The Streisand Effect and Your Brand

No responses.

The Streisand Effect and Your Brand Value.

The Streisand EffectPhotographer Kenneth Adelman took an aerial photo of Barbra Streisand’s Malibu mansion. In return, the singer sued him for $50,000,000 citing violation of privacy. Before the suit, “Image 3850” (the photo of Streisand’s mansion) had been downloaded from the California Coastal Records Project collection of 12,000 images only six times (and two of those downloads were by Streisand’s attorneys). After the suit was made public the image was visited over 420,000 times.

Hence the Streisand Effect.

Wikipedia defines The Streisand Effect as “the phenomenon whereby an attempt to hide, remove, or censor a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely.” This is otherwise known as “psychological reactance, wherein once people are aware something is being kept from them, their motivation to access and spread the information is increased.”

When you apply the Streisand Effect to your brand, the results can be either good or bad.

The outcome depends on how you employ the technique. Miami Republican state representative Jose Felix “Pepi” Diaz was a competitor on Season 5 of The Apprentice. But a few years later he decided that being associated with president Donald Trump was not a good thing for his senate bid.

The Streisand Effect - Pepe DiazAnd so Diaz’s picture of the two of them smiling together, along with the post “Just ran into the first guy who ever fired me. The next president of the United States @realDonaldTrump #Apprentice #POTUS #ElPresidente”, was removed from Diaz’s website and Twitter feed.

The Miami New Times pointed out that it’s not hard to figure out why: “Diaz is worried about the image that would project to voters in Florida’s 40th state Senate district – especially because Hillary Clinton crushed Trump in that district 57 percent to 40 percent last fall.”

In response, the New Times has now distributed the story. Also, Democratic activists are making sure that the photo of a chummy Pepe and POTUS is not forgotten.

Clearly this is a negative example of the Streisand Effect.

But the Streisand Effect can also be put to good use thanks to its uncanny ability to generate interest and attention.

Think back to The Beatle’s masterful “Paul is Dead” campaign. This hoax culminated in the clue-laden Abbey Road album cover. That resulted in the band’s November 1969 record sales breaking all records.

Ferrari puts the Streisand Effect to good use, too. Unlike virtually every other auto brand that sells cars for money, you cannot simply walk into a showroom, throw down your black American Express card and drive out in a special edition Italian sports car. Instead Ferrari uses scarcity to keep demand – and prices – skyhigh.

Hermes does it with their Birken bags.

Augusta does it with tee times and Masters tickets.

Rao’s does it with dinner seatings.

Nike does it with their special release Air Jordan’s.

And Apple does it with almost every product they sell.

If familiarity does indeed breed contempt, then these brand masters know that we desperately want what we can’t have. And rather than being upset or walking away in anger, we’ll wait longer, pay more, and use every angle and connection we have to overcome the Streisand Effect.

Why Standing For Something Matters

3 responses.

Last week Yum Brands’ (YUM) Taco Bell and Pizza Hut chains made a big announcement. They are going to remove “most” artificial ingredients from their food products “by July” (Pizza Hut) or “by 2017” (Taco Bell) “where possible.”

According to AP, “Instead of ‘black pepper flavor,’ for instance, Taco Bell will start using actual black pepper in its seasoned beef… Artificial dye Yellow No. 6 will be removed from its nacho cheese, Blue No. 1 will be removed from its avocado ranch dressing and carmine… will be removed from its red tortilla strips.”

In ad speak, “Most…by 2017…whenever possible” means not all, not now, and not when it’s difficult. In plain English that means that the fast food restaurants are not going to serve artificial ingredient-free products like their successful competitors do. Taco Bell and Pizza Hut will stand for something only when it’s expedient.

Why then are they even bothering? As my friend Melissa Francis says, “It’s all about the money.”

Taco Bell has been trying lots of different things to shore up its steadily slipping sales. They’re introducing new products, introducing liquor in one of their Chicago locations, and trying to make their offerings healthier.

