Pre-Ramble:  Darn it Gary, another astonishing current event has drawn me off topic … I promise I’ll get back to the business of innovation and creativity straight away, but who can resist the bloody spectacle of Friday night’s NHL Capitals/Canadiens playoff game? (Not it at right.)

Sure, there is always a lot of action in hockey… lots of fast skating, checking, icing, sticking, sliding, sweating, slamming and stuff. The fans love it!  Friday’s game had an extra bit of excitement though, when Capital’s center Eric Belanger took a high stick to the face off the hand of Canadian defenseman Marc Andre Bergeron in the first period of Montreal’s 2-1 victory in game 5 of the playoff series.

According to AP reports, Belanger needed some “serious dental work at the arena,” in fact, he ended up losing a total of 9 teeth, even pulling one out himself on the sidelines to ready his situation for a return to the ice later in the game. Explains Belanger:

” I knew I was in trouble, but what are you going to do? It’s the playoffs.”

According to the experts at SimplyTeeth.com (grizzly photo alert there):

• The leading cause of oral injuries are sports, violence, falls and motor collisions.  … I think we’re safe to say that Belanger’s incident involves a combination of all of these. 
• A visit to the dentist is necessary following any injury to a tooth.  … Good plan.
• Follow-up treatment will likely involve a root canal procedure, as the nerve and blood vessels within the tooth have been damaged or even severed.  … So, 9 root canals?
• Mouthguards are designed to protect the teeth, gums and jaws; they should always be worn when there is a risk from injury.  … Ok.
• Mouthguards can be purchased over-the-counter at many sports shops and pharmacies, however it is preferable to have a professional mouthguard made by your dentist – it will have a better fit and will be less bulky.  … Yes, when we are dressed in full hockey gear, the last thing we need is a bulky mouthguard.

How tough is a hockey player?  So, I was sufficiently repulsed and impressed by this report and, in the name of research, felt it my bloggeristic duty to check out the spectacle for myself. I’ll spare you the video link, but suffice it to say, the guy had a mouthful of whatever and was swiftly ushered off to the sidelines.

More interesting than the replay of the event (viewed by some 71,000 fans on the YouTube site), were the random sentiments left by spectators of all ilk (semi-cleaned-up sampling): 

“Every single player in the NHL is as tough as nails… bar none!”

“Hockey is for boys, rugby is for man’s.”

“Looks like the hit pretty much took out the tooth mostly. seems like he barely tried pulling that sh*t out.”

“Tough? The tooth was already f***ed…”

“What do you call a hockey player with all his teeth?……. a rookie ”

” [referring to previous comment about how supremely tougher rugby is than hockey] … So? There is also no ice, which is harder than grass, no boards or glass, and the ball isn’t shot as hard as a puck. There is also less physical contact. Do you have trouble thinking logically or something? I don’t have all day to correct every stupid irrelevant point you make.”

“Wud be tough if he had trouble pulling it out, but it was probably already clean off in his mouth. He didn’t hafta yank it at all.”

“Hockey is stupid.”

Say it with flowers.  I guess my only question at this point is, what is the proper etiquette around hitting someone in the face with a hockey stick? Assuming it is an accidental event, which it undoubtedly is in hockey, right? … Do you respond immediately, approaching the motionless body to say “Sorry” ?  …  ”Oops” perhaps?  … Or, would you wait and send a heartfelt note of apology at a later time?  Hand-written on personalized stationery?  Is it ever acceptable to send this kind of correspondence via email?  What about flowers or a token gift?  A tin of saltwater taffy or beef-jerky is probably not appropriate — jaw-breakers, definitely out.  Suggestions?

The Take-Away:  Don’t forget to brush and floss.

Pre-Ramble: In the interest of reigning in on the random potpourri of stuff I cover in the blog here, I promised my new-found blogging brand-identity guru, Gary (more about him at a later date) that I would keep my posts short, tight and focused on my niche topics, innovation and creativity. Great plan. Yes. Go. Ready.

