.

And let’s not forget the side effect that accompanies this culture. People who really care about service look elsewhere for work. That leaves demotivated employees who actually do a good job of hitting their time targets. In the end, you get what you want, but you lose because of un-nuanced thinking that more is better than less.

Call it brilliantly fulfilling the wrong vision.

The quest for more may well be the defining ethos of our time, but the downside that comes with this single-minded fixation warrants greater attention. Relying on the smartest and the most talented to lead and manage people and teams may be one of those things that sounds a lot better in theory than in practice.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt BBC has a real problem with smart people. XD LLOOLL!!! Great, then put dumb people. :I Dumb people cool for BBC.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt No kidding, one has to be dumb to like BBC News anyway :S LOL! Dumb people for dumb people. Hahaha.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Well, I do not manage people. :I I manage software, software manages people. It's a new kind of work. :)

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt We do not manage people. We operate a system, sometimes of mutual consensus. We just see. To keep it together.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt I do not give orders to anybody. :I I change a software. People use the software with no manager.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt So I never manage anyone. XD We just all agree on a software, someone has to look at it, keep it together.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt In your case you do not manage anyone. You see to the artistic software part. Getting input from artists.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt In Angel Academy same thing, defines the software interface, the enforcer takes the input from users.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt That is provided by the art & academic directors. Lets imagine. :) Imagine there is a TRIBalance system.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt And Emma is in charge of the culture part. :D Yay! Well, she does not program, she oversees the requirements...

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt of the artist users. Like some type of support staff. She proposes the changes to software, sees that it is good.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Then after showing the proposed changes, sends it to the programming team. :) The enforcer, who then programs it.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt That means that the enforcer has no management at all, in the terms BBC put it. XD It is just a programming entity.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt The enforcer, Me, signs the authorization to make it happen in the software part. My job is to keep cohesion.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt And I can get hundreds of good ideas, which I must administer, show, make a vote system & finally chose.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt An enforcer decides what solutions become official. Just to keep it together. :) Integrity of system.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt In Emma's case, she receives the needs of the artists, leads the discussion systems as support chief for artists.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Then passes Me the requirements for software change. I then send to software community for suggestions.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Then I get many suggestions, I chose which one. :P In that sense there is no leadership at all. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt It's just one big Computer system that works in much the same way as Microsoft. XD Only more open & transparent.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt To let the software manage, and not the people, is a new concept implemented by TRIBalance. :) Where...

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Managers act a bit more like support staff and channellers. We work for the users, not the users for us. XD New!

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt It's a totally different mind set that the BBC is not familiar with. It does not exclude intelligent people.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt So it will literally BEAT THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF BBC XD CRUSH IT ALL THE WAY TO EXTINCTION! :D Yay!

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Because it is not a Pyramidal Elitist Dumb system, it is... A BRAIN SYSTEM :D Yay! Hahaha. The more intelligent...

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt neurons, the better. :) While the BBC tries to get dumber people, which is a process called "Falling".

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt TRIBalance systems do not use "Going Under" techniques: … XD Does not exploit dumbness.
Evanescence - Going Under lyrics

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt TRIBalance instead of pushing people down, it motivates intelligence. … Powers intelligence.
Evanescence-Bring Me To Life lyrics

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt We work on software, not on people. XD Software is to serve the people. User is boss. New concept :D

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt So as you can see, I do not rule over people, never. XD I rule over the shape of a system. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt And you do not rule over people, you are the support staff of the people to the system. :D Yay! Hahaha.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt In such a working, what do we care if people are intelligent? :I We like it. XD We have no problem with that.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt While the BBC is scared of intelligence. :I Does not stand a chance. I,WILL,CRUSH,THAT,DINOSAUR!!! :D Yay!

