h1

Facebook Saves Clark Kent from Death by Kryptonite in a “Smallville” Episode

May 8, 2009

If you think social media is only about fail whales, think again: Facebook played a significant role in saving Clark Kent from death by kryptonite exposure in the April 23, 2009 episode of Smallville.

smallville_opening_creditsTitled “Stiletto,” the episode involves Lois Lane posing as a new hero of the same name to attract the attention of the “Red/Blue Blur.”

This is the name given to Clark Kent in reference to the distinctive “red and blue blur” his primary-colored clothes leave in photographs taken of him saving residents of Metropolis at supersonic speed.

In the scene when Facebook is mentioned, Lois visits Chloe Sullivan (her cousin) about the whereabouts of missing Daily Planet photographer Jimmy Olsen. Notably, after getting married just a few episodes ago, Chloe and Jimmy abruptly divorced due to some key plot twists involving the appearance of Doomsday in Smallville.

Audio clips and transcripts of the two key parts of the scene are provided below. Note that the volume of the clips might be low, so be sure to adjust your volume.

Facebook Saves Clark Kent: Part 1

 Lois: “Jimmy’s not answering his phone and I was just wondering if perhaps you knew — “

Chloe: “Where my ex was? I thought that’s what Facebook updates were for.”

 

 Facebook Saves Clark Kent: Part 2

Chloe: “Jimmy should be at the Ace of Clubs…I really need to remove him from my Facebook friends, don’t I?” 

 

FacebookFortunately, Chloe’s revelation allows Lois to find Jimmy and Clark who are being held captive by gangsters. She embraces her adopted superhero role and saves the day. 

Unfortunately, a kryptonite-weakened Clark takes a bullet meant for Lois during the rescue, but he quickly recovers. Of course, he makes sure to not let a guilt-ridden Lois in on the secret.

The “rescue” scene and the one immediately following it is available on YouTube (embedding has been disabled). You can also watch the full episode online at the website of the CW Television Network.

So, when’s the last time your Facebook status saved a superhero?

h1

Cinco de Mio: My Top 5 Strengths from “Now, Discover Your Strengths”

May 5, 2009

What are your top five strengths?

I have previously blogged about how insightful my personal mastery course in the organizational leadership EdD program  at Pepperdine was to me. The most paradigm shifting experience during that class was reading “Now, Discover Your Strengths” and taking the related online test to understand my top five strengths.

Today, with “Cinco de Mayo” upon us, it seems appropriate (and only mildlyopportunistic) to reveal what you could call the “Cinco de Mio!”

Build your life upon your strengths - one brick at a timeWhen I first read the book in 2006 I received free access to the online “StrengthsFinder” test and the first five of 34 possible strengths in order of their relevance to me.

I did not choose to learn all of my 34 strengths then, nor am I sure it would be any more useful to me now. Five seems like a manageable number.

My top five strengths with my explanation of the meaning, my interpretation and projected application of each  follow below.

Note that these assessments are derived from two assignments I originally completed in October 2006. I have made some edits where time and experience have changed what I originally wrote, but the essence remains the same.

Interestingly, after re-reading my original analysis and evaluating it within the context of my present situation, I feel even more confident that earning a PhD and contributing knowledge to the world is my true calling in life.

Without further adieu — my top five strengths:

1. Learner

Meaning: I have a great desire to learn and want to continuously improve. The process of learning, rather than the outcome, is what excites me.

Interpretation: I’ve always found satisfaction, purpose and identity as a “learner.” When I was younger I mistakenly measured my self-worth on my grades alone. As I matured I finally understood “the outcome of the learning is less significant than the ‘getting there,’ (Buckingham and Clifton, 2001, p. 107).

I have worked to develop a healthier balance between academics and adventure. Likewise, when I was younger I was engaged in book learning exclusively, but have since identified an equal interest in “experiential education.” I don’t think I will ever satiate my desire to overcome a new educational obstacle.

Lately most of my learning has resulted from my journey as a parent of two children who each have special needs.

Application: My biggest challenge as a learner has been extracting myself from an educational environment and integrating into a professional setting – while still finding satisfaction and purpose. While I am a very good student, I often feel lost once I am no longer exclusively in that role.

At positions in the past I frequently fond myself wanting to ask “why” when given an assignment while my superiors wanted me to answer “when can you get this done?” I feel a need to understand the underlying reasons for a project so I can break it down into logical, more easily understood components.

I desire an occupation that feels more like an avocation — something for which which I can tackle an intellectual challenge, transform information into knowledge and apply it strategically to render a tangible, beneficial result.

2. Strategic

Meaning: I like to create alternative ways to proceed with a given task. Faced with any given scenario, I can quickly spot patterns and issues around which I can devise a specialized plan of attack.

Interpretation: I have often defined myself as “a strategic thinker and creative tinkerer,” so it seems my initial perceptions about being “strategic” are correct. Beyond being a natural talent, I attribute this strength to a background in student journalism and years of being taught to deconstruct information.

