How to Improve Consumer Internet Product Design - Dan Street
What are Pros and Cons of a Stealth Mode Product Strategy - Dan Street
How to Prepare Clients for Digital and Social Media Projects - Mike Germano
How to Help Brands Innovate With Social Media - Mike Germano
Why Study Computer Graphics at Syracuse University - Doug Jaeger
In Chapter 2 of 12 in his 2011 Capture Your Flag interview with host Erik Michielsen, designer Doug Jaeger shares the decision inputs that informed his choice to study computer graphics at Syracuse University. He highlights influences across his friends, family, and personal interests. Ultimately Jaeger chooses Syracuse a strong balance between academics - science, history, English - and arts and design. Jaeger is a partner at design firm JaegerSloan - http://jaegersloan.com/ - and is also president of the Art Director's Club - http://www.adcglobal.org/ . Previously he founded thehappycorp and has served in creative director leadership roles at TBWA/Chiat/Day and JWT. Jaeger holds a BFA in Computer Graphics and Art Media Studies from Syracuse University.
Transcription:
Erik Michielsen: When you were at Syracuse University, what propelled you to focus on computer graphics?
Doug Jaeger: That's an interesting question. I went to Syracuse because I growing up had a friend, his name was Pete Berthold, and his father was an engineer at BellCorp. BellCorp was the company that defined all the business operating systems for the phone systems, and had the latest Macintosh computer at his house all the time. In the basement, never being used. It was like the home computer that dad would use when we weren't around as kids, you know, we got home from school, dad wasn't there, we'd play with the computer. I learned about HyperCard and all these computer software way before schools had them, and uh, my friend Pete, my friend Sean, all these guys I was growing up with, were all playing with basic and basicA and all these crazy, geeky things.
Pete was one year older than me. And he was the year ahead of me doing research he lived, you know, right down the block and he was doing research on what schools to go to, and he built this list of schools, and one was RISD, another one was, University of Arts in Philadelphia had a computer program, there was RIT, Syracuse was one of them - there were very few number of schools on the east coast I was limited because my parents didn't want me to go too far away. And, there was this idea Pete was just like, I'm going to Syracuse.
And he came back during his break and told me all about you know the technology, and they had this really great SGI lab they were doing 3D modeling in, and he in a sense convinced me that this was a great place to go. Because Pete was a friend of mine, I trusted him.
We were doing a lot of the same things, we were both artists and we were making videos and we were using the computer and so he went there, and then as a result, I went there. And, I wanted to go to RISD because I thought it had greater, you know, creative output in general it is a more creative school, but my parents felt really strongly, they wanted me to have a basis in academics. You know they wanted me to have science and history classes and English, they thought it was just really important. And so, although RISD has Brown as a sidepiece, they thought I would not do that. And so they felt that it's a school that could control me, put me in this little box where I would do all those things. And so, the city was not an option for me my parents grew up in the city, and they just didn't want me to go there and to learn there, they just thought it would be too corrupting and forced.
And so they wanted me to go somewhere protected, and so Syracuse was that place. And the program was computer graphics, which was half computer science and half art. And the art portion was photography, you know, studio photography, filmmaking, non-linear editing, 3D modeling and interaction design. And I also tried to take classes in conventional design I had lots of peers that were in design courses as well. And so I was really able to kind of, you know, get experience very early on, on the full palate of what media is and its potential.
Simon Sinek on Why Internet Friends Do Not Replace Human Relationships
In Chapter 20 of 20 in his 2011 Capture Your Flag interview with host Erik Michielsen, author and leadership expert Simon Sinek shares why human, physical interaction creates deeper, more meaningful relationships than Internet communication. Sinek notes that sheer physicality limits the Internet and its communication tools - Facebook, Twitter, blogs - ability to develop lasting, trusted bonds. He finds the Internet great at three things: one, connecting people; two, finding and sharing information faster; and three, increasing transaction speed. The Internet does not however develop the human bonds and the associated trust, sharing, emotion and interaction that come with them.
Simon Sinek is a trained ethnographer who applies his curiosity around why people do what they do to teach leaders and companies how to inspire people. He is the author of "Start With Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action". Sinek holds a BA degree in cultural anthropology from Brandeis University.
Transcript
Erik Michielsen: How has social media culture shifted your view on relationships?
