ForumResources: Researches, Studies, TheoriesFeedback / IdeasHow Can We Promote An Innovative …

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

How Can We Promote An Innovative Culture in any Forum?

#1 · January 10, 2022, 5:05 am

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on January 10, 2022, 5:05 am
The following message addresses the nature of the forum rather than any particular person.

However, it sprang to mind after my discussion with Lucio on this thread:
Discussing the Zombie Approach to Refining Idea for the Community & Individuals

The Nature of Forum Communications Results in Less Dialogue

A huge part of the forum conversations/threads has one-way communication dynamics or at least one-way value exchange dynamics.
What I mean is that

People ask questions and are looking for answers (getting value)

People share their ideas with the community (giving value)

The "Personal Feedbacks & Clarifications" may also seem that way.
It doesn't have the discussion vibe.

So it may be the case that there's not enough dialogue/discussion.
But people don't like extended conversations over an asynchronous medium.
It feels tiring and stale.

Also, it's hard to find the "early fit" through quick exchanges that a synchronous medium fit.
"Early fit" means short back & forths to get 2 people on the same page.
I would argue vibing helps in this "early fit" in face-to-face conversations.
But vibing is harder over text.

This is also why it's so much more important to have a clear, solid post in a forum compared to verbal exchanges.
A lot of effort is needed for other forum users to clarify ambiguous posts compared to face-to-face conversations.

Actually, I intended this thread to be for quick exchanges:
Short Thank Yous and Feedback - Experimental
Organically, it turned out to be mainly a thread to show appreciation and gratitude to others.
Although I saw that a short conversation developed between Lucio and Kevin on working on the project management case studies.

In short, the nature of the forum results in less dialogue.
At least dialogue that is not deep and wide.

[Houseparty tried to tackle this problem through impromptu voice channels but failed.
I think this is a long-time issue that's challenging to solve for asynchronous working.]

Experimental Idea Brainstorming Thread

I will start a meta-idea brainstorming thread where it has a brainstorming vibe.
Shorter exchanges and people don't need to feel "on-topic".
When the idea begins to show feasibility, let's spin this out on another thread within the idea section of the forum.

Appeal to People's Fantasies

Fantasies speak to the deepest of human desires and the depth of the human condition.

ThePowerMoves appeals to the human desire for equality and the desire to matter.
The fantasy and idealism of a fair world.
Giving people a taste of being able to stand up for themselves is very seductive.

Humans yearn for

freedom

equality

power

respect, recognition and the desire to matter

People are very motivated and inspired to generate ideas to satisfy their deepest desires.
People start dreaming and begin releasing the mental shackles.
Ideas flow naturally.

Higher Level of Product Management -> Product Directorship

I was reading about how the responsibilities of product managers and product directors are different.

The responsibility of a product manager is to bring ideas on a given product to life.

The responsibility of a product director is to develop the culture, resources, tools, and conversations necessary for products managers to brainstorm ideas and bring them to life.

The product manager is really good at the ideation process from brainstorming to implementation.
The product director understands how to facilitate the ideation process.

In short, we can

promote the ideation process and

teach people how to use the ideation process to generate & present good ideas.

Personal Interests

I'm interested in these fields:

Power dynamics and social dynamics -> social power is needed to brainstorm ideas and gather the necessary people to bring them to life

Entrepreneurship -> stages of testing & developing a business idea into a viable business

Product management and directorship -> approach to developing products from ideas

Scientific and research process -> enlarging the knowledge base of a field through experimentation, analysis, and ideas

Learning, creativity, expertise and the broader field of cognitive psychology -> you need a certain baseline of knowledge to come out with good ideas although you need the ability to switch off the "dogmatic" thinking as you progress

Environmental psychology -> for example, high ceilings promote creativity

In short, I really enjoy the fields which help in innovation.
If you're interested in any of the fields, I would be really excited to have a discussion.

The following message addresses the nature of the forum rather than any particular person.

However, it sprang to mind after my discussion with Lucio on this thread:
Discussing the Zombie Approach to Refining Idea for the Community & Individuals

The Nature of Forum Communications Results in Less Dialogue

A huge part of the forum conversations/threads has one-way communication dynamics or at least one-way value exchange dynamics.
What I mean is that

People ask questions and are looking for answers (getting value)
People share their ideas with the community (giving value)

The "Personal Feedbacks & Clarifications" may also seem that way.
It doesn't have the discussion vibe.