Even after I ventured into the world of consulting I find myself relying on the perfunctory “5 Ws” of journalism: who, what, when where, why.

This strength has become particularly relevant as I’ve endeavored further into higher education. I’ve always had an aptitude to “sort through the clutter and find the best route,” (Buckingham and Clifton, 2001, p. 115), which is the foundation of my ability to learn and to communicate my discoveries in a clear and compelling manner.

Application: While most of my professional past has involved creative areas, I’ve always had focused and practical mindset. My challenge is to find a professional situation that will reward me for this strength while engaging my others.

The most feasible route is a career as a college professor (either in a full-time or adjunct capacity) while also remaining engaged with the “real world” from which the curriculum I teach is extracted.

Note: when I initially proposed this idea, I had not yet begun teaching at the college level: I started my first online class with Axia College of University of Phoenix on June 18, 2007 and my first onsite experience began with DeVry University on October 30, 2007.

However, once I understood my natural strengths I began working towards making the dream a reality.

3. Input

Meaning: I naturally crave more information, I need to know more. I like to collect and archive all kinds of information.

Interpretation: Even as I wrote this paper I couldn’t resist the urge to check various websites for the latest events around the world. As Buckingham and Clifton (2001) explain, I “collect information – words, facts, books, and quotations,” (p. 105).

Beyond collecting information I have a need to “connect the dots” between each individual piece and clarify the meaning of each to hopefully reveal a larger truth.

Considering the mind of someone with a strength in ideation, “is always looking for connections [and is] intrigued when seemingly disparate phenomena can be linked by an obscure connection,” (Buckingham and Clifton, 2001, p. 102), my need for input shares some characteristics with ideation.

Application: Information overload and analysis paralysis are weaknesses that can impugn the effectiveness of “input” and are issues with which I have dealt. The main obstacle with “input” as a strength is that it can be a solitary, passive endeavor.

On the positive side, the big picture of my strengths reveals someone who is introspective, analytical, and clear minded, but who also enjoys close relationships. As a leader, I can share this strength with the people I lead to facilitate their specific needs. There is also an implication that someone with an “input” strength is also a good listener.

On a related note, Max DePree writes  in Leadership is an Art (1989), “The leader listens to the ideas, needs, aspirations, and wishes of the followers and then…responds…in an appropriate fashion,” (p. xxi).

When powerless people feel those in power have a genuine interest in them those people feel hopeful. When the reverse is true, people are consumed with resentment and disdain for their leaders.

4. Intellection

Meaning: I enjoy a high degree of intellectual activity. I am introspective and enjoy engaging in intellectual discussions.

Interpretation: I am an intellectual who enjoys “exercising the ‘muscles’ of [my] brain,” (Buckingham and Clifton, 2001, p. 106). However, I also have a strength in “intellection” which “may very well lack focus,” (Buckingham & Clifton, 2001, p. 106) but I do have a strong “strategic ability.

I suppose this is an example of nature finding a balance: while I enjoy intellectual flights of fancy, I am also grounded by a need to remain clear and have my research serve a practical purpose.

I think one of my most unique strengths is being an academic who can also take action, combining the theoretical with the practical.

Application: Having “intellection” as a theme enables me to provide well researched and well organized information about the competitive landscape and well reasoned thoughts about options. I generally consider all available options and only take action when the best one reveals itself, but also I sometimes make decisions based on instinct alone.

Realistically, in an average day, I must make hundreds of decisions and not all are worthy of intellectual investigation. I have been accused of “over thinking” decisions and taking too much time to choose a course of action. Maybe therein lays the difference between a manager and a leader?

Whereas a manager must make immediate decisions based on the information available at that moment (in conjunction with the knowledge gleamed from past experience), a leader can afford to be more systematic and pensive.

I am unresolved on this, but know that if “intellection” is a strength, it is anchored in a natural talent and therefore worth embracing.

5. Relator

Meaning: I prefer to establish close relationships with others and I find deep satisfaction in working hard with friends to achieve a common goal.

Interpretation:I find it interesting how, “the Relator theme pulls you toward people you already know. You do not necessarily shy away from meeting new people….but you derive a great deal of pleasure and strength….from your close friends,” (Buckingham & Clifton, 2001, p. 110).

This theme reflects my focus on honesty and my preference for a smaller circle of friends. I am not superficial and don’t want my relationships to be. Although I don’t have many close friends I do have several hundred acquaintances.

Confiding in a close cadre of colleagues is a powerful way of living; one that reflects the actions of many noted leaders who only had close friendships with a few very special people despite their being followed by thousands.

Application: The most powerful component of this theme is that “you are comfortable with intimacy…for you a relationship has value only if it is genuine,” (Buckingham and Clifton, 2001, p. 110).

