 |
 - Were are you
going?
|
 |
|
|
Again,
if your
own primary interest is simply
to participate in the open
ongoing fiction writing
collaboration, particularly
just as a fun hobby (though
even such may be hoped to
illicit at least some
modicum of
dedication),
then, by all
means, click
here
...
-
- Of
the interrelating proposals,
have you any particular interest in new
business models on the frontiers of advanced
automated Sociometry?
Until
such technological potential is realized,
online and available, we all must
conduct and optimize our own
interpersonal networking, as best we
can. And everybody has their own
different style.
So, if
you answered in the affirmative to the
question above, that,
yes, you are responding
in regards to new business models on the frontiers
of advanced automated
Sociometry, then with whom
are you seeking to establish contact
and, ultimately, to collaborate
with? Please check the answer
which best describes your intent:
Attention:
Aaron Agassi, please respond.
Attention:
Douglas Wilson, please
respond.
I
hope to be working, individually, with
each of
you.
I
see us all working together closely,
and I am interested in setting out to
help develop a successful and effective
working group.
I
am undecided, and need to find out
more.
And feel free to consult the
CASA
business report.
Thank
you. Your input will be redirected
as per your indicated
preference.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
GETTING REAL
In particular, issues of control need to
be explicit, as ambiguity and
disagreement, incidental and innocent or
deliberate and dissembling, will tend to
be no less damaging than heavy handed
tyranny outright. Hence, the investment
of time, effort and attention into
preliminaries to clarify powers,
responsibilities and their motivations,
so often neglected, no less often turns
out to be crucial.
So, which
of the following best describes
you:
A) Money, money, money,
money, money! That's what I want...
!
- B) Money doesn't matter
to me. I can make do with
little.
- Other things are more
important.
-
- C)
This is more than just an arbitrary
personal life style
question:
- Obviously Capital, connections and
influence are among the important
resources that could make a difference
to advance just about any major
project.
-
- D) Others will
deal with all of that!
- My
grand designs will come to fruition my
the confluence of events without me
actually polluting my soul with
commerce at this
juncture.
- Additional comments:
-
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
-
The
Web is simply overrun by monosyllabic wanna be
authors expecting effortless sonnets from
sheer Stream of Consciousness, would be
Captains of Industry acknowledging
no need to balance the books, and mass
movements with no mass and less movement.
For such are the delusions of
impatience!
Beyond vastly
impractical and counterproductive
fanatical sociopolitical agenda fixations
and just whopping Big Lies, articles of
faith in whatever sort of dogmatic cult
ideology may often even include
antirational paranormal claims, but
perhaps most commonly bankrupt models of
human nature and society, while,
likewise, the deepest and most counter
productive personal delusion and denial
are often characterized by a marked
reluctance to at all observe, empirically test, research
existing bodies of knowledge, or consult
with others, but regarding some
individual personal hypothesis, technique
or procedure of relating to and
influencing others. Persisted in, all
such tend to perpetuate failure and even
disaster, no less than any other sort of
wishful thinking. In the worst cases, the
question beggar, individual or
collective, instead blames others,
individuals, groups or institutions, who
have not responded as so blithely predicted, who
would not be bullied or conned, who did
not respond and performed as they
"ought" to, by whatever
self-serving one sided pragmatic or moral
rationalization.
Whereas, all to
often, the ugly truth is that people
often will simply not be helped, much
less bullied or conned, instead moving by
their own moral or pragmatic compass or
whatever other not so secret customs or
motivation and obvious priorities,
sensible or otherwise. And that forging
collaboration is profoundly difficult.
Cavalier dismissive hand-waving just
won't do. Expertise and capability in all
manner of interpersonal interaction will
be a crucial human resource recruitment
need, but wasted if it will only be
disregarded, rejected out of hand by self
absorbed lunacy.
Beyond merely
raising or suggesting further questions,
a begged question presents a proposition
that needs to be logically demonstrated
and/or supported by evidence as if it
did not, simply assuming the validity
and/or truth of an
assertion. When a
question is begged, either a premise is
simply assumed to be true without warrant
or else what should be logically proven
valid or evidenced as actually true is
instead implicitly taken for granted or
imbedded in fallacious circular reasoning
wherein the conclusion is also premise.
An inadveritently begged question can turn
a supporting argument into a testable
hypothesis. But seldom so an article of
faith, of cult ideology or grandiose
personal delusion and denial all
alike.