But by only going part of the way with the health thing, Yum Brands will see almost no benefit. Health-conscious consumers will not be swayed because the company removed their unnatural ingredients “whenever possible.” And Taco Bell’s and Pizza Hut’s regular clientele – who care more about taste and low prices than health and ingredients – won’t care either.

By not standing for something, the company will find itself in the purgatory of being neither fish nor fowl. With no discernable brand value built into their new menu changes, regardless of what it costs them to make the revisions, no one will care and sales will continue to drop.

BMW is always standing for something. The car company promotes itself as “the ultimate driving machine” and lives up to the promise by engineering the same performance pedigree into their $30,000 cars as they do in their $150,000 models. Apple is always standing for something, too. They consistently maintain their commitment to design in everything they produce – from products to software to packaging. They even design and finish the inside of their devices which few of their customers will ever even see. Ritz-Carlton’s “Ladies and gentlemen serving ladies and gentlemen” are consistently standing for something. The hotel chain maintains its service reputation by providing superior levels of customer relations each time they interact with their guests.

On the other hand, Toyota virtually ruined its reputation as an always-reliable automotive appliance. They weren’t standing for something when they refused to take responsibility for their unintended acceleration problem. And Lululemon seriously damaged its reputation for empowering women. They weren’t standing for something when their since-departed CEO told the world their pants “don’t work for some women’s bodies.”

Standing for something is not always easy but it is an essential component to building brand value. Standing for something means companies have to turn down business opportunities that don’t fit with their core values. Standing for something means people have to say no to prospects that won’t enhance their personal commitments. And standing for something means that brands have to be ever vigilant about the training and follow-up required to always maintain their reputations and public image.

Of course standing for something requires a strong sense of self-awareness. After all, before you can make a commitment to what matters you have to know exactly what it is that does matter and why you’re willing to fight for it. But once you do, standing for something can become one of the most important things you do to build—and protect—your brand.

The Truest Brand In The World.

11 responses.

Bill O’ReillyThe more I write about how critical it is to discover and express both your authentic self and your customers’ deepest desires in your brand, the more questions I get. Many are about how one can discover the true self they should be promoting, or how to know exactly what their customers want. Clearly answers to both these questions require a lot more time than an email answer or even blog post offers. But the other frequent request is for a clear example of a brand that is congruent with both its own authentic self and the desires of its clients.

Sure there’s a pat list of expected answers including names such as Apple, Porsche, BMW, Panerai, Ralph Lauren, Harley-Davidson, Prius, Las Vegas, and Hermes.

But perhaps the truest brand example I can think of is Bill O’Reilly. Seriously. Bill. O. Freaking Reilly.

Before I explain, let me issue a prophylactic disclaimer. I’m neither condoning nor condemning O’Reilly’s politics in this blog. For the sake of illustrating the concept of true brand value I’ve gone out of my way to be as agnostic as possible. The point here is not the what, but the how.

Almost a year ago I was a guest on The O’Reilly Factor, coincidentally invited along with my friend and tech/social media genius Peter Shankman, as one of two marketing experts O’Reilly wanted to interview about ESPN’s decision not to run a Christmas-themed television commercial for a Catholic children’s hospital.


It was O’Reilly’s contention that ESPN’s refusal to run the spot was a clear example of what he called “America’s War on Christmas.” Click HERE to watch the interview.


