A few people whose opinions I value highly have told me they're disappointed with the model I proposed yesterday for finding people to make a living with. Their concerns fall into three categories:
- The
model doesn't accommodate people who have already done their homework
and research and identified a solution (a product or service) that
satisfies a deep unmet human need, and now are looking for partners to
help them bring it to fruition.
- The model doesn't work for
simple businesses that are needed to provide an unmet need for a
commodity (like quality local organic food or a local community-based
renewable energy co-op).
- The model may actually discourage
people from following their passion and trusting their instincts, no
matter what the obstacles. There is a lot to be said for intentionality.
These
are very valid criticisms, and they explain why the model I propose
hasn't received more traction already, and why a lot of us are still
pursuing our passion alone. Let's look at each of these in turn.
- Suppose
the show was on the other foot, and you were to read about someone
else's entrepreneurial venture that had already been spec'd out
carefully, and where the 'owner' was looking for partners with
particular talents or resources s/he lacked. You'd probably think the
'owner' was really looking for employees, junior partners, passive
investors. It's an unequal partnership. It's also one where the 'owner'
is likely to be resistant to changes and new ideas.
So what should you do if you've done all this work? How about this: - From
the list of unmet needs that have been identified, find one that
matches the one you think you have a solution for. Keep your solution
under your hat.
- At stages 1-2 of the model, providing the research you've already done, and listen to those who share your purpose with an open mind.
- If
the stage 3 invitation engages you, get to know the stage 4
participants and proffer your solution during stage 5. You are likely
to find that the additional knowledge, perspectives and creativity will
make your solution even better, or perhaps reveal it to be seriously
flawed. Either way, you win.
- And you've identified a group of
people who have pride of ownership in the solutions you've collaborated
on, so you don't have to convince them to join you, they have full
partner potential.
- The essence of successful Natural Enterprise is
finding and filling an unmet need. Things are the way they are for a
reason, especially when it comes to commodities. If your plan is to
sell organic food to people in your community, or start a local
renewable energy co-op, ask yourself why someone isn't doing it
already. It can't be that easy. Whether the need is unrecognized, or
the solution is unaffordable, or there are technical obstacles, or
supply problems, you need more research, or innovation to resolve the
problem. You need help. Following this model can give it to you.
- OK,
so your passion is to be a singer-songwriter, and you play the bassoon
pretty well too. All you've ever wanted to do is perform, to create
music. What possible use is this model to you? Well, if you believe in
the Hollywood myth of people being discovered and making it big,
nothing.
Or suppose your
passion is to find a cure (or the cause) for some chronic, perplexing
disease. You're going to stick to this task, even if you have to do it
in your basement, burning the midnight oil. This one's a little easier
to see, isn't it? The truth is that things get done when a group of
people with a shared sense of purpose and passion, who between them
have the gift to make it happen, get together and make it happen.
That's not to say you don't need to hone your craft, and make time to
practice your gift until you truly do it better than anyone else.
That's a necessary condition, but not a sufficient one. There's always
a need for great art, and great science, but collaboration, using a
model like this, is far more likely to being that genius to light than
waiting for serendipity.
An issue I haven't spoken about is:
Where and how do we collect the needs? I've already said that an online
database isn't enough, that we need to engage the majority who are on
the other side of the digital divide, and that we need to facilitate a
million conversations to surface, articulate, qualify, and refine the
needs.
On this issue, I'm stumped. Maybe we need more than one
place to collect, and more than one mechanism to discuss, these needs.
How can we reach everyone, on a regular basis, often enough and long
enough to get them sync'd up with people who share their purpose, and
their passion, so that they can discover if they were destined to make
a living together?
What do you think?
|
MADE IN CANADA
trust your
instincts 