Hence, in the
colloquial, question begging implies
deliberately and dishonestly smuggling
the conclusion into the premise in order
to side step or evade whatever question
begged. Indeed, hypersensitivity and
bullying outright are not uncommon in the
face of awkward questions and heterodoxy.
If the question beggar cannot attain
consensus, then they will often
resentfully seek to extort at least some
tactful silence. However, to be
businesslike entails the most rigorous
and rational scrutiny of assumptions. And
for this, all must remain open to
question. But the dishonest Dogmatism of
willful question begging defeats
openness.
- For the sake of
whatever collaborative effort, do you
agree to the need to openly and
rationally examine assumptions,
assertions, implications and practices
-your own in particular- regarding not
only reality in general, but more
specifically, procedures in
successfully dealing with others to
meet out goals and attain our
desires?
-
- Got any problem with
people who are just
argumentative?
-
Cooperation/collaboration
means:
Everyone in the totality of
being playing each our
rôle somehow, and
it all come to fruition as destiny
manifests.
Compiling extensive data
links so that action in the World at
Large will arise organically with
improved understanding. Because, truly,
collaboration is ultimately naught but knowledge
sharing.
No more than
division of solitary labor.
Consistently
uncritical validation. Unquestioning
loyalty.
Committed and sustained
effort and interaction,
continually building upon one
another's input into the same
project.
Exchanging information,
altering activities, sharing
resources, and enhancing the
capacity of other individuals for
mutual benefit and to achieve a
common purpose.
Protecting one
another's interests.
Together building and
then serving as a reciprocal web
of support in whatever common
undertaking.
Responsibility and
reliability in the face of
cross-functional task/outcome
interdependencies.
Commitment to tasks that are
crucial to other tasks undertaken
by somebody else, even
reciprocally, in order to assure
any chance whatsoever of any
desired outcome of collaboration
over all, especially where chances
of success at all are enhanced or
actually even require that all
such tasks be executed in
sequence.
"From each according
to their abilities, and to each
according to their needs." A
trade of sorts, assisting one
another in a timely and concerted
fashion, as ever needed, such that
complimentary skills and resources
fill gaps and smooth stumbling
blocks so that work will advance
in common cause and ever be
accomplished.
Business planning seeks to maximize gains and
minimizes losses. Hence, the very essence of
business planning is in risk management. Hence, for
the business layperson, the wanna-be entrepreneur,
one greatest of major stumbling blocks to concrete
business planning is innumeracy, an intrinsic
misapprehension of risks.
Innumeracy is difficulty in thinking with numbers.
Statistical innumeracy is the inability to think
with numbers that represent uncertainties. Ignorance
of risk, miscommunication of risk, and clouded
thinking are all deadly forms and manifestations of
innumeracy. Like illiteracy, innumeracy is curable.
However, innumeracy is not simply a cognitive
deficiency inside an unfortunate mind, but cultural
and in part resultant from inadequate outside
representations of numbers. Hence, in that regard,
innumeracy is entirely curable from the outside.
Indeed, miscommunication of risks is a form of
innumeracy wherein one knows and understands the
risks of some actual or hypothetical event, action
or choice, yet may find oneself at something of a
loss as how to how to communicate these so that
others will also understand. And various
representations that facilitate comprehension may
help overcome just such communications barriers.
By every contrast with the standard hierarchical
dominance and compartmentalization of established
corporate life, in any entrepreneurial management
team or mastermind/affinity group, the first most
crucial rôle of the "suits," the money specialists,
the indispensable project social engineers, in the
drive to success, will be as the shared resource,
intensive awareness and guidance of expense and
benefit quantification in business planning and
collaborative management, choices and decision
making.
-
fascinating
repugnant
-
-
Dolt! I am one of those "suits!"
At any hoped for prospect of
establishing contact to work with an MBA,
lawyer, lobbyist or other such social
engineer to help prepare and open the way
to a chance at Venture Capital,
connections, even political influence or
any other such helpful resources, I would
be:
a) You must never forget
that I am the Prima Donna, and temperamental genius
must always be catered to, whatever it takes. You need
to persevere as the go between, and work according to
my timing and my inclination. This the Internet, and,
therefore, I can have no accountability.
Fuck you all in
advance!
b) To be honest, I would
be troubled, because, truth to tell, I
just am not comfortable with them
"suits"! And so, there is simply
no guarantee how I'd feel, how I might
respond, and what I'd do or not.
Basically, I'm just a
whiner!
c) I am always polite, treat everyone as equals and
never bite the hand that feeds me. I will behave and
respond as seems to me reasonable.