Well, needless to say, I managed to breach that plan almost instantaneously by posting what is probably one of my longest entries ever last week. I knew it was long, but in my own defense, it was right on topic - scoping around in people’s heads to get a better understanding of how they think and what inspires them is totally aligned with innovation, and one of my very favorite things to do. And, I couldn’t leave out the part about Nerf balls.

Spoiler alert. Ok, so, in another failed attempt, I will now keep the blog entry brief while veering completely off topic …  I never thought I’d have to state my position on this, but the recent headliner in WSJ’s Personal Journal (4/22/10) has pushed my hand — I will never spend $3,000 on a pair of lederhosen.

“Not since the Von Trapp children donned their lederhosen (German for “leather trousers”) in “The Sound of Music” has the fashion world seen so many variations on the traditional attire of Bavarian Boys. Naturally, the look has been transformed for contemporary women. Gone are the front flaps and suspenders. Many of the new leather shorts look like regular pleated and cuffed shorts – with a certain swagger.”

The “city shorts” look, the latest innovation/trend in fashion, is supposed to imbue the wearer with a versatile, ”effortless sensuality” … 

“It’s got that rocker feel, but it’s also casual … Teen idol Miley Cyrus recently wore black leather shorts while performing, and singer Rihanna appeared on the cover of GQ in a tiny brown pair of Balmain leather shorts – and nothing else.” 

Swagger, my ass!  Oh, yes – this totally fits with my lifestyle.  Next time I’m performing at the grocery store I’ll be sure to rock the shorts with some sturdy tights and a tasseled loafer. (I know better than to attempt the bare-legged option.) Fashion reporter Rachel Dodes offers some quick tips (accompanied here by my smarty-pants remarks) on how to pull off the look:

1. “Keep it simple – when wearing leather shorts, it’s easy to become a bad cliche” – No, seriously?
2. “Wear leather shorts for daytime as well as nighttime” - From where I sit, as long as you don’t leave the house, you’d be appropriate wearing the look at any time of day or night.
3. “Be conscious of what looks good on you” – This is code for, “If you’re old or fat don’t even finish reading this blog.”
4. “Don’t wear the style in more formal offices” - I’m sure it will be fine in your casual offices, particularly if you pair it with your feather vest (shown above right).
5. “Don’t wear leather shorts with high heels or anything too revealing … Leather shorts can look ‘a little cheesy’ with platforms” – Especially if you are working street corners late at night.
6. “Don’t be shy; leather shorts have attitude… Designer Laurie Lynn Stark advises wearing leather shorts with ‘a low boot, a bikini top and a scarf around your head.” – This requires no comment.

The Take-Away: See point #6 above.

Parts of this post originally appeared in a feature that I wrote for the PUSH Institute. A new iteration of that piece appears below. 

Pre-Ramble:  A recent WSJ headline notes that at 3M, “Innovation Comes in Tweaks and Snips.”  3M CEO George Buckley charged staffers to find cheaper ways to make products like respirator masks as a way to improve products and cut costs, suggesting that in hard economic times like these, innovations can be found “at the bottom of the pyramid” rather than in pursuit of a single “grandiose invention.” 

Huh? Certainly, innovation can come in many shapes and sizes, but the brand of iterative chicken scratching suggested in this charge raises serious questions about the definition of “innovation.” For example, can any/every iterative maneuver, be it cost cutting, process improvement, or otherwise tweaking and snipping, be considered “innovation”? Where are the lines drawn around an “ah-hah moment” born of the elusive “creative spark,” and simple problem-solving?  Are we wrong to lump the concepts of innovation, invention and creativity into the same category?  Is being “skillful” the same as being “innovative”? What about resourcefulness?  And, where does novelty come into play?