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt You see BBC works under the plutocratic idea that the elite is the boss, the user is the slave. :S

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt I work under a totally different concept. The user is the owner, the programmers work for the users.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt And we all administer a system, they administer people's consciousness. Primitive, obsolete, ineffective. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt This concept is nothing new. It is the concept most Software Companies have. :) System is priority.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt The intelligence is in the system, not the manager. :P Creating thus collective intelligence, thus social brains.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt While they fear intelligence, the TRIBalance channels it, the more the better. XD That is why they will go extinct.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt and that is why the System will prevail. XD Intelligence is in the collective system, not the manager. :D

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt That is why I say I won't manage anyone. :I I just shape the system. You do not manage anyone, you support crew. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt So programmer works for support crew, making you BOSS :D Yay! You are My boss :) since system is for users.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Microsoft has that in a similar way. It has a development department and a support department. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt That is the new kind of management, the collective brain system management. Collective intelligence. :D

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt There is the high consciousness layer, or Angel layer, there is the normal consciousness layer and there is the...

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt system core choice layer. I am creating a real brain XD But instead of neurons I use people. :P Yay!

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt You two have culture system channeling. Other academies have their own support staff, like Journalism.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt That is why I called it the Brain Era. :) The social brain systems era. Intelligent social systems. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Transparency gives it excellent use of resources. XD Making it's survival a lot better than other systems. :D

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt The efficient use of resources in a transparent way is a winner on the evolution game of the future. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Maybe I start showing the idea on 3D games. :) The future brain societies. :D Yay! Each building a brain.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Building has a food floor :P Zips the food up to people. XD By special elevators in closed plastic containers.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt If you don't want to pay food, cool XD You get it for free XD But it will probably be dull :I LOL!

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt if you want better food, you pay XD No one has any kitchen. :P There is a freaking floor for that. Efficient!

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Fuel efficiency :D And since food is bought in HUGE QUANTITIES by one entity, prices drop for whole sale. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Without kitchens, the fuel efficiency increases a lot. :) Think of it like a space ship building on earth XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt With food on their tummies, free or paid, people behave a lot better. :D Yay! They healthy. :)

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Ok that for the digestive system. XD Then comes the security system, the floor for police. :) and the Academic floor

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt The mini apartments, with just an office space and bedroom, for 1 or 2 people only. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Baby and mother, or baby and father sometimes. It expands to 2 people. If people want more, they in trouble. :P

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Can be one room with a dual bed, one auxiliary room space, one little office. XD 1 apartment per person.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Making a building much like a Space ship actually, with optimal use of resources. :P No heat misused.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt No fuel misused, all contamination controlled. All crime controlled. Live on earth like in mars. XD LOL!

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt The BRAIN BUILDINGS :O! Coolness. XD Yay! Intelligent buildings of the future. :)

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt No one will have a refrigerator any more, nor a kitchen. XD Kitchen floor and storage floor serve it with robots.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt for maximum energy efficiency. :D Yay! Robots don't need light on fridges. XD And cold is well used.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt All the wastes of that super building is efficiently processed & recycled. :P Using trash boxes elevators.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt It's much like a spaceship :I But here on earth XD Can have shared computer systems too. :) All in all...

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt living in that thing is a lot cheaper, more ecological, more fuel efficient & healthier. Megapolis :D

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Kids use computers, no more schools. Tightly controlled computers. With Academic networks & social classroom systems.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Games have to include those concepts. :) To see it happen in virtuality. To start planning for the future.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt The intelligent buildings. :D The brain societies, the sustainable future, fuel efficient. Well just removing the...

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt kitchens and the air conditioning or heating units from each separate apartment reduces energy a lot. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Most of us do not use all the capability of our refrigerators, use too much energy in kitchens and temperature.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt So expect future high tech buildings :) Intelligent, ecological buildings. That is the future of brain societies.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Oh people do not have to wait to build them, they can create a game with them. XD To study people.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Oh can be one elevator for food, in closed plastic boxes and containers. :P The slums of tomorrow too.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Oo 1 dual bedroom, 1 kid room or auxiliary, 1 office, 1 bathroom. No kitchen. storage, food & trash elevators. XD

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt That should replace this: … :S So ugly, contaminating & eco-destructive.

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Oo I know how people can pay for a mini sky rise apartment. XD They pay with the land they used on the slum. :P

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Which coordinates are fed into a computer device for National Guard to verify it is used for farming. :) So we...

@DeltaGoodrem @emhewitt Venezuelans recover all that land for food and oxygen making. :D Nice idea. Trading slum for micro apartment.

Back to index.