Simon Sinek: There was a time not long ago, you know, where relationships meant something different than they mean now. There was a time where – for example – you know, that a desktop meant something horizontal, and today a desktop means something vertical, right? I mean, that’s how technology has changed the definition of language. Um, when you say desktop, people think computer.
You know, they don’t think a desktop, with a blotter and folders and things, that we actually now have on computers as well. Technology has also changed the definitions of human relationships. A friend is not somebody who you check their status, you know, your network is not on LinkedIn, a conversation doesn’t happen on Twitter and a dialogue doesn’t happen on your blog, you know?
There’s a human experience, you know this, is an conversation, you know, this – it has reactions and advancing ideas, and it’s not just people taking turns to speak, which is what happens online. The Internet is incredibly, fantastic and valuable for three things. One, for connecting people. Amazing, amazing, right? Connecting people … for access to information, brilliant, right? And sharing information – access and sharing information, and for speeding transactions, to increase the speed of transactions.
And it’s the Internet that has allowed people to build small business, because you can increase the span of transactions, you can connect to more people, etcetera. Find people from your child hood, whatever, Wikipedia - all this stuff, wonderful, wonderful. But the Internet is not great at developing real deep human bonds, where deep, deep, mutual trust exists. And one of the reasons is simple, is human bonds are human, and they require this, human physical interaction. You have to be able to look someone in the eye before you’re willing to trust them, right?
This is why the videoconference will never replace the business trip. Because you can’t get a good read on somebody over videoconference. And even the blogosphere, you know, who, who, talks about that the Internet solves all problems, every year they descend on Vegas for Blogworld. Why couldn’t they just have their convention online? Why couldn’t they just all turn on their webcams and have a convention? They can do that, you know?
No, it’s because nothing beats human interaction. And the amount you learn and the connections you make and the relationships you build, physically, are not only more efficient but deeper. And the Internet has yet to find a way that can reproduce them. You know, if others can say that it can, I’m open to it, but human relationships are in fact human. Um, and so, you know let us use the Internet for all that it gives us, and all its value, but let us not believe that it can replace things that, that are hard to replace.
Simon Sinek on How Childhood Influences Cultural Anthropology Research Career
In Chapter 10 of 20 in his 2011 Capture Your Flag interview with host Erik Michielsen, author and leadership expert Simon Sinek shares how his childhood and education have shaped his approach to cultural anthropology, ethnography, and research. Sinek believes research should be done away from focus groups and in the field, especially in uncomfortable environments. His curiosity turns discomfort into a motivating factor he uses to better understand his subjects. Simon Sinek is a trained ethnographer who applies his curiosity around why people do what they do to teach leaders and companies how to inspire people. He is the author of "Start With Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action". Sinek holds a BA degree in cultural anthropology from Brandeis University.
Transcript
Erik Michielsen: How has your anthropology background proven helpful working in unfamiliar environments, including with the United States military?
Simon Sinek: Being trained as an ethnographer being trained and sort of having this cultural anthropology background, significantly changes the way of how I do my work, or being in strange or different situations. This is why I’m against focus groups. I think the concept of a focus group is laughable. That you bring people in to a sterile research environment, so that the researcher can be comfortable and safe and happy, but the respondents – the people who you want to be open and honest – are the ones who are uncomfortable and on-edge, that’s backwards to me.
It’s the responsibility of the researcher to go to the respondents. It’s the responsibility of the researcher to go into the environment, into the homes, into the societies, into the buildings, into the offices of the people that they want to study and understand. It’s the responsibility of the researcher to deal with the discomfort, rather than forcing the respondent to be uncomfortable.
So that’s how I was raised, both academically, and also that’s how I was actually raised. I lived all over the world. As a kid, we traveled around a lot, and so I will always go to somebody if I’m interested in them, and I believe they are the ones who should be comfortable and I’m the one who should be uncomfortable. That’s correct, because that way you get the best answers. And so, because that’s how I’ve always done things, I have no problem going to very unfamiliar environments. For me it’s an object of curiosity, if I’m uncomfortable I want to understand what’s making me uncomfortable and I think that’s kind of cool.
Simon Sinek on What Makes the United States Air Force So Innovative
In Chapter 9 of 20 in his 2011 Capture Your Flag interview with host Erik Michielsen, author and leadership expert Simon Sinek shares what he has learned about open-mindedness and innovation by working with the United States Air Force (USAF). Sinek finds the USAF has created a culture of innovation by encouraging its people to be open-minded thinkers constantly seeking to improve how things work. This openness allows the Air Force to look at different perspectives, including outsider opinions from individuals such as Sinek. Simon Sinek is a trained ethnographer who applies his curiosity around why people do what they do to teach leaders and companies how to inspire people. He is the author of "Start With Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action". Sinek holds a BA degree in cultural anthropology from Brandeis University.