If O’Reilly had actually permitted me to explain why ESPN had disallowed the commercial I would have told him about these three factors:

  1. To not offend their viewers, ESPN – like all television networks – has policies regarding how much religiosity they allow. Before you jump to conclusions, look at it this way. Most Americans wouldn’t mind Christian messages, and many would accept Jewish messages. Fewer still might tolerate Muslim doctrines on their TV set. But how about Baha’i teachings? Or Wiccan sermons? Or even Pastafarianism (The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster)? These are all accepted religions that are guaranteed freedom of expression under the Constitution. But because the network’s choice is to limit them all or limit none, they chose the former.
  2. EPSN – again like all television networks – has clear charity requirements. I don’t know for sure, but I’d bet the potential advertiser didn’t fill out the required 501(c) 3 forms and therefore the network couldn’t be sure that any money donated to them would be used appropriately.
  3. Did you notice that the little boy in the spot was wearing a surgical mask? And did you notice that the mask had a big red splotch on it? No TV signal wants their viewers changing the channel to avoid looking at blood.

Flying Spaghetti Monster

The funny thing is that O’Reilly, one of the highest paid personalities on television, knows these things better than I do. But explaining them doesn’t promote his brand nor engage his audience.

Bill has strategically built an aspirational brand by living the life his viewers wish they could live. Bill sells his brand to disaffected, formerly middle-class general market consumers who are angry that the life they lived is being eroded by rampant technology, increased minority rights, painful economic realities, and encroaching old age. And so O’Reilly brilliantly fabricates crises such as The War on Christmas to empathize with his audience while he first enrages and then placates them by manhandling his guests. Quite simply, O’Reilly beats up his mostly affluent, well dressed, educated, and/or minority guests because his audience wants to but can’t.

By doing this, O’Reilly has perfectly aligned his authentic self with his audience’s deepest desires and created one of the truest and most profitable brands on television.

Simply remove O’Reilly’s signature rancor, and there’s a lot to learn and emulate from his brand, regardless of what you think of his politics, his practices or his policies.

The Incredible Lightness of Travel

17 responses.

If you’ve read my blog before you know I’m obsessed with traveling light. That’s because a minimalist mindset makes travel more enjoyable and stress-free. Also I believe there are only two kinds of luggage – carry-on and lost. I’ve written about this before, listing a bunch of road-tested travel tips HERE and HERE.

My business partner and I used to go to a lot of industry events. We’d sit in way too cold conference rooms listening to lectures by the SVP of marketing for Humongo Company or director of international relations for Gigantis Corp. During the speech, Roberto would whisper, “You think this person ever made payroll?” When I’d answer, “No, payroll arrives from HR regardless,” Roberto would walk out. If the speaker didn’t walk the walk, why hear her talk the talk?

It’s the same with travel advice. And knowing Roberto would read this blog, and that he doesn’t suffer fools gladly, I made sure it was accurate and “real-world tested” before I uploaded it for you.

My family and I recently made the trip of a lifetime through Southeast Asia. All of us — my wife, kids, and mom — only took carry-on luggage. But I went further and took as few clothes as possible so I could report back to you.

What I learned is that there are three strategies that make all the difference: color coordination, fabric selection, and clothing utility.

The importance of color palette is easy to understand. I only brought black, gray or blue clothes. That way everything matched everything else and I never ran out of combinations.

Fabric is critical, too. Certain cloths are lighter and easier to pack, wash, and dry quickly, don’t hold odor, and keep you comfortable. The magic words are nylon, merino, and wool crepe. Ultra light merino wool shirts and socks from Icebreaker and SmartWool are comfortable on warm and cool days, easy to wash in the shower, don’t retain odor, and don’t itch. Really.

Woven nylon is another great fabric. Nylon cargo shorts and pants are comfortable and easy to wash, drying more quickly than cotton. Best – the new nylon looks and feels like cotton canvas so you don’t look like a fly fisherman.

What did I take? Here’s my entire list:

Three pairs of pants – one pair of light wool suit pants, Clothing Arts cargos, and a pair of Lululemon nylon pants that look dressy but stretch like sweats — perfect for red-eyes.

Three pairs of shorts – two nylon cargos and one pair of athletic shorts for jogging, gym, and pool.

Three pairs of ExOfficio travel underwear. Two are plenty but I splurged and brought an extra pair. I know, I’m wild.

