“トラップでいえば、「インサイド（足の内側）でしっかり止めなさい」などとは、間違っても言ってはいけない。これは「あれこれ教える」という範疇に入る。確かにインサイドなら確実に止めやすいが、そんなことは誰が決めたんだ？ アウトサイド（足の外側）でも、つま先でも、浮き球なら太ももでも腹でも、どこでも止められる。変な言い方だが、寝転がって止めても反則じゃない。逆にインサイドで止めると、ボールが懐に入ってしまって次のプレーが遅くなり、むしろマイナスになるケースがある。「その時その時の状況を見てどういうトラップがいいか考え、試しなさい」と言って、状況にふさわしいトラップ技術が習得できるような練習の習慣を付けさせることが監督の仕事であり、トラップの仕方まで形作ると、その選手は監督が何かを言わないと何もできないようになってしまう。” asahi.com（朝日新聞社）：ダメなものはダメだ。その場で言え - 釜本邦茂のニッポンＦＷ論 - スポーツ
Posted: 26 Nov 2009 06:39 AM PST
Words matter. Anybody who uses paid search advertising knows this all too well. Change one measly word in your Google Adwords text ad, and it's astonishing how many more or less people click on your ad (or how wildly you affect your conversions), just by changing one word!
And because Google's technology allows us to measure the difference that changing just one word can make with such incredible precision, Adwords guys are obsessed with picking and testing the right words.
But just because you live in a world where results aren't as easily measured, doesn't mean this "one word" phenomenon doesn't exist.
That cold call sales script you have...did you ever think that by changing just one word, you'd convert more sales?
That billboard on the highway...would changing just one word get more people to take your exit?
What about your personal voicemail message? Changing one word might might make strangers think you sound like a nice guy...instead of like a jerk.
Just because it's not as easily measured, doesn't mean you don't have to think about it.
We all need leaders in our lives: mentors, people to look up to, people that simply get it. Leaders inspire us, help us accomplish our dreams, and teach by example. Leaders make us better people and give us an ideal to strive for.The measure of leadership is always influence; leaders have an amazing ability to influence our lives. Leaders lead wherever they go; they lead at work, at home, or wherever they happen to be.
So after that intro, it's easy to conclude that being a leader is not an easy task; it requires a collection of very important skills that have to be ingrained into your daily practice - your soul.
Below are the 7 Signs of a Leader. How many of these do you believe you have? More importantly perhaps, do you look up to someone today that doesn't have many of these traits? Are they really the person to look up to? The choices you make today and the people you surround yourself with will determine much of your path in life; choose wisely.
Vision
“It’s a terrible thing to see, and have no vision.” – Helen KellerLeaders are visionaries; they know where they’re going, and their committed to bringing others along. They have a clear vision of what they want to accomplish and their vision is so compelling that it inspires others to participate in the fulfillment of the vision.
Discipline
“Discipline is the bridge between goals and accomplishment.” – Jim RohnLeaders are disciplined individuals! They are the first partaker of what they preach and they exemplify unprecedented discipline, focus, and commitment in the achievement of their vision.
Emotional Strength
“He who is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he who rules his spirit, than he who captures a city.” - ProverbsLeaders are not easily shaken. Leaders anticipate challenges and are not derailed by obstacles. Leaders remain strong when things get tough; they don’t faint when adversity strikes.
Leaders have an amazing level of emotional strength.
Experience
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment." – Jim HorningLeaders have experience. In other words, they’ve been around the block a few times and they know where they’re going. Their experience has taught them how to get things done and they can differentiate between activity and accomplishment, between efficiency and effectiveness.
Leaders focus their efforts on the tasks that produce the greatest rewards.
Respect “Respect is love in plain clothes.” – Frankie Byrne
Leaders are respected and trusted individuals. Leaders have earned the respect of their followers by becoming an “example.” They chart the course, follow their destiny, and inspire others in the process.
Leaders are respected because they earn respect. The second they demand respect is the second they are no longer a leader.
People Skills
Arguing with a fool proves there are two. - Doris M. SmithLeaders have great people skills; they are friendly to the unfriendly, they know how to respond in every situation. Leaders do not engage in personal battles, they save their strength for the task at hand.
Leaders treat people with respect and dignity; they connect with others on a personal and emotional level.
Momentum and Timing “If you're coasting, you're either losing momentum or else you're headed downhill.” – Joan Welsh
Finally, leaders know how to create momentum, and they know when to act. Nothing great is ever accomplished without momentum and timing.Leaders Develop Leaders
The test of a great leader is who they develop. A great leader will develop great followers; those followers will become great leaders.
It takes a leader to make a leader. A leader’s legacy is measured by succession. Are you a great leader?
Thank you for reading.
Written on 11/20/2009 by Mr. Self Development who is a motivational author that offers a practical guide to success and wealth; support him by visiting his blog at mrselfdevelopment.com. . Photo Credit: I'll Never Grow Up
The Empire always strikes back. Every revolution inspires a counter-revolution. Luke Skywalker and the Rebel Alliance didn't win independence overnight — and neither, it seems, will the www.
Microsoft is negotiating with News Corp to pay it to remove its content from Google's index. Uh-oh: the Empire — industrial-era business as usual — is striking back. Will the rebels be crushed?