I remember wondering in high school why I didn’t have more friends – not because I wanted more friends but because I thought I should have more. Even today, I am closest to my wife and our two children, even sometimes to the exclusion of my larger family.

On one level my wanting to develop fewer, but closer relationships demonstrates a self-confidence I didn’t realize I had and a deep personal conviction that my friends are meaningful people to me. I value people and seek to validate them by acknowledging their individual strengths.

The secret is to pick the right people with whom to entrust my friendship, but more importantly to not totally shut out anyone new who might prove to be a valued ally.

So now that you know my greatest strengths, what are yours?

Resources

h1

Is Creativity without Contribution a Waste?

April 23, 2009

Last week, after posting my last blog entry about Sir Ken Robinson’s riveting 2006 TED speech, I added a link to it from my LinkedIn profile status update, asking the question “Do schools kill creativity? Yes, says Sir Ken Robinson in his 2006 TED Talk!”

I didn’t think much of my decision to do so as I’ve been using my LinkedIn profile and my Facebook account to cross-promote my blog entries for quite some time. Additionally my most recent blog posts also display on my LinkedIn profile (as will this one). I typically receive a few comments on Facebook, but very few, if any, on LinkedIn.

This would be the case no longer.

Looking In from the Outside -- From 365 Days: 4/365 (December 4, 2008)After one positive comment from a colleague within my LinkedIn network, I soon found myself engaged in an unexpected, yet interesting electronic exchange about creativity versus innovation with another colleague.

His essential argument was creativity which does not result in a tangible good or service for which people will pay money is wasteful and void of value.

Further, he added society does not pay for the creative process, but the result of that process.

My counterargument was creativity is the foundation of innovation, that ideation without implementation is another word for brainstorming: an essential, though admittedly inefficient process.

What’s more, I argued the possibility of commoditization should not be the only indicator of value: a society worth living in should value ideas and reward creative thought. Notably, I found myself heretically disagreeing with management guru Peter F. Drucker’s canonical thoughts on the matter.

I’ve included a transcript of the exchange below, but I removed the name of the person with whom I had the conversation out of respect for his privacy (however, if you are in my LinkedIn network I presume it is something to which you have access):

Colleague: Sir Ken is great, but people aren’t paid to be Creative. Innovative, perhaps. The latter is operational; it includes implementation skills.

Me: Certainly the best ideas should be actionable. But can you have innovation w/o creativity?

Me: In a recent interview Guy Kawasaki talked about “ideas vs. action” as related to luck. I blogged about it: http://cli.gs/luck

Colleague: That’s my point. The obverse, that you can have creativity w/o innovation/implementation, is the concern.

Me: A valid concern, but re: ROI/measurement could it be argued that creativity indirectly leads to innovation by stimulating thinking?

Me: I suppose you don’t want to encourage aimlessness or hinder potential (w/ a BA in English and an MBA I see both sides).

Colleague: Everybody loves creative kids, but generally creative adults are misfits. Read Peter F. Drucker on “The Fallacy of Creativity.”

Me: But it is usually the misfits who make the biggest mark and through their rejection of assimilation render real innovation.

Me: Drucker says “creativity is no substitute for analysis and knowledge,” but I counter that creativity combines analysis and knowledge.

Colleague: Society doesn’t pay for (creative) process, it pays for contribution, for results. Process w/o results=waste.

Colleague: Matthew, I’m outta here! Have to create some clients!

Me: A society worth living in values ideas and rewards creative thought. Not everything can be commoditized.

Me: Process w/o results=brainstorming (which eventually leads to an idea that can be implemented).

Me: Thanks for the engaging discourse!

I appreciated this unique opportunity to engage in a spirited debate on LinkedIn. Ironically, one day earlier, I had espoused on Twitter that I often find myself unsure how to leverage LinkedIn because it seems to be the most formal and least interactive of all social media platforms I use.

How perfectly timed was this exchange to disprove my earlier assumption?! Coincidentally, I’ve been making efforts to participate more in the groups to which I belong and to add comments to the status updates of my colleagues.

In reviewing the exchange above, I realize there are some similarities between my colleagues thoughts and those communicated by Guy Kawasaki in my earlier blog post to which I referred my colleague. Specifically consider this passage:

“At the beginning of my career I used to think that the idea is the key, and once you get a good idea, implementation is easy. Now, I’m at the end of my career and I believe the exactly the opposite: I think good ideas are easy and implementation is hard.”

From that perspective I see my colleagues point: you can have all the ideas in the world, but until you do something with them or about them do those ideas really matter? In other words, you can think about doing something all day long, but until you actually do it, have you achieved your goal?

Yet, I also question how you can contribute without having invested time into the creative process? And, any reasonably person accepts that the creative process is, by nature and almost by requirement, inefficient and irregular.

Perhaps this is a chicken and egg scenario? Or, strangely, does it somehow connect to the age old existentialist question of “if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?”

What do you think: is creativity without contribution a waste?