So it may be the case that there's not enough dialogue/discussion.
But people don't like extended conversations over an asynchronous medium.
It feels tiring and stale.

Also, it's hard to find the "early fit" through quick exchanges that a synchronous medium fit.
"Early fit" means short back & forths to get 2 people on the same page.
I would argue vibing helps in this "early fit" in face-to-face conversations.
But vibing is harder over text.

This is also why it's so much more important to have a clear, solid post in a forum compared to verbal exchanges.
A lot of effort is needed for other forum users to clarify ambiguous posts compared to face-to-face conversations.

Actually, I intended this thread to be for quick exchanges:
Short Thank Yous and Feedback - Experimental
Organically, it turned out to be mainly a thread to show appreciation and gratitude to others.
Although I saw that a short conversation developed between Lucio and Kevin on working on the project management case studies.

In short, the nature of the forum results in less dialogue.
At least dialogue that is not deep and wide.

[Houseparty tried to tackle this problem through impromptu voice channels but failed.
I think this is a long-time issue that's challenging to solve for asynchronous working.]

Experimental Idea Brainstorming Thread

I will start a meta-idea brainstorming thread where it has a brainstorming vibe.
Shorter exchanges and people don't need to feel "on-topic".
When the idea begins to show feasibility, let's spin this out on another thread within the idea section of the forum.

Appeal to People's Fantasies

Fantasies speak to the deepest of human desires and the depth of the human condition.

ThePowerMoves appeals to the human desire for equality and the desire to matter.
The fantasy and idealism of a fair world.
Giving people a taste of being able to stand up for themselves is very seductive.

Humans yearn for

freedom
equality
power
respect, recognition and the desire to matter

People are very motivated and inspired to generate ideas to satisfy their deepest desires.
People start dreaming and begin releasing the mental shackles.
Ideas flow naturally.

Higher Level of Product Management -> Product Directorship

I was reading about how the responsibilities of product managers and product directors are different.

The responsibility of a product manager is to bring ideas on a given product to life.

The responsibility of a product director is to develop the culture, resources, tools, and conversations necessary for products managers to brainstorm ideas and bring them to life.

The product manager is really good at the ideation process from brainstorming to implementation.
The product director understands how to facilitate the ideation process.

In short, we can

promote the ideation process and
teach people how to use the ideation process to generate & present good ideas.

Personal Interests

I'm interested in these fields:

Power dynamics and social dynamics -> social power is needed to brainstorm ideas and gather the necessary people to bring them to life
Entrepreneurship -> stages of testing & developing a business idea into a viable business
Product management and directorship -> approach to developing products from ideas
Scientific and research process -> enlarging the knowledge base of a field through experimentation, analysis, and ideas
Learning, creativity, expertise and the broader field of cognitive psychology -> you need a certain baseline of knowledge to come out with good ideas although you need the ability to switch off the "dogmatic" thinking as you progress
Environmental psychology -> for example, high ceilings promote creativity

In short, I really enjoy the fields which help in innovation.
If you're interested in any of the fields, I would be really excited to have a discussion.

#2 · January 12, 2022, 12:02 pm

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on January 12, 2022, 12:02 pm
On the Feedbacks & Clarifications thread, I realised that I got distracted by personal issues.
I actually wanted to discuss this on a forum level.
This thread I opened seems to be a better place to talk about that.

I still want to thank Lucio very much for his time in talking me through those personal issues.
I found the discussion productive.

From the thread Feedbacks & Clarifications, Post #355

And I wanted to talk about this on a general level.
Because I noticed for other people who contribute ideas as well, you sometimes give a short reply.

Compared to people asking for help in social situations, you sometimes give very detailed replies.

I feel that the intention to contribute ideas is a positive and value-adding one.
Asking questions on social situations is not necessarily value-taking but the intention is to ask for help.

Shouldn't people who contribute ideas be rewarded with more investment compared to people who ask for help?