With operations in more than 65 countries, 75,000 employees, and global sales of over $23 billion, 3M leadership must remain engaged on all levels of the innovation pyramid in these tough economic times. No stranger to innovation, Buckley’s training as an electrical engineer combined with a broad knowledge of physics and thermodynamics led to many patented, industry-changing inventions including early prototypes of the front-loading washing machine. In his role as CEO of 3M (current tagline, “Innovative Technology for a Changing World”), Buckley is both an idealist and a realist when it comes to innovation. The cost-cutting exercise around the respirator masks belies the true depth of Mr. Buckley’s creative nature. 

Part genius, part maverick. In 2007, I had an opportunity to sit down with Mr. Buckley to talk about the dynamic of creativity. An intensely curious and widely read man, he described himself as a life-long-learner, engaging in regular inquiry into a wide variety of topics including ancient history, biographies, classical music and the arts. Buckley is comfortable talking in both broad abstract terms and in the vernacular of the pragmatic, Fortune 500 business leader that he is. Introverted and thoughtful, driven to a state of near constant scanning, observation, processing and critiquing, Buckley believes that the creative process occurs at the intersection of intuitive vision, specialized “deep” knowledge and opportunity. He believes that creative discovery is something other than linear processing that “comes on another level of awareness … part genius, part maverick … a willingness to risk, to go out into an unknown realm.”

Whether it’s intensive, intentional brainstorming or pie-in-the-sky day-dreaming, innovation can come at any time in any place.  If the classic anecdotes are true, it would seem that innovations are more likely to come to those who are sitting at a bar doodling on a cocktail napkin. Seems to me that the flash of insight in the “ah-hah” moment is a much sexier way to go than the plodding, nose-to-the-grindstone approach, … some thoughts:

• Value-add.  The nature of the innovation and its value to society is a factor in assessing the innovative quotient of a product or process. Resourcefulness, for example, can be a component of innovative behavior, however it does not necessarily deliver social value. If you’re lost on a deserted island, there will be great personal value in being able to forage for food, fashion shelter out of palm fronds, and create an imaginary friend out of found objects …. But, beyond that immediate situation, what is the enduring or replicable outcome?  What is the value-add for mankind? Does there need to be one?
• Novelty.  Toys and games, can claim some real estate in the sphere of creativity, innovation and invention as well. Think Nerf ball. Invented by journalist-turned-toy-mogul, Reynolds Guyer, the Nerf was a literal game-changer, challenging the once unbreakable rule that “you can’t throw a ball in the house.”  The invention of the Nerf spawned an industry of fun, neon-colored, foam-based weaponry and continues to score millions in revenue every year.
• Context.  One man’s failure is another man’s innovation. Take the ubiquitous, highly innovative 3M product, the Post-it note. In the context of the 3M research department, inventor Spencer Sliver’s attempt to formulate a new super-sticky adhesive was a failure. Years later, however, colleague Arthur Fry conceived the application for Sliver’s easily removable glue compound that we celebrate today. 

The Take-Away: At the end of the day, innovation is as innovation does. If this week’s pull-out in The Economist, “The world turned upside down: A special report on innovation in emerging markets,” is any indication, we have not begun to exhaust the possibilities here, and, as it turns out, Mr. Buckley’s “tweak and snip” approach is spot on with global innovation trends. Woot!

NOTE: In recent efforts to “make the Post-it brand more relevant and ‘cool and hip’ with members of Gen X and Y, 3M marketers have released “Project Things We Forget” into the social media marketplace.  The project website has attracted 770,000 visitors; has 13,000 fans and 700 friends on Facebook; 1,500 followers on Twitter; 700 devotees on Stumbleupon (a website where you can collect and share neat stuff that you find online); reviews and features on over 674,000 sites; and a review on Singapore’s largest radio station.

Post-Note:  As for the challenge to 3M respirator researchers – consumers can breathe a sigh of relief; an ultra-low-cost respirator mask will be released into the marketplace this month.

Pre-Ramble: There is a lot of buzz and quite a few books out there that promote the value of “branding” yourself as a way to attract recognition and business. I just don’t know about that. As a dedicated “intuitive thinker” who delights in the pursuit of random stuff, the idea of nailing myself down to a single focus is more than a little scary.