Three t-shirts – two ultra-light weight merino wool tees and one dri-fit running shirt.

One no-iron cotton button-down. Besides being easy-care, you can wear a button-down with a suit and tie or roll up the sleeves and wear it untucked with shorts. You can’t do that with more formal dress shirts.

Three pair of socks – gray and black lightweight merino wool and one pair of low-cut running socks.

Shoes – one pair of black dress sneakers (mine are from To Boot but they’re available from most designers), one pair of Nike Free running shoes (with collapsible heels that I wrote about HERE) and flip-flops for the pool.


What else? A lightweight merino wool sweater, wool crepe sport coat (folds small and hardly wrinkles – if it does, it straightens in a steamy bathroom), travel belt with leather-covered plastic buckle that doesn’t set off TSA alarms, zip-up running jacket (for cold planes), knit silk tie (absolutely does not wrinkle), and a SmartWool watch cap for rain, cold, and to pull down over my eyes to sleep on planes.

Besides clothes, I brought a few harmonicas, Garmin running watch, Apple MacBook Air and iPhone, Samsung DV300F camera, noise-canceling headphones, a reduced toiletry kit, sketch book, and laptop charger – I charged everything else by running their USB cables into my MacBook. All of this – plus a Mountain Smith day bag, fit in my 22” overhead-sized carryon.

Were there downsides? Sure — some mornings I felt like putting on something different but it wasn’t because my clothes weren’t clean or comfortable. And each night I had to wash what I wore that day in the shower but that only added a few minutes in the bathroom.

I know you women are wondering if my wife also took a single carry-on. I’m proud to say she did. Gloria brought gauzy pants and tops that fold up small, silky dresses that also take up little space and colorful scarves to brighten up her relatively subdued palette. She brought four pair of shoes – loafers, running shoes, and low- and high-heeled sandals. And she brought a set of travel curlers from Hot Tools. My mom and daughter also fit everything in a single carryon.

If this seems too Spartan for you, remember that a credit card in your pocket means you can purchase anything you’ve forgotten or can’t live without. But if you forget some of the selection you’re used to, I promise you an easier and much more enjoyable trip.



Have You Seen the Future of Radio? Have You HEARD it?

2 responses.

Are you mature enough to remember when radio was a significant influence in your life? I wasn’t old enough for the golden age of radio – Amos N Andy, The Thin Man, Tommy Dorsey, and the like – but for me radio was the soundtrack of my childhood in the sixties and seventies.

Numerous musicians and writers talk about listening to radio in their formative years. Boz Scaggs said, “I’ve always listened to the black side of the radio dial. Where I grew up, there was a lot of it.” And Salman Rushdie wrote, “In the ‘50s, listening to Elvis and others on the radio in Bombay – it didn’t feel alien. Noises made by a truck driver from Tupelo, Mississippi, seemed relevant to a middle-class kid growing up on the other side of the world.” Of course we’ve all seen the movies where a pre-teen in the fifties or sixties brings his radio to bed and listens to faraway stations under the covers. And speaking of movies, nostalgic shows like American Graffiti and Diner used radio broadcasts as their defining soundtracks. Cousin Brucie, indeed.


Like many things we loved when we were younger, radio grew long in the tooth and lost its vibrancy to the encroaching powers of commercialism and new technology. Local DJs and programming went the way of the dodo bird as multi-state networks such as CBS and Clear Channel gobbled up hometown stations. Real live voices with local accents and geographically specific music gave way to computer-generated song lists and nationally recognized celebrities and bland voiceovers. And many listeners abandoned traditional radio when they turned to iPods, CD players, satellite radio and Internet music providers such as Boomer Radio, Pandora, Spotify, iTunes, and others.

But while the industry is being consolidated, disrupted, and disintermediated, it’s also being innovated. And entrepreneurs are figuring out what they can do with the newly democratized technology.