Consider Perspective of Average Forum User

In order to focus on the nature of ideas and questions, let's consider

an anonymous forum poster (or rather the form poster without his name and reputation).

the perspective of a third-party forum user who's observing the post by the poster

User Intentions When Posting Questions Vs Ideas

Questions may be value-adding but the intention has a greater inclination towards getting value rather than contributing value.
Not to be mistaken as advised by Lucio, a good question does contribute value.
Not all questions have this inward orientation (focus on the self rather than forum community) but questions are more often of this nature.

On the other hand, ideas (at least good ideas) have an outward orientation towards the forum community.
Ideas can seek to take the value as well by asking people for feedback to shape them.
But overall the idea is aimed to possibly generate a new perspective for the community.

Will Engagement Influence the Type of Content a Forum User Posts (Questions Vs Ideas)?

As such, how much we engage with questions vs ideas will influence how a third-party forum user views what will get a better response.
This is not to say that generating ideas do not get social credit.
For example, Lucio has generously given a lot of credit to good ideas.
My point is that contributing ideas has a less obvious, longer-term dynamic of building social capital.

My guess is that engaging more with ideas will incentivise idea brainstorming from the forum users.
The assumption here is that we want to generate more ideas.
Maybe the current rate of idea generation is sufficient.

This is more of a question than an opinion actually.
Also, targeting this at the whole community.

Do you think how much we engage ideas relative to questions will influence and incentivise forum users towards posting more of either ideas or questions?

Full Disclosure: I like to bring up ideas so there's a personal incentive and bias towards me increasing engagement for idea threads.
Because it would give me more social capital and also generate more engagement which helps my learning.

On the Feedbacks & Clarifications thread, I realised that I got distracted by personal issues.
I actually wanted to discuss this on a forum level.
This thread I opened seems to be a better place to talk about that.

I still want to thank Lucio very much for his time in talking me through those personal issues.
I found the discussion productive.

From the thread Feedbacks & Clarifications, Post #355

And I wanted to talk about this on a general level.
Because I noticed for other people who contribute ideas as well, you sometimes give a short reply.

Compared to people asking for help in social situations, you sometimes give very detailed replies.

I feel that the intention to contribute ideas is a positive and value-adding one.
Asking questions on social situations is not necessarily value-taking but the intention is to ask for help.

Shouldn't people who contribute ideas be rewarded with more investment compared to people who ask for help?

Consider Perspective of Average Forum User

In order to focus on the nature of ideas and questions, let's consider

an anonymous forum poster (or rather the form poster without his name and reputation).
the perspective of a third-party forum user who's observing the post by the poster

User Intentions When Posting Questions Vs Ideas

Questions may be value-adding but the intention has a greater inclination towards getting value rather than contributing value.
Not to be mistaken as advised by Lucio, a good question does contribute value.
Not all questions have this inward orientation (focus on the self rather than forum community) but questions are more often of this nature.

On the other hand, ideas (at least good ideas) have an outward orientation towards the forum community.
Ideas can seek to take the value as well by asking people for feedback to shape them.
But overall the idea is aimed to possibly generate a new perspective for the community.

Will Engagement Influence the Type of Content a Forum User Posts (Questions Vs Ideas)?

As such, how much we engage with questions vs ideas will influence how a third-party forum user views what will get a better response.
This is not to say that generating ideas do not get social credit.
For example, Lucio has generously given a lot of credit to good ideas.
My point is that contributing ideas has a less obvious, longer-term dynamic of building social capital.

My guess is that engaging more with ideas will incentivise idea brainstorming from the forum users.
The assumption here is that we want to generate more ideas.
Maybe the current rate of idea generation is sufficient.

This is more of a question than an opinion actually.
Also, targeting this at the whole community.

Do you think how much we engage ideas relative to questions will influence and incentivise forum users towards posting more of either ideas or questions?

Full Disclosure: I like to bring up ideas so there's a personal incentive and bias towards me increasing engagement for idea threads.
Because it would give me more social capital and also generate more engagement which helps my learning.

leaderoffun has reacted to this post.

#3 · January 13, 2022, 7:52 pm

Hello Matthew,

My opinion about the-value giving: I think there is more to it.