*
d) I'd be Fuck'n
thrilled!!!
| |
Because, while in a
rational world, the crucial
importance of my life's work would
be readily recognized, in the real
world, I understand full well that
we need those who can help in
making connections and acquiring
needed resources far more than they
actually need us, and getting them
and keeping them onboard and giving
them the input and assistance with
our concept as and how and when
they know they need it and
accepting and following their
guidance in facilitating our aims
is all crucial.
After all, it's not what you
know but who you know -or, rather, who
knows you! ...as the
saying goes.
Moreover, however scummy
their professions, then by the very
same token it follows that any of
them visionary enough to come to
our support is already an unusual
person. Indeed, far from
trivializing whatever concept,
they'd have to really grasp the
potential of an idea in order to
actually be motivated to come
onboard and work on
spec.
|
|
Dolt! I am one of those "scum bag"
social engineers!
For decades now, the obstacles to
outer space and to ending hunger and so forth, have
never been technological but entirely social. What
this means is that Geeks are nothing more than
slackers who love to deal with the easy cut and dry
part of any project, and to leave the heavy lifting
and calculated risk to the Suits. Which is alright,
if only the Geeks recognize with due gratitude and
cooperation, the Suits who open doors for them.
At the same time, conversely in this equation, the
influence peddling money grubbing Suits spinning
such Byzantine process out of thin air, are really
nothing more than servile intermediary between
technology and the market. And without these salient
Ontologies, of the technology on one end and the
market on the other, those damn Suits would be no
more grounded in reality than Theologians counting
angels on the head of a pin!
And for example by way of further
illustration to the point, no one reaches for the
stars more literally that Richard Branson and Burt Ruttan. And certainly all operations of Virgin
Galactic are channeled together into the common goal
of the company.
Indeed, we may all rest assured
that there is neither a letter of Richard Branson's
business planning that isn't carried out save but to
meet the needs of by Burt Ruttan's engineering, nor
likewise a single stroke of Burt Ruttan's
engineering designs that doesn't rise to meet the
needs of Richard Branson's business planning.
Otherwise, they'd literally never get off the
ground!
The wretchedly pigheaded fantasy
that Geeks and Suits or indeed any other category of
specialist, will ever get anywhere by shunning one
another with contempt, is made a lie by the simple
truth that compartmentalization is a manifestation
of sheer
irrelevancy
so endemic to the
normative death throws
of systems. Or when arriving early, such is the
frequent herald of the still birth of pipedreams.
- Additional
comments:
-
STRATEGY
A great idea is
enough.
The key is to promote and
manage stock and then get out quickly at
maximum valuation.
The opportunity is to be
found very generally in a demonstrably
huge market.
Once we get that big Venture
Capital check in the bank to get over the
next hump in development, everything else
will fall into place.
Only
once we have pretty much everything else
worked out, will anyone ever invest. And
the key is in clear added value to
whatever specific target
market(s)
- .Any
further comment:
-
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
And who do
you
trust?
-
-
MORALE
AND ESPRIT DE
CORPS:
Apathy and
acrimony are
contagious. And I
detest being trapped
in the middle!
When
problems arise within
a group, can I count
on your support in
trying to facilitate,
encourage
participation and
resolve
problems? Will
you speak up when
there is a crisis?
Will you also be
persistent with other
people involved?
Can you be
counted on to assert
yourself and lend
active support as
personality conflicts
and other bottle
necks arise, or
will you squeamishly
and passively drop
all of that
responsibility in
just anybody else's
lap?
|
 |
|
|
|
As
a
participant in collaborative
effort,
should
you commit to
join
in,
reciprocity
and cross-functional
task/outcome
interdependency
will become
job one,
especially
where chances
of success at
all are
enhanced or
actually even
require that
all such
tasks be
executed in
sequence. The
most
immediate
priority of
good faith
must be
whatever
reasonable
and diligent
effort or
response
another
participant in collaborative
effort
needs of you
in order to
be able to
continue
their own
interdependent
tasks in turn
as smoothly
as possible
and without
needless
delay. After
that, second
priority is
advancement
of any larger
vision of
whatever
mission or
outcome as a
whole. Only
then, in case
of any
whatever
demands of
the previous
other two
priorities,
comes the
third
priority
which is
whatever
one's own
largely
solitary
division of
labor or
specialty on
one's own
schedule,
even if that
is what
generally
continues to
take most of
one's time
and effort in
whatever
joint
affinity
action or
venture.