On April 23, 2014 Apple announced a new milestone when it uploaded one billion podcast subscriptions via its iTunes store. “From comedy to hard news to sport to innovative educational content and so much more, podcasting has transformed the global media landscape,” Apple said. “The heart of podcasting is finding your favorite voices in this exciting field, and subscribing to the best ones.”

One billion! And that’s just from Apple’s servers. Clearly podcasting is not a passing fad but a genuine and quantifiable new media. Perhaps it will actually be more influential than traditional terrestrial radio. Maybe it already is.

Speaking of influential new radio ideas, my friends Marcy Rosenbaum and Seth Werner have just thrown their hats into the fray, debuting their online streaming concept, Entrepreneur Radio. According to their website, “we provide programming in the ‘how of success’ for people launching and growing new businesses. We provide unique insight and perspective into the entrepreneurial mindset through in-depth interviews with successful business creators.”


Rosenbaum, a management development coach and Internet radio pioneer, and Werner, a veteran real estate and finance businessperson interview successful entrepreneurs and ask them how they started their companies and what they’ve learned – what worked, what didn’t, and what they wish they had done differently. Every two weeks, they upload new interviews with business creators who are willing to share the true stories of how they got where they are. It’s one part inspiration, two parts information, and a whole lot of entertainment. With their direct and insightful questions, Werner and Rosenbaum draw out honest, personal perspectives you won’t hear anywhere else.

I was lucky enough to be the first guest they interviewed. Not truly convinced of my own entrepreneurial standing, I mostly talked about the most powerful entrepreneur I was lucky enough to know – my father. By sharing the things he taught me I figured I could both honor his memory and provide the show’s listeners with real, proven information and anecdotes they can use to build their businesses. Give it a listen HERE and let me know what you think.

Only time will tell if Entrepreneur Radio has figured out how to take advantage of radio’s future. But it’s clear that Marconi’s invention is now about on-demand programming and unrestricted access to voices and information free of corporate filters.

Early To Bed. Early To Rise.

16 responses.

The flight to San Juan was scheduled to leave at 7:25 AM, so my mental math looked something like this:

“Want to get to airport an hour early, that’s 6:25 AM.

Thirty minutes to get to airport, that’s 6:00.

Half an hour to get ready, gotta get up at 5:30.”

But here’s what happened:

Was still jet-lagged from my trip back from Southeast Asia and California the day before, so I went to bed early and was wide awake at 4:30 AM. Finally got out of bed at 5:00. Took 40 minutes to leave house and 20 minutes to get to airport because of early hour, so I arrived at 6:00. Zipped through TSA pre-check, grabbed a snack and still got to gate at 6:15 – at least 45 minutes before boarding time.

Know what happened next? Absolutely nothing. I read the paper, sipped my coffee, and boarded the flight when they called my section. No stress, no drama, no nothing.

Flight on the way back landed late and I was pulled over by a policeman for speeding.

“Where’s the fire, Mario?” he asked.

“Sorry officer,” I answered. “I’m late for a meeting.”

“You should have left sooner.”

Damn it! Why didn’t I think of that? I had no good response, so I just nodded and opened my hand and took the ticket.

Leave early, stress free. Leave late, stressful.

Can it really be as easy as that?

“Leave early?!” I hear you screaming. “Who’s got time to leave early? And anyways, what the hell do I do when I get to the airport or meeting with an extra half hour to kill?”

Here’s a radical idea – you’ve probably got your smartphone, laptop or iPad with you already – why don’t you do what you’d do if you were still sitting at your desk? Answer messages and emails, reread your proposal or presentation, read the newspaper, write blog posts, or just sit quietly and think.

The simple point is that thanks to today’s technology, where you are has less and less to do with what you can accomplish than ever before. And so the old rules just don’t apply anymore. The trick is to figure out how to apply the new realities and possibilities to make your life as enjoyable, productive, and stress-free as possible.

