Art in Business Education: Creating buy-in for your great new ideas
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
2 gefällt mir•587 views
Getting buy-in for your latest and possibly greatest idea is about creating the conditions that make people want to buy it, or invest in it. For this a strategy is required, and we've found it in a book about the anthropology of art by the late Alfred Gell. The anthropology of art may seem a very unlikely place to find such a strategy, but you will be pleasantly surprised. This is an opportunity not only to learn about creating buy-in conditions, but also the nature of Art works produced through ages by many and diverse peoples of the world. The evening will focus particularly on ideas that are novel and unique, ones without prior reference points, either in existing markets or inside your organisation. It ends with an alternative model of Steve Blank's customer development process, which shows the 'product-solution' nexus
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Mehr von Peter Bond
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Art in Business Education: Creating buy-in for your great new ideas
- 4. Creating the conditions such that others desire to invest in your idea.
- 7. Is it a great idea? Is it a great idea? Is it a great idea? Is it a great idea? Is it a great idea? Is it a great idea?
- 8. Is it a great idea?
- 9. Gell’s ART NEXUS Great IDEA NEXUS New PRODUCT NEXUS What makes an object an ‘Art’ object, and a product ‘great’ is the formation of a NEXUS
- 10. Nexus a connection or series of connections linking two or more things a connected group or series : a nexus of ideas. the central and most important point or place from Latin, ‘a binding together,’ from nex- ‘bound,’ from the verb nectere.
- 11. artistprototypeIndex (art object) Receiver (target of action) CREATING THE ART NEXUS THE OPPOSITE OF AN AGENT IS A PATIENT Receiver’s prototype
- 12. artistprototypeIndex (art object) Receiver (target of action) CREATING THE ART NEXUS prototype Accidental, ad hoc, random, buy-in by chance
- 13. artistprototypeIndex (art object) Receiver (target of action) CREATING THE ART NEXUS Strategy One prototype
- 14. artist CREATING THE ART NEXUS Strategy Two prototypeIndex (art object) Receiver (target of action) prototypeTeacher facilitator An elite group. An Institution. Culture. ?
- 15. THE ART NEXUS
- 16. AGENTS and PATIENTS and TERMS of ENGAGEMENT
- 17. AGENTS and PATIENTS and TERMS of ENGAGEMENT
- 18. AGENTS and PATIENTS and TERMS of ENGAGEMENT
- 19. AGENTS and PATIENTS and TERMS of ENGAGEMENT
- 20. AGENTS and PATIENTS and TERMS of ENGAGEMENT
- 21. inventor CREATING THE IDEA NEXUS Invention/ prototype novel Idea/product Investor (target of action) prototypeTeacher facilitator Who could be the teacher?
- 22. AGENTS and PATIENTS and TERMS of ENGAGEMENT
- 23. mkt C3 market making C2 network making Information gathering feedback channel Material distribution and information broadcast channel Material supplier Knowledge/information supplier £ C1 Solution making E P EP=Enterprising person SOL= solution P O PO=Problem owner SOL Investor(s) IDEA-as-Solution NEXUS
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Alfred Gell wrote this book as he coped with terminal cancer. It is widely held to be unpolished. Some believe it to be highly flawed, others think it to be game changing and a significant departure from previous efforts to come to grips with what is, or isn’t, mostly from art historians not anthropologists. However, that needn’t bother us too much. What will concern us is what is hidden within Gell’s interpretation of art, a model of how to create the conditions that will lead to others wanting to invest in your great ideas for new products, new businesses, or just yourself.
- This slide shows the huge variety of objects that have been called Art. Gell disliked the idea of ‘primitive art’ or ethnic art. He wished to create an anthropological theory that explained the existence of what we are inclined to call Art.
- Although the essence of Gell’s theory of art will be explained, the main objective of this presentation is to develop a model of how to create support for the ideas YOU think are great.
- What is ART? What defines and object as an object of art? The chairs were on display in Tate Modern(London) so they must be art objects. At least somebody has defined them as Art for us ordinary folks. The tent is from Tracy Emin, and again is widely accepted as art, while Tracy is accepted as an artist. The Mandlebeot Fractal, is not Art, it was produced by a computer, but it is conceivable that it could in the right place, presented by the right person (an artist) it could become a work of art.
- This is not Art. The ‘sculpture’ is a result of Homer’s bad temper. He became so frustrated at not being able to light his barbecue, he smashed it. A gallery owner spotted the wreck and judged it to be art work of pure genius. She said Homer was a great artist, but when he failed to live up to her expectations she decided he wasn’t . This episode of the Simpsons is the work of genius, but would it be a work of art? It takes a very cynical view of the art elite, those who decide, in a variety of ways, what is art and, consequently, who is an artist.
- These are great ideas that someone has persuaded someone to invest in. The Newton is widely believed to be one of Steve Jobs several failures but it did precede the most successful of Apple’s products, the iphone. They must have learnt something from making and marketing the Newton. The Newton may have been ahead of its time, which means not every thing was in place to get buy-in, especially users, and maybe the ‘technology’ was short of satisfying Apple’s vision for the device. There were other similar devices around at the time that performed much better, such as the Palm Pilot. There may have been particular reasons for ‘failure’ to get buy-in but overall it was the network of necessary relationships that was the main one, as will become clearer later in the presentation.
- These are product concepts that became famous not only because they were great, but because they were difficult to get investors to buy into them. The stories of Dyson and Trevor Bayliss detail how they failed time after time to convince people these products were great. Dyson succeeded but Trevor reputedly did not.
- The rest of the slides are geared to explaining what the art nexus is, and then pointing out how the art nexus can be simply changed to the idea nexus or the new product nexus
- A nexus is either a network, or something that sits at the centre or the hub of a network. There are similar ideas to Gell’s nexus in disciplines such as actor-network theory, which will be mentioned in more detail presently.
- This slide shows the development of the nexus. It begins with someone who becomes an artist during the process of creating what others deem to be art. The artist-as-agent produces what Gell calls an Index, which is the object that becomes a work of art. An index is essentially meaningless, or has whatever meaning someone decides it has. Being a purposeful agent the artist produces the object with a target in mind, who Gell calls the receiver. The index becomes an invitation to engage with it, and through it the artist. The third element that pops up in the presentation is the prototype. This is essentially the message that an artist wants the receiver to receive. A prototype is the idea or the concept that the artist wishes to embed in her work. The the example here is Tracy Emin’s infamous bed. The prototype is whatever the bed signifies for the artist. It’s the purpose the motivation that drives the process of creation. The final element to be included on this slide is the receiver’s prototype. If the receiver accepts the artist’s unspoken invitation to engage with the object (the index), to contemplate it, she is free to generate her own prototype and that process can be completely free of the artist’s influence. This particular stage is not part of Gell’s nexus but it seems sensible to me to include it. The reciever, then, is free to think what they like about the meaning of the object, like the gallery owner who interpreted Homer Simpson’s wrecked barbecue as a work of art. One of the controversial points about Gell’s work was his insistence that it is useful to consider art objects to be agents. Agency is related to purposeful action and so broadly speaking only higher animals can be agents. Notably we Homo sapiens. Gell, however, not only said art objects were agents but that any of the elements of his nexus could be both agent or patient, depending on the perspective that was taken to