In summation,
thou shalt not
let thy
partners in collaborative
effort
down, nor leave
them in the
lurch!
agree |
disagree
Yea, verily,
and thou shalt
expect and
righteously
demand as much in
return for
thyself, as a
partner in collaborative
effort,
reciprocally.
agree |
disagree
Yea, verily,
nor suffer thy
partners in collaborative
effort to
let thee down nor leavest thou in
the
lurch.
agree |
disagree
Yea, verily,
nor standest by in silence to
suffer thy
partners in collaborative
effort to
so iniquitously
misbehave towards
one another!
Problems and
issues must be
confronted,
conflicts
and
antipathies
diffused in
order to resolve
and avert
needless
crisis.
agree |
disagree
Should I ever
find myself
troubled with
questions,
concerns or
misgivings
pursuant to our
collaboration, I
will speak out
and press the
matter until
resolution, never
to dissemble nor
to drag my
feet.
agree |
disagree
- In our
imperfect
world,
realistically,
recruitment may
tend to be an
arduous trial
an error. And
so, when,
inevitably, one
or another
crucial
participant
starts flaking
out on us one
way or another
and the entire
deal threatens
to
unravel:
-
a)
I will
pitch in to
redouble our
efforts at
whatever
remedy, damage
control and
even
replacement
recruitment as
need be, and
try, try again.
With such
reciprocal
commitment,
everyone will
know that
flaking out can
only ruin one's
own prospects,
without so
easily
scuttling the
entire venture
for everyone
else.
-
b)
Are you
kidding?
I'm not gonna
do anything
except sit on
my hands and
then maybe bail
out myself,
likewise! I
don't stick out
my neck for
nobody...
-
-
-
- If some
arrogant
know-it-all
turns up on
whatever our
turf (physical
of virtual)
seemingly
claiming/showing
off some
allegedly or
implicitly
deeper grasp or
neglected skill
set pertinent
to any aspect
of our
undertakings:
-
a)
I will
shuck and jive,
vaguely
pretend we know
exactly what we
are doing,
sulk, fume and
stonewall,
instigate
behind the
scenes, and
then, if he or
she still won't
take a hint,
go
ballistic!
(After all,
the most
importation
skill set
superceding all
other talents
and abilities
are social
skills. And the
greatest
treasure among
all personal
assets is
humility. After
all, these are
eternal
verities
readily
validated by
any insecure
and volatile
Conformist
angry mod that
one would ever
choose consult!
Clearly, anyone
who ever
ruffles my
feathers has
thereby
irrefutably and
irredeemably
demonstrated
their
deficiencies in
social skill
and humility.
Unless, of
course, they
can dominate
and intimidate
me first, into
sucking up.
Otherwise,
in the very
name of
decency,
obviously they
should be
looking for
someone to suck
up to
themselves.)
-
b)
I will show
every courtesy,
do due
diligence, hear
what they've
got to say,
question in
detail,
scrutinize
whatever they
have to show,
and then do my
utmost to help
evaluate
whatever
recruitment and
/ or networking
prospect for
any possible
advantage to
better our over
all chances of
success. (Hey,
why not?
Let's rise
to the
challenge! Egotism can
be healthy, sportsmanlike,
confident, competitive,
productive, honest, well
humored and fun! Let's
always be glad to to be
shown up and find out
whatever we don't know and
are unprepared for, sooner
better than later.
-
-
-
Explain
yourself
immediately!!
-
-
How
Affinity
Action
suffers
from
Passive
Hostility
and
denial:
-
Barring
coercion
or
dependency,
individuals
involved
in
unreciprocated
exchanges
will be
motivated
to
withdraw
from
such
interaction
and
choose
better,
if and
as open
to
them.
If
whatever
collective
project
survives
at all
in the
first
place,
Tangible
Costs
will
include
turnover
and
reduced
efficiency.
Even
litigation
should
things
escalate
to that
point,
entailing
costs:
attorney
fees;
settlement
costs;
jury
awards;
appeal
costs...
Stress
and
errors.
Talent
Flight
of best
and
brightest
as they
seek
less
hostile
and
better
responsive
projects
to join
instead
-- in
such an
event,
dummies
and
political
operatives
will be
all
that
remain
-- lost
capacity
to
respond
and
innovate
Intangible
Costs
are likely to
include damaged
reputation as
conflict spills over
into evil gossip,
instigation and
Relational Bullying
in any larger social
context. Reputation
as a silly clique of
fools and social
climbers
accomplishing
nothing. Bad public
relations from
high-profile feuds.