When someone asks a question this person also gives value: people get to learn through the learning experience of this person. Also, to teach someone is one of the best ways to learn. Finally, this provides a case study that applies to other situations that the reader might also be encountering.

In medicine, one could say that the doctor gives value to the patient. That being said, all of our knowledge comes from the patients. So it's a mutual exchange even if the patient benefits the most.

Example: there is a program to bring small children or infants from Africa with congenital heart defects to Switzerland so get a treatment. In truth, the surgeons get a lot of value from these "poor children" as they get to learn and practice. as these diseases are much rarer in Europe. So it might sound like the children are the lucky ones (they are) and it's also a training experience that the surgeons would not get otherwise.

Cheers!

Lucio Buffalmano and Matthew Whitewood have reacted to this post.

#4 · January 13, 2022, 8:27 pm

Hi John,

Thanks a lot for sharing your thoughts and your time.
We are actually on the same page in that regard.
A person presenting a question or case study no doubt presents an opportunity for learning and practice.

I wanted to emphasise the intention.
To use your analogy, the "poor children" do provide a lot of value in terms of opportunities for learning.
However, the "poor children" probably did not have an intention of providing value to the surgeons.
They most likely wanted value for themselves.
Again, correct me if I'm wrong because I'm far from being familiar with the medical sector.

Let's compare this to a new surgeon who's researching a new methodology for treating congenital heart defects.
Yes, he probably has lots to gain in terms of status and reputation.
At the same time, his intention and focus are on actively contributing to the medical research community.
As such, his intention is to provide value.

In short, I feel that there are 2 elements to consider:

Providing value - What you and I agree upon
The intention to provide value

I feel that it's important to incentivise both.

At least, this is my personal view of when I'm posting on the forum.
When I post a practical question, I have more intention to get value for myself although I do my best to answer the question and provide value too through a solid context.
The intention is inwards. Towards myself.

When I post an idea, I have an intention to give value to the community.
Maybe I do have an intention to gain status as a result of the value given.
But the intention is still value-giving and outwards.

It's not binary but I'm comparing the thought process and desire when a person posts a question for themselves vs an idea.
I have a feeling that there're some differences when it comes to the intention.

I may be seeing this from the wrong angle.
As such, this is why I would like to hear other people's thoughts on this.

What do you think?

#5 · January 13, 2022, 8:51 pm

I'm not sure surgeons do these kind of stuff to provide value to the community as a whole. This specific example is to show that what may look altruistic from the outside could be actually selfish.

I'm talking about grey vs black/white. My point is that it's not one person is giving 100% and the other one is taking 100%. It's more give and take with one person getting more and the other person giving more.

#6 · January 14, 2022, 5:31 am

It was a bad attempt on my part to engage your analogy in another way due to my lack of industry know-how.

Our points are complementary and go hand-in-hand in my opinion.
(And thanks for your time to share your point of view)

I will use arbitrary percentages.
Even if they are wrong, I wanted to highlight that, in terms of balance, the value given and taken can be different from the intention to give value and take value.

In terms of value exchange,

Child
- get value by getting treatment (70%)
- give value in terms of opportunities (30%)
Surgeon
- give value by treating the child (70%)
- get value by receiving an opportunity (30%)

In terms of intentions to give and take, I believe it's more skewed

Child
- intends to get value by getting treatment (90%)
- intends to give an opportunity to the surgeons (10%)
Surgeon
- intends to give value by treating the child (50%)
- intends to get value by receiving an opportunity (50%)

When someone asks a question this person also gives value: people get to learn through the learning experience of this person. Also, to teach someone is one of the best ways to learn. Finally, this provides a case study that applies to other situations that the reader might also be encountering.

So no doubt on the value of questions and how teaching can be one of the best ways to learn.

Maybe I'm being unclear when I use the dichotomy of question vs idea.
I will re-phrase this in another way.

Should we consider the intentions behind someone's question/idea on top of the value exchange as you advised?

For example, one person could pose a question with an intention to get at another angle for learning.
Another person could have an intention of getting answers for himself even though, in the process, he incidentally gives value.

#7 · January 14, 2022, 5:52 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 14, 2022, 5:52 am
Some notes on my side:

Should Forums incentivize innovation-giving? Many might, yes. TPM already does it

Generally speaking, I don't know about "any" forum.