Transcript
Erik Michielsen: What has working with the Air Force taught you about open-mindedness?
Simon Sinek: They are perhaps the most innovative organization on the planet. If you think about most big corporations – corporations who have significantly contributed to the innovations in our society – most of that have actually contributed one, at best two, things. Microsoft: Windows, that changed the world. The other stuff? Good stuff … World changing? Wouldn’t go that far. You know? One. One. Apple: Maybe two things in there, you know? The graphic user interface, they didn’t really invent it but they perfected it, you know? So most corporations who develop something big do one thing. Now let’s look at the Air Force. The reason that we have commercial flight came out of military, you know? I mean the mil - the Air Force, or the Army air corps really propelled that industry. Anti-lock breaks, GPS, you know, all of this stuff … Satellite communications … Cell phones, hello?
And all of this stuff came out of the Air Force. And one of the reasons they are so innovative is that they have open minds. They’re constantly looking for better ways to do things, you know? Where they say that every Marine is a rifleman, absolutely every airman is an innovator. That’s just the way they’re wired. And because of that, they are so curious, and so interested in what outsiders have to say. The other armed forces – and most corporations, let’s be honest – they’re much harder to get in, you know? They like to protect themselves, and it’s hard to get in the door. The Air Force, they’re constantly looking, they’re constantly open, they’re constantly curious. It’s not an accident that they found me, because here I am a guy with unusual perspective and they were interested in it. If you want to find new and better ways of doing things, you have to look to other people, ask other people and just get outside opinions. It just goes with the territory.
Simon Sinek on How to Avoid Useless Innovation and Solve Human Problems
In Chapter 8 of 20 in his 2011 Capture Your Flag interview with host Erik Michielsen, author and leadership expert Simon Sinek shares his favorite definition of innovation - the application of technology to solve human problems. He highlights several product advancements that do not answer human problems, causing a breakdown in innovation thinking. He uses a toaster as an example of useful innovation that meets his criteria: the application of technology to solve human problems. Simon Sinek is a trained ethnographer who applies his curiosity around why people do what they do to teach leaders and companies how to inspire people. He is the author of "Start With Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action". Sinek holds a BA degree in cultural anthropology from Brandeis University.
Transcript
Erik Michielsen: How do you define innovation?
Simon Sinek: Well, I mean a definition I like is the application of technology to solve human problems. I know that not all innovation is about technology. I know that, but I like that, if we have a very broad definition of innovation.
Erik Michielsen: Why does that register so well with you?
Simon Sinek: Because the important part, to me, is the solving of human problems. Just because we can do something doesn’t mean we should do something. And I think, especially in the technology world, we become obsessed with the fact that we can, not that we should. And we call “innovation” where it’s really nonsense. I mean for example, do you remember when if you wanted to watch – if you needed a projector – you used to pull the string down to get the screen down.
Like, what problem were they solving getting rid of the string? You know now everything has a button. And by the way, those buttons and those motors break all the time. I don’t ever recall that string being a problem. And yet we feel the need because we can put motors on buttons on things, that we should put a motor and button on that. It’s like, you look at a Toyota Prius, and everything is touch screen. So if you’re following the GPS and your phone rings, you lose the GPS! Or, if you want to change the temperature, you know, or if you wanna – you have to take four screens – what happened with knobs and buttons? Like, what’s wrong with turning up your volume like this, for your radio? Like, what human problem are we solving? The answer is we’re not solving any human problems. That’s the problem with that kind of technology. It’s pointless.
One of the best pieces of innovation I’ve seen lately is my toaster, which is – and I bought my toaster specifically for this feature – which is, you push a toaster down to make it toast and then it pops up. In my toaster, you can lift the button up and it lifts the toast out so you don’t have to go picking it out with a fork or a knife. That’s innovation! That’s the application of some sort of technology, or engineering in this case, to solve a human problem. And, uh, I think just because we can do things, whether engineers or technologists, or on the Internet, doesn’t mean that we necessarily should. And if you have the capacity to do something big make sure you’re solving a real problem that exists, not something that doesn’t. [Erik laughs] I have more respect for my toaster than I do a Toyota Prius.