Yet more passive
sabotage by fearful
collaboration
participants
who
know no
alternatives
given
failure
to
screen,
purge
or
punish
the tyrant(s).
Resistance
to
initiative
because
of
prevailing
mistrust.
It
makes
no
sense
to
incur
these
preventable
costs
in this
competitive
market
for
capable
and
motivated
participants in collaboraton!!
By
tolerating
passive
hostility
and
denial,
not
only
viable
function
at all,
but
excellent
recruitment
and
retention
advantages
are
sacrificed.
-
-
-
-
-
Even in ancient
Athens,
Socrates made
himself respected by
some but quite
unpopular among the
powerful, simply by
pointing out how
experts in anyone
field often become
foolishly arrogant
so as to believe or
to behave as if they
thereby knew
everything, or at
least everything
important, esteeming
whatever their own
specialty as
supreme, and all
others as
insignificant.
Whereas, it might be
the more prudent
simply to admit when
one doesn't know
without making such
a fuss.
-
-
Indeed, even today,
it is all to common
to hear the
specialists in any
particular
discipline complain
bitterly of being
expected to
nursemaid others in
whatever enterprise.
And they will be
even more hostile
towards any notion
needing to be
nursemaided
themselves, in
matters beyond
whatever their own
specialty, let alone
integrating
different
disciplines.
-
-
But the model
presented here in
this very
questionnaire is one
of close-knit
entrepreneurial
reciprocal
nursemaiding,
so to speak.
-
-
Could you yourself
ever consider
embracing such a
paradigm?
-
-
-
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identifying Strengths
& Weaknesses
The starting point
for developing new business
ventures from
 scratch
lies inside the prospective
entrepreneur no less than in
the marketplace, laboratory,
business plan
etc.
It is our strengths
and weaknesses which should
dictate the areas in which to
develop ideas and the likely
scale & scope of any
venture. At the end of the day,
support for any business by
financiers, suppliers,
customers etc. will also be a
vote of confidence in your
abilities to make it
successful.
We must build on our
strengths and shore up,
surmount or work around our
weaknesses, and possibly
cut our cloth to meet our main
limitations.
For example, there is
little point in searching for
capital-intensive or
knowledge-based ideas if,
between us, we will have
slim/no prospects of raising
the necessary capital or if our
pool of educational background
is unsuitable.
Of course we have all
heard stories of
garage-startups by school
drops-out which attracted
venture capital and eventually
became mega-businesses, but we
might not hear so much about
the huge numbers of failures,
precisely because that
would not be remarkable
or uncommon.
Check
motives as applicable to
you:
From
what vantage is your approach?
Are you:
Be especially aware that
inventors and innovators do not
necessarily make good business
people.
Areas where you should make
honest assessments of your
strengths and weaknesses
include the
following:
Educational
background
- Any
general or special business
or technical
qualifications?
- Do you have a knowledge
of finance &
marketing?
- Are you up-to-date with
business-related
issues?
Financial
strengths
- Have
you influence or access to
Venture Capital? How much,
how easily, what conditions
and when?
Commitment
Expertise &
interests
- Do you have insights into
any business sectors or
trades?
- What
are you good at or like
doing?
- Do you
have a
hobbies/interests/talents
which could conceivably be
commercialized?
Personal
qualities
Prior
experience
- Have
you done anything special,
exceptional or
unusual?
- What
skills or expertise have
you?
External contacts,
resources etc.
- What
contacts have you in finance,
business etc.?
- Have you or any of
your own contacts access to
any under-utilized
resources?
- Do you
know people who might help
give us a start?
Don't be afraid to
ask other people to help assess
your strengths and
weaknesses.
To help surmount
one's own weaknesses, one might
consider the option of forming
an entrepreneurial or activist
team. And that is the focus
of this website. But beware
of trying to work with people
you don't like or respect or
can't
trust.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
-
*How do you define
reasonableness?
a) According to
personal convenience. I will do as
much as will not put me out, because
I must prioritize and put my important
goals first.
b) According to
honor and commitment between
partners in collaborative
effort to one another. I will
always go out of my way to reciprocate, aid, support and
better equip the efforts of whom so ever
we should ever encourage or allow to
trouble themselves on behalf of our grand
designs.
How shall we define our working
relationships?
a) Everything and Everyone
in Each Their Place. We each must
focus on our own specialized part in
things, which will all come together as
history unfolds. Any cooperation, per se,
must be entirely spontaneous.