But I think it's a smart approach.

And I think TPM is already doing great with promoting and incentivizing both an innovative and value-giving community.

Should it do even more?

Maybe.
And I probably can do even better on that as well as per your feedback which is both appreciated and something I'm consciously working on now).

Even at the current stage though, it's long past the time when it was just me coming up with ideas and concepts.

You're working on a course that supplments TPM.
That's HUGE.

Ali is writing a book based on many TPM's core strategies.
That's HUGE.

Kevin will eventually come up with a booklet of highly practical scripts for challenging work-situations.
Some cutting-edge stuff that's not anywhere else to find.

These will all be turned into win-win.

A lot a of strategies, techniques and high-level approaches sprung out from other guys who took the time to summarize or generalize an approach to their own question (John had several of them as well).
These are also win-win as the people who ask learn and become more effective in life.
TPM gets to codify that knowledge -one of its goals- and me, I might sell more courses thanks to that knowledge.

Should YOU -or individuals- incourage giving? Abso-Fucking-Lutely

Yes!

That's one of the SO simple and obviousy, yet may I say, in large part revolutionary approaches of this webiste / PU.

Many PU's strategies and techniques are designed to get the most cooperation and giving out of people as possible -or to keep good releationships / avoid enemies, which is also a secondary way of encouraging giving and win-win.

That's just smart and, often, win-win (unless one abuses of it, but generally speaking many people are not stupid and they won't keep on giving withotu getting something back)

And in leadership positions, that's also a leader's responsibility (another fundamental TPM's axiom that should have been so obvious but that was somehow missing in all the thousands of leadership books-.

Should YOU -or individuals- consider intentions? Abso-Fucking-Lutely

I think you're right Matthew in separating the two.

It's a very important distinction.
And, in life, I do seek and appreciate more the people with good intentions -and recommend the same as part of an effective as well as happy (social) life-.

Good intentions can be seen either in more practical value-giving as well as emotional.

Should YOU -or individuals- encourage intention? Dubious

When we consdier intention we get into a very different realm though.

Now we're talking about ethics.

And can you change people's morals and ethics?

Maybe, a bit.

But I don't think it should be a goal.

At that level, I believe more in taking people for who they are.

My approach is to take people for who they are, and act as a cosequence (in a way that makes the pie pigger and/or maximize returns).

Important exceptions may apply with very close friends and partners.
In those cases, you can do a bit more to "shape" the person you prefer a associating with -but it goes on a case by case basis-.

Should TPM's forum encourae intention? I don't personally think so

I don't think that this forum should try to change people's moral/ethical intention.

We propose here why win-win is good for everyone and we say pretty much everywhere that we write and prefer high-quality value givers who seek win-win.

But beyond that... Should we try to convert people into more moral beings?

I don't think so.

That's more like a religious insititution kind of thing.

Some notes on my side:

Should Forums incentivize innovation-giving? Many might, yes. TPM already does it

Generally speaking, I don't know about "any" forum.

But I think it's a smart approach.

And I think TPM is already doing great with promoting and incentivizing both an innovative and value-giving community.

Should it do even more?

Maybe.
And I probably can do even better on that as well as per your feedback which is both appreciated and something I'm consciously working on now).

Even at the current stage though, it's long past the time when it was just me coming up with ideas and concepts.

You're working on a course that supplments TPM.
That's HUGE.

Ali is writing a book based on many TPM's core strategies.
That's HUGE.

Kevin will eventually come up with a booklet of highly practical scripts for challenging work-situations.
Some cutting-edge stuff that's not anywhere else to find.

These will all be turned into win-win.

A lot a of strategies, techniques and high-level approaches sprung out from other guys who took the time to summarize or generalize an approach to their own question (John had several of them as well).
These are also win-win as the people who ask learn and become more effective in life.
TPM gets to codify that knowledge -one of its goals- and me, I might sell more courses thanks to that knowledge.

Should YOU -or individuals- incourage giving? Abso-Fucking-Lutely

Yes!

That's one of the SO simple and obviousy, yet may I say, in large part revolutionary approaches of this webiste / PU.