Well, so, by ”branding,” of course, I don’t mean scorching your backside with a hot metal “K.” I mean representing yourself to others — who you are, what you do and what you are about in a specific and consistent way.  Beyond a title or symbol, a brand is a holistic summation of the character of a person or entity — its personality or reputation.

Brands of businesses are all around us … the bold FedEx letter forms, the Nike swoosh, the little blue Twitter bird, the Target … target, the Apple … apple … They all have a distinct look and feel … they all have a unique differentiated point of view.  Alina Wheeler discusses the many dimensions of “brand”  in Designing Brand Identity (2003) …

There is substantial evidence that companies whose employees understand and embrace the brand are more successful. What began as “corporate culture” under the auspices of human resources is fast becoming branding, and the marketing department runs the show; … each touchpoint is an opportunity to strengthen a brand and to communicate about its essence; … brand identity increases awareness and builds business.” 

I get it. I can see the value there. The more people recognize you/your brand for what you “do,” the more likely they are to seek you out when they need someone to do that for them (… or with them … to them … whatever).  I am so all over this in the business world. I believe that businesses who are able to articulate a clear consistent message about who they are and what they do are ideally positioned to attract meaningful (and prosperous) business opportunities. So, I guess it is no small stretch to apply this same principle to the individual.  At any given time, in any given place, you as an individual may be called upon to perform as the brand that you are.

I guess what that means is, that at any given moment ”you” are a potential business … or a potential business opportunity.  By establishing a consistent set of attributes, skill sets, a look and a feel for yourself, … you are constantly marketing yourself in the world marketplace. I guess that’s the big hairy deal about the “new social media” venues – Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter. In launching a Home Page, or a Profile, or even a blog (!), you are, for better or for worse, putting yourself out there as a brand. Yikes – no pressure there.

The dilemma I have is, if in order to successfully be “a brand,” you have to forsake the enticing array of random very-cool-stuff that lurks around so many corners, it that worth it?  Creativity and its kissin’ cousin, innovation, are made from the very stuff of random collisions/conjunctions of things and ideas. So, does a guy have to sacrifice the capacity to think big, out-there thoughts for the privilege of having a successful business or personal brand?  (How do the folks whose brand is that they Think Big Out-There Thoughts make that work?)

The Take-Away: Doomed.  If I need to be together enough to align my appearance, environment, family members, pets, possessions, activities, attitudes, disposition and every confounded twittering thought in my head with my designated “brand,” …

… JUST SHOOT ME NOW.

Pre-Ramble:  Like millions around the country, I was on the edge of my seat last night watching the 2010 NCAA National Championship basketball game between the first seed Duke Blue Devils and the sweet ‘n’ scrappy Cinderella Butler Bulldogs.

With 4,200 students, [Butler] was the smallest school to play for the title since the field was expanded to 64 in 1985 and fourth-smallest overall. Forget state-of-the-art facilities. The Bulldogs play in an 82-year-old gym, the barn-like Hinkle Fieldhouse. Practice there, too. At 6:30 a.m. There are no athletic dorms and, yes, those were some of the Butler players spotted in the classroom Monday morning.

And, what a game!! Duke was favored to win, but plenty of folks were rooting for the Bulldogs to pull a “Hoosier” victory. The score never favored one team over the other and there were times where Butler looked like it was going to pull ahead only to be slapped back to reality by an efficient Duke 3-pointer.

Duke ended up beating Butler 61-59 after a 3-point half-court desperation shot by Butler’s Gordon Hayward (shown right) thwacked off the backboard, then rim, falling to the floor in a breath-taking-but-failed final attempt to clinch the win. 

The real take-away from the game however, went far beyond the scoreboard. As is the case in many of these kinds of contests, winning is secondary to the actual game itself – the twists and turns, … the way the action unfolds, … the behavior of the players and coaching staff, … the decisions of the officials…  This game definitely delivered on all of these scores – lots of amazing athletic moves; a tight game with lots of turnovers and no early run-away; nothing but good clean competition on both sides (oh, sure there was a little ticky-tack going on, but nothing ugly); and, for the most part, the officials ”let the players play the game.”