Agreements are an imperfect social
technology. If you spontaneously do
for me, and then I do not in due course
spontaneously reciprocate, then this is
no indication what so ever of any
neurotic self absorbed or dishonest
exploitative ulterior cross purpose
agenda on my own part, but,
rather, only proves that you first
need to accomplish more by yourself in
order to impress me, on top of
continuing helping out and kissing my
ass.
b) The Ideal Solution May
Arise Outside of One's Own Field. I
will "break out of the box",
either taking more active interest in the
specialized work of any other
participant, or else we will build
trust
so that I may surrender whatever degree
of control in another person's field,
and be happy to be as helpful to them
as is asked of me, demanding as much in
return, adaptive, ad hoc
interactions, so that, together each
our goals will be accomplished. And I
look forward to such a rewarding
experience.
I wanna be:
a) Bossed around and
ignored
b) Logistically supported and
respected
How do you define
commitment?
a) In such terms as how
so ever I see fit, being that only I
can ever fathom the fixated dedication with which
I burn for my own vision and
ideals.
b)
Interpersonally and actively,
among
participants in collaborative
effort, to empower and better equip one another in
group effort of reciprocal logistical
support.
- Would you
actually relish the opportunity to take
an ongoing active interest in
orientation, in learning about and
familiarizing yourself with the different
general and specialized efforts and
inputs of each of your fellow
participants in collaborative
effort?
-
- Would you actually relish the
opportunity to take an ongoing active interest in
opening yourself to assist and better equip
partners in collaborative
effort to
do likewise, reciprocally?
-
- Would you
actually relish the opportunity to take
an active interest, drop everything and
bend over backwards to graciously and
enthusiastically assist or advise a
fellow
participant in collaborative
effort as ever needed,
particularly whenever any sort of
cross-functional interdisciplinary task or problem
arises, and a combination of respective
skill sets and resources may
immediately be required?
-
- Would you
actually relish the opportunity to take
an active interest, drop everything and
bend over backwards to graciously and
enthusiastically help court a new
prospect?
-
- Would you
actually relish the opportunity to take
an active interest, drop everything and
bend over backwards to graciously and
enthusiastically help make a newly
joining partner participant in collaboratoion feel
welcomed?
-
What is your executive
style?
To maintain dictatorial
rule and never ask anyone else
involved for suggestions. This way all
the glory will be mine. Of course, our
participants in collaborative
effort will not tend to do their
best, nor rush to correct obvious errors,
and they will desert us by and by. But
then having to continually network for
new collaboration resource is just part
of the job.
After all,
it is my risk, sacrifice vision and
commitment that embodies all promise, so
of course I must make all key decisions.
All others involved are mere tools to get
the job done, easily discarded if they
break or wear out. Besides, caring
about people just clouds the harsh
realities of true visionary
commitment.
All others
involved are either only using me for
their own selfish motives, or else, if
they are altruistic, then they won't mind
in any case. For success, they'll take
the credit, but otherwise, they'll never
admit their worthless
inadequacy.
To serve. Initially, we must
function without the resources of
established big organizations. And so, I
understand full well that
compartmentalization is simply not a
viable option. There is nothing yet to
dominate, micromanage or
compartmentalize!
I know my field, but only others
understand the application thereof as
dictated by their own tasks and
responsibilities. Therefore each of our
job description, including my own, must
continually revise itself to to empower, fully
support and better equip the efforts and abet the needs of
each of our fellow
participant in collaborative
effort in
addition to one's own tasks, especially
where chances of success at all are
enhanced or actually even require that
all such tasks be executed in sequence.
No matter how expert and visionary any
one of us may be. And so, I look forward
to putting myself at the disposal of my
partners in collaborative
effort and being guided by
them to aid, better equip and facilitate their efforts however
best I can (and shall expect no less in
return) because I realize full well that
Entrepreneurial new venture creation is
by nature a close working
interdisciplinary effort at preparation
to risking the unknown.
For without great rewards to
bestow, how else can I bind anyone to
common cause, save by giving of myself?
And what hope for great success against
all odds can there be save by nurturing
faith in one another? What is more
important than people, at the inception
when people and their dedication are the
sole resource? For this we must all be
reciprocally accountable, and, without
reservation I will bend over backwards to
give 110% the utmost of my assistance and
support, no less priority than to
entirely my own life's work, however
particular or solitary that has been up
until now.
Any collaboration against the
odds, after all, must be no less
dedicated in order to succeed.
- Additional comments:
-
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|