Many PU's strategies and techniques are designed to get the most cooperation and giving out of people as possible -or to keep good releationships / avoid enemies, which is also a secondary way of encouraging giving and win-win.

That's just smart and, often, win-win (unless one abuses of it, but generally speaking many people are not stupid and they won't keep on giving withotu getting something back)

And in leadership positions, that's also a leader's responsibility (another fundamental TPM's axiom that should have been so obvious but that was somehow missing in all the thousands of leadership books-.

Should YOU -or individuals- consider intentions? Abso-Fucking-Lutely

I think you're right Matthew in separating the two.

It's a very important distinction.
And, in life, I do seek and appreciate more the people with good intentions -and recommend the same as part of an effective as well as happy (social) life-.

Good intentions can be seen either in more practical value-giving as well as emotional.

Should YOU -or individuals- encourage intention? Dubious

When we consdier intention we get into a very different realm though.

Now we're talking about ethics.

And can you change people's morals and ethics?

Maybe, a bit.

But I don't think it should be a goal.

At that level, I believe more in taking people for who they are.

My approach is to take people for who they are, and act as a cosequence (in a way that makes the pie pigger and/or maximize returns).

Important exceptions may apply with very close friends and partners.
In those cases, you can do a bit more to "shape" the person you prefer a associating with -but it goes on a case by case basis-.

Should TPM's forum encourae intention? I don't personally think so

I don't think that this forum should try to change people's moral/ethical intention.

We propose here why win-win is good for everyone and we say pretty much everywhere that we write and prefer high-quality value givers who seek win-win.

But beyond that... Should we try to convert people into more moral beings?

I don't think so.

That's more like a religious insititution kind of thing.

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.

Check the forum guidelines for effective communication.
---
Book a call for personalized & private feedback

#8 · January 14, 2022, 6:36 am

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on January 14, 2022, 6:36 am
Thanks a lot for this detailed answer Lucio!
Much appreciated.

Now we're talking about ethics.
And can you change people's morals and ethics?
Maybe, a bit.

But I don't think it should be a goal.
At that level, I believe more in taking people for who they are.
My approach is to take people for who they are, and act as a cosequence (in a way that makes the pie pigger and/or maximize returns).

My word "encourage" probably carried some connotation of changing people's morals and ethics.
I do believe in taking people for who they are.

A person's morals and ethics can remain unchanged.
At the same time, I do think that their thinking and behaviour will be affected by practical social exchange.

If someone gives me value but I sense bad intentions, I may not encourage the behaviour and the intention.
One good example is the Machiavellian giving now and asking to take shortly after.
If I sense that intention, I would probably not encourage that even though for the specific exchange, the social exchange could be a win-win.
Because this social exchange dynamic will set up a bad relationship dynamic which may not be win-win.

I don't think that this forum should try to change people's moral/ethical intention.

We propose here why win-win is good for everyone and we say pretty much everywhere that we write and prefer high-quality value givers who seek win-win.

But beyond that... Should we try to convert people into more moral beings?

I don't think so.

That's more like a religious insititution kind of thing.

It may sound religious.
And most groundbreaking, visionary companies/businesses have that element.

At the same time, it's very practical to encourage people to have a win-win intention in my opinion.
Or at least, if people see that win-win intentions will generally lead to tangible, stable benefits in the long run.
Stable is an important word because win-win is quite a foolproof method of winning for yourself.

And having a win-win mindset and intention is actually a simple, direct way to gravitate oneself towards focusing on building things rather than spending your time to come up with elaborate ways to appear win-win.

I'm excluding the extreme people like cold-hearted psychopaths who absolutely cannot be influenced in their thinking.

I have a few assumptions here of course (maybe requiring more research and thought):

Intention stems from cognitive processes (thinking)

We can influence people's thinking through incentives, persuasion and appealing to their long-term benefits

If we can influence people's thinking, we can influence them to be more win-win oriented

All in all, thanks for the discussion and new ideas on this topic of intentions to give and be win-win.
It helped me clear up my thinking and my underlying assumptions.

Thanks a lot for this detailed answer Lucio!
Much appreciated.

Now we're talking about ethics.
And can you change people's morals and ethics?
Maybe, a bit.