Not a chance. Blocking Google is about as smart as eating a pound of plutonium. Here's why MicroFox is making a big mistake.
Substitution. The simplest flaw in the MicroFox's strategic logic? MicroFox is trying to create artificial scarcity instead of value. That might have worked in the 20th century, but in a hyperconnected world, creating artificial scarcity kills orthodox businesses dead. That's because though MicroFox can block Google, there's no way to block people from using Google to find stuff that doesn't suck. Artificial scarcity is usually a one-way ticket to oblivion, as people simply defect to better alternatives.
Network economics. Search engines live or die by network effects. Murdoch's challenge isn't "de-indexing" the stuff of the newspaper — but de-indexing all the viral and network effects that flow from newspapers. If MicroFox could remove all the tweets, links, and blog posts that flow from newspapers, their threat would begin to be credible. But they can't — and so the threat is limited in value.
Conflict. I spent a couple of days discussing MicroFox's move with investors, entrepreneuers, and media bigwigs. Many said: "a little competition in search? Isn't that great"? It would be — but this ain't competition. It's what I've termed conflict: the opposite of competition, or anti-competitive behaviour. MicroFox's goal isn't to offer a better alternative to consumers. It's explicitly, simply, to deny Google. It's what regulators call "exclusive dealing."
Unnovation. Isn't, I said to one notable investor, real competition about building a better search engine — not just cornering the market on content? That competition and conflict are so easily confused by those at the very pinnacle of the economy speaks volumes about why our economy's in a mess. The fundamental challenge of the 21st century is learning to make radically better stuff, because for the last several decades, most industries have been unnovating. MicroFox is just deal-making — not making a radically better search engine, or better news media. And for that simple reason, Google will always outcompete it.
Scarcity. As I point out in my recent IdeaCast, the challenge for newspapers is scarcity — real scarcity, not artificial. Can newspapers offer distinctive perspectives, rich with knowledge, expanded into topics, that make readers authentically better off? That's what scarce, distinctive news might look like.
Thick value. The real challenge for every industry today is learning to create thick value — value that makes society smarter, healthier, authentically better off. Yet, MicroFox, as ever, illustrates the shortcomings of 1.0 strategy perfectly. Murdoch's move is a page straight out of the thin value playbook: bluff, threaten, withhold. Yet, if Murdoch "wins," society is worse off. Readers lose, because choice in news is limited, and prices inevitably jacked up, without better news having been created.
At the end of the day, what MicroFox is missing is the big picture. The future of advantage is fair, not unfair.
Every Constructive Capitalist knows that Google's revolution wasn't just about search. It was about learning to not engage in unfair tactics like these. Google's far from perfect — but it strives to be less evil, less unfair, less, well, 20th century, than rivals. Its next great challenge? To get even more radically fair. Google's big flaw is that it hasn't kept exploding the boundaries of fairness in recent years, leaving its suppliers beggared. Today, Google must find radically innovative ways to share a portion of the thick value it has created with content guys, without the exclusive dealing that MicroFox uses. There's no reason that sharing value has to involve kickbacks and side deals.
What kind of publishers are likely to seek these sorts of exclusive deals? Those whose content isn't competitive on a level playing field to begin with. The same is true for search engines. That's classic adverse selection — uncompetitive players falling into each others' arms. And it's why this strategy is easily dominated.
Let me try and put it even more simply. FairTrade is turning food upside down through the power of a fair advantage. Who will create a FairTrade for media? That's every media player's next great challenge. MicroFox, still trapped in the confines of strategy 1.0, can't take it on. But somewhere out there is a Constructive Capitalist who will — and when they do, kiss big media goodbye.
Empires always strike back, but the Force is with the fair. It's awesomeness that gives you the power to, like Google, create real value. So how unfair is your business? Is the force with you?
* * *NB — Here's some more basic econ for those who are interested:
How much will Bing will be willing to pay News Corp? The value of the advertising revenue that marginal traffic generates for Bing. But that value depends first on how valuable Bing ads are. If Bing ads were maximally relevant, no exclusive deal would need to be struck in the first place. The fee is an admission that ads aren't valuable enough to publishers alone. When Google's ads are valuable enough to offset the marginal gains from fees to publishers, exclusivity will fall apart. Conversely, Google will always be able to offer greater exclusivity fees than Microsoft, should it choose to do so.
People who read this also read:
* * *
Never miss a new post from your favorite blogger again with the HarvardBusiness.org Daily Alert email. The Alert delivers the latest blog posts from HarvardBusiness.org and HBR.org directly to your inbox every morning at 8:00 AM ET.
事件当日の順序のまま現在911.wikileaks.orgで続々公開中というわけだ。傍受は誰かが組織的に行っていたみたいね。気になる信憑性だが、CBSが調べてみた限りでは「本物」らしい。
Twitter is great for getting mass messages out to the public > but is it any good in reverse? I can't see it helping me much when I have a very specific question about a very popular topic.
New literacies? Reading, 'riting, 'rithmetic are no longer the only vital skills to learn. 'A New Literacies Sampler' investigates the literacies we need today, and students will need in the future.
This is just one nugget from the blog of Rebecca Black, scion of cool academia.http://rwblack.blogspot.com/
2009/11/22