Let me state the obvious – What really made this game interesting though, was the greater sports-world context in which it was played. Front loaded onto yesterday’s news cycle along with the national championship game were both Opening Day of major league baseball, and the return of golf’s number one player-turned-scumbag, Tiger Woods. Ironically, until a few months ago, we thought that TW was one of the few professional athletes with integrity,… (And, somebody’s gotta say it, his current wannabe goatee is … unfortunate.)

The contrast in vibe between the earnest, haven’t-really-been-around-long-enough-to-screw-up NCAA players and professional athletes, and particularly Tiger Wood’s now epic, drug-through-a-toxic-sinkhole persona, is stark.  Never mind that one of the star players on the Butler team is nick-named “Babyface.” If you don’t know which one this is, look at a team photo (or photo above) and I guarantee you’ll be able to pick him out of the line-up.

No whining - Like my past blog posts on Eagle Scouts and such – college basketball players, the guys on the Duke and Butler teams, (the players on all of these teams really…) … These guys are in a league of their own. In last night’s game they demonstrated not only some outstanding skills on the basketball court, but they also provided a shining, much-needed example of what determination, integrity and sportsmanship look like. We didn’t see any tantrums or cheap shots or excuses out there, just a great competition between dedicated, talented, (tall) athletes. Butler’s head coach Brad Stevens describes it this way:

It’s the way they play that most charmed people,… The Bulldogs call it “The Butler Way,” and it has nothing to do with Xs and Os, backdoor cuts or zone defense. It’s the next guy stepping up, everybody having each other’s back. Somebody that is a team-first person, that accepts responsibility, accountable for their actions …  those are all things that lend to a successful program.”

The Take-Away: These guys are the kind of guys we need around here … making the plays, anticipating the rebounds, rolling with the bad calls, and ultimately, win or lose — owning their stuff, moving it forward and getting it done with grace, style and integrity. These are the kind of stand-up guys we need not only in sports, but in our neighborhoods, communities and world as well!

Post-Note: Heck, these are the kind of guys I’m hoping my daughters will bring home for Sunday dinner! (Especially you, Babyface.)

Pre-Ramble: April Fool’s Day is often memorable for the rash of lame pranks that befall the unsuspecting fool. Yesterday however, April 1st, 2010 was simply “a great day to be a particle physicist,“ exclaimed Rolf Heuer, director general of the European Nuclear Research Organization (CERN).

At 12:06 pm BST, the much hailed Large Hadron Collider (LHC) was once again operable after having been unceremoniously shut down by a “massive electrical failure” (uber-glitch) minutes after its inaugural spin in 2008. Cheers and applause broke out as scientists witnessed the two counter-rotating beams of protons accelerate to nearly the speed of light along the 27km circular tunnel 100 meters below the French-Swiss boarder.

The hope here is that the speedy protons will be forced into a series of head-on collisions creating “tiny fireballs” that mimic conditions that were present in the universe “during the fractions of a second after the big bang” … 13.7 billion years ago. (How we know that these conditions were actually present 13+ billion years ago is the topic for another day, I suppose.)  Fabiola Gianotti, spokesperson for the collaborative effort explains the significance of the event,

“With these record-shattering collision energies, the LHC experiments are propelled into a vast region to explore, and the hunt begins for dark matter, new [energy] forces, new dimensions and the Higgs boson …”

The Take-Away: Well, I hope they have the video camera set up. Wouldn’t it just be such a drag to have spent all this time and energy (not to mention the $6 billion) getting this all set up only to miss the big moment while texting or yawning or whatever you’re doing while waiting to see if something is going to happen? Like missing your kid’s only goal for the entire soccer season while digging around in your purse for a piece of gum.

Post-Note:  Doesn’t the photo of the inner-workings of the LHC look like a BSF (Big Spring Flower)?