But I don't think it should be a goal.
At that level, I believe more in taking people for who they are.
My approach is to take people for who they are, and act as a cosequence (in a way that makes the pie pigger and/or maximize returns).

My word "encourage" probably carried some connotation of changing people's morals and ethics.
I do believe in taking people for who they are.

A person's morals and ethics can remain unchanged.
At the same time, I do think that their thinking and behaviour will be affected by practical social exchange.

If someone gives me value but I sense bad intentions, I may not encourage the behaviour and the intention.
One good example is the Machiavellian giving now and asking to take shortly after.
If I sense that intention, I would probably not encourage that even though for the specific exchange, the social exchange could be a win-win.
Because this social exchange dynamic will set up a bad relationship dynamic which may not be win-win.

I don't think that this forum should try to change people's moral/ethical intention.

We propose here why win-win is good for everyone and we say pretty much everywhere that we write and prefer high-quality value givers who seek win-win.

But beyond that... Should we try to convert people into more moral beings?

I don't think so.

That's more like a religious insititution kind of thing.

It may sound religious.
And most groundbreaking, visionary companies/businesses have that element.

At the same time, it's very practical to encourage people to have a win-win intention in my opinion.
Or at least, if people see that win-win intentions will generally lead to tangible, stable benefits in the long run.
Stable is an important word because win-win is quite a foolproof method of winning for yourself.

And having a win-win mindset and intention is actually a simple, direct way to gravitate oneself towards focusing on building things rather than spending your time to come up with elaborate ways to appear win-win.

I'm excluding the extreme people like cold-hearted psychopaths who absolutely cannot be influenced in their thinking.

I have a few assumptions here of course (maybe requiring more research and thought):

Intention stems from cognitive processes (thinking)
We can influence people's thinking through incentives, persuasion and appealing to their long-term benefits
If we can influence people's thinking, we can influence them to be more win-win oriented

All in all, thanks for the discussion and new ideas on this topic of intentions to give and be win-win.
It helped me clear up my thinking and my underlying assumptions.

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.

#9 · January 14, 2022, 7:19 am

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on January 14, 2022, 6:36 am

At the same time, it's very practical to encourage people to have a win-win intention in my opinion.
Or at least, if people see that win-win intentions will generally lead to tangible, stable benefits in the long run.
Stable is an important word because win-win is quite a foolproof method of winning for yourself.

And having a win-win mindset and intention is actually a simple, direct way to gravitate oneself towards focusing on building things rather than spending your time to come up with elaborate ways to appear win-win.

Yep, agreed, absolutely.

Several "conversions" to better intentions already happened in my opinion.

And they happened without any "direct encouragement" to morality but simply by showing a more "eagle" mindset and approach.

This is from the thread on song analyses:

Quote from naathh12 @gmail.com on December 6, 2020, 12:49 pm

I buied your course and beggined to follow your site because i wanna know how to manipulate and make people dependent of me.But through this annalisis and the course i see that this way is not so rewarding as i think.I learned its much better if you pull prople up in the same time you pull you up.

Pretty awesome, I thoguht.

And I remember another user here who was constantly looking and seeking manipulate-hypnotize type of information, and then eventually started "seeing the eagle win-win" light, so to speak.

Those are just two that are visible and that I noticed.
There might be more who never showed up on the forum side.

And that win-win, "fly higher with your approach/intentions" ethos might be one of the most important contributions of TPM.

Check the forum guidelines for effective communication.
---
Book a call for personalized & private feedback

#10 · January 14, 2022, 7:46 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 14, 2022, 7:46 am

Quote from John Freeman on January 13, 2022, 7:52 pm

Hello Matthew,

My opinion about the-value giving: I think there is more to it.

When someone asks a question this person also gives value: people get to learn through the learning experience of this person. Also, to teach someone is one of the best ways to learn. Finally, this provides a case study that applies to other situations that the reader might also be encountering.

(...)

Yep, I agree that it's often (but not always) a two-ways streets.

And, as per most complex and social things, it's also often shades of grey.