All of a sudden, location and productivity are not joined at the hip. A workspace can be anywhere with power and Wi-Fi. The inspiration muse can be serviced wherever you are. An hour in a Starbucks between meetings can be more productive than running back to the office only to turn around and run back out again. And when you are in the office and face-to-face, that time can be better spent doing the personal warm and fuzzies — the “atta-boys” and “atta-girls” that are best done in person.

Running late and making yourself and everyone around you crazy no longer needs to be a part of your life – or your brand. All you have to do is change the way you approach your calendar and your to-do list.

Try it. I think you’ll like it.

The Importance Of Design In The Sales Process.

9 responses.

It happened again! You blinked and the world changed. Don’t feel bad if you didn’t notice (it was hidden in plain sight). But whether you saw it or not, all of a sudden the planets realigned, the tectonic plates slipped, the paradigm shifted.

While you were dealing with your day-to-day affairs, function and competency took to a back seat to design. It’s John Lennon’s prediction coming true: “Life is what happens to you while you’re busy making other plans.”


Back in the dark ages of analog production, we bought stuff because it worked better than other stuff. The Sears Craftsman tools in your shed were unbreakable and warrantied for life—in case it ever turned out that they weren’t. The Mercedes diesel in your garage would run for 300,000 miles without a hiccup. The Timex on your wrist would “take a licking and go on ticking.” Those products were successful because they were anomalies. Back then, most stuff just plain didn’t work. These things did.

Remember your old television? It broke all the time. Tubes would blow, dials would strip, and those funky remote control buttons would stop controlling remotely. But today, TVs simply don’t break. I’d be willing to bet that your giant flat-panel TV works just as well today as the day you mounted it on the wall.

Remember when cars used to leave you stranded? Back then it made sense to spend the extra money for a Volvo or Mercedes because they were so much more reliable than less expensive cars. But today, an inexpensive Kia or Hyundai will provide you just as much hassle-free driving as the most expensive BMW or Bentley. Maybe more.

Today people just expect the things they buy to work. And so function and competency are taken for granted. Instead of worrying about how well things work, consumers now buy things for how they look and feel, and more importantly, how the products make them look and feel.

Design, the former handmaiden to production, has become the differentiating asset consumers look for. To completely mix my metaphors, the king and queen of the prom have been upstaged by the AV guy with tape on his glasses.

Good design used to be something that was hard to acquire — it took a lot of time, money, and discerning taste — not to mention an unwillingness to accept the ordinary. Back in the day, being well dressed or having a beautifully designed home or office was a mark of distinction that was simply ‘out of reach’ for most people.

But today good design is available everywhere you look. Crate and Barrel, Target, and West Elm peddle it in every mall in America. Apple promises that the ubiquitous phone you carry in the pocket of your (designer) jeans or the computer sitting on your desktop is the most highly evolved industrial design you can own. Even products as prosaic as Nest thermostats, Plumen light bulbs, and Dyson fans have been designed to within an inch of their lives.


What hasn’t kept up with the blinding pace of design growth is the ability of salespeople to use aesthetics to meet their quotas. Believing that most consumers are still buying products based on what those products do, most salespeople are still busy demonstrating features and explaining capabilities instead of promoting what people are buying. Today an in-depth understanding of the modern consumers’ purchase motivations is what the best salespeople are using to push their products and services. Instead of inventorying capabilities, the savvy salesperson understands that their job has changed the best of them into editors and curators – constantly reappraising the aesthetic and lifestyle advantages of the products they sell and demonstrating these benefits to their customers.

After all, that’s what their customers are buying, even though they think they’re buying old-fashioned functionality.


Why iOS7’s Less Equals A Whole Lot More.

7 responses.

Have you upgraded to iOS 7 yet? If you’re an Apple iPhone or iPad user you know what I’m talking about (if you aren’t an Apple user, indulge me please and read on. You’ll catch on quickly.) iOS 7 is Apple’s chief of design Jonathan Ive’s first public shot at overseeing the entire ecosystem of their products, both hardware AND software.