I'd like to add a coupe of notes to this correct thought:

The shades of grey eventually do turn into more white or black: the subjectivity and relativity is not "endlessly elastic" as we sometimes say here

Such as, it's possible to recognize either questions or folks who are more on the the side of taking or giving (and those who are more around the middle).

And by the way, this is different from intentions, and it's not always the case that folks who are more self-interested are giving less.
In life, many very self-interested folks build empires based on making buyers better off.

And on forums, it's certainly possible that folks with the intention to give are giving nothing because their ideas are useless, while those who ask a lot ask such great questions that end up giving hugely (and BTW, from a practical perspective, one of the reasons I'm happy to read from you John, is that your case-studies often lead to great reflections and important techniques / strategies).

So while it's possible to generally have an idea about intentions being more giving/taking, it's also possible to grow a good approximation of those who pragmatically give/take.

Not all questions are the same: some questions add more value than others.

An easy example: a very basic question might add less value to a community and website that caters to more advanced folks and produces more advanced material

Some questions are asked in a way that is more value-giving or value-taking based on how they're presented: as a subset of the above

Take a general question such as "how do I get a girlfriend"?

Such a question gives little but asks a lot.

How can you respond to such a question, properly, without writing a book?

Such a question asks for huge value, with little investment, and with low odds of generating something interesrt since most people aren't coming up with specific strategies nad tecniques, but more with very general things (start by going out, start getting good pics for online etc. etc.).

Guidelines for value-giving & win-win

The guidelines here can also be seen as a way to ensure that the question-asker invests and starts already with some value.

For example, the "provide your own solution first" is a simple yet super effective way of embedding value already -plus making everything easier for the person answering, and generally keeping investment levels balanced-.

@Matthew,

this veered off the "innovation" topic and generated an interest dialogoe on value-giving/taking.

Are you cool with changing the title to something more descriptive of value-giving/taking content?

Quote from John Freeman on January 13, 2022, 7:52 pm

Hello Matthew,

My opinion about the-value giving: I think there is more to it.

When someone asks a question this person also gives value: people get to learn through the learning experience of this person. Also, to teach someone is one of the best ways to learn. Finally, this provides a case study that applies to other situations that the reader might also be encountering.

(...)

Yep, I agree that it's often (but not always) a two-ways streets.

And, as per most complex and social things, it's also often shades of grey.

I'd like to add a coupe of notes to this correct thought:

The shades of grey eventually do turn into more white or black: the subjectivity and relativity is not "endlessly elastic" as we sometimes say here

Such as, it's possible to recognize either questions or folks who are more on the the side of taking or giving (and those who are more around the middle).

And by the way, this is different from intentions, and it's not always the case that folks who are more self-interested are giving less.
In life, many very self-interested folks build empires based on making buyers better off.

And on forums, it's certainly possible that folks with the intention to give are giving nothing because their ideas are useless, while those who ask a lot ask such great questions that end up giving hugely (and BTW, from a practical perspective, one of the reasons I'm happy to read from you John, is that your case-studies often lead to great reflections and important techniques / strategies).

So while it's possible to generally have an idea about intentions being more giving/taking, it's also possible to grow a good approximation of those who pragmatically give/take.

Not all questions are the same: some questions add more value than others.

An easy example: a very basic question might add less value to a community and website that caters to more advanced folks and produces more advanced material

Some questions are asked in a way that is more value-giving or value-taking based on how they're presented: as a subset of the above

Take a general question such as "how do I get a girlfriend"?

Such a question gives little but asks a lot.

How can you respond to such a question, properly, without writing a book?

Such a question asks for huge value, with little investment, and with low odds of generating something interesrt since most people aren't coming up with specific strategies nad tecniques, but more with very general things (start by going out, start getting good pics for online etc. etc.).

Guidelines for value-giving & win-win

The guidelines here can also be seen as a way to ensure that the question-asker invests and starts already with some value.

For example, the "provide your own solution first" is a simple yet super effective way of embedding value already -plus making everything easier for the person answering, and generally keeping investment levels balanced-.

@Matthew,

this veered off the "innovation" topic and generated an interest dialogoe on value-giving/taking.

Are you cool with changing the title to something more descriptive of value-giving/taking content?

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.

Check the forum guidelines for effective communication.
---
Book a call for personalized & private feedback