There are two noteworthy parts to Ive’s debut operating system – the new software features and the design updates. Let’s leave the software function changes discussion to the industry program pundits; what I want to discuss here are the design developments.

Besides changing the colors and the icons, the biggest change Ive made was to get rid of Apple’s trend setting skeuomorphism design protocol (don’t feel bad, I didn’t know what skeuomorphism meant either. Skeuomorphism is the design of a derivative object that retains the ornamental design cues that were prevalent in the original. For example, the yellow-lined paper for Notes, the leather binding for Calendar, the wooden shelves for iBooks). As David Pogue wrote in The New York Times, “The look of iOS 7 is sparse, white — almost plain in spots… it’s all blue Helvetica Neue against white.”


Because of these changes, when people talk about the new system what I hear is either praise for the stark new look or complaints about it. Being a minimalist at heart, I happen to really enjoy the new clean look. But in this instance, I think discussion of the aesthetics of the new program really misses the point.

Back in the early 1980s when Apple first introduced their Macintosh interface and again when they introduced their first smartphone 20 years later, Apple was showing us something we’d never seen before. In fact, Steve Jobs famously said, “People don’t know what they want until you show it to them.” It was Apple’s job to expose us to something we’d never experienced before that would quickly become both intuitive and intrinsic.

Because Apple was showing us something new with the original Mac, they needed to use a visual language that we already understood. THAT’S why the icon for deleting digital files looked like a trash can and the icon for pointing at things on the screen looked like an extended finger.

Jumping forward to the original iPhone operating system and all the way to the one iOS7 just replaced, Apple used these same visual metaphors to shortcut the need for wordy explanations.

Which brings us back to skeuomorphism. And so the “bookshelf” was dressed in wood grain, the “notepad” looked just like the old school yellow legal pad we all instantly recognize, and the “datebook” was represented with a faux-leather cover and computer-generated wire binding.

Those real world finishes were not simply design elements used to make the interface look better but were, in fact, visual metaphors judiciously employed to quickly explain what the phone could do for us.

That leads me to believe that Ive’s elimination of these realistic design features was not just an overhaul created to bring the iPhone’s operating system in line with his design aesthetic. Instead, it was the realization and acceptance that today’s consumer is savvy enough to no longer need the visual training wheels that Apple first bolted on their early phones.

What-Got-You-HereBusiness consultant Marshall Goldsmith’s last book was named What Got You Here Won’t Get You There. Goldsmith’s title describes a lesson that Apple clearly took to heart. What Apple and Ive figured out is that because it’s not broken doesn’t mean you shouldn’t fix it. Ive clearly understands that unless Apple constantly innovates and updates their mighty iPhone it could just as easily suffer the fate of the Palm Pilot and Blackberry and wind up on the unforgiving trash heap of irrelevance.

Whether it’s abandoning skeuomorphism or moving on from an operational system that no longer supports their brand, Apple’s iPhone refresh is a great lesson and reminder to all of us of the importance of staying ahead of our competition AND our customers before we too suffer the cruel fate of the outdated and the obsolete.

  • Follow Bruce on the Web

  • Most Recent Comments

    • User AvatarBruce, loved your post, I am doing a PhD and your words... by Julia says on Numbers Lie.
    • User Avatar;^) by Bruce Turkel says on Numbers Lie.
    • User AvatarBruce, Thanks for continuing to do all three. by David J. Hawes says on Numbers Lie.
    • User AvatarThank you Mary Lou. That’s very nice of you. by Bruce Turkel says on Numbers Lie.
    • User AvatarThis is great stuff, Tim, thanks. I actually read quite a bit... by Bruce Turkel says on Numbers Lie.
    • User AvatarI am literally amazed and amused by your writing. I have known... by Mary Louise Cole says on Numbers Lie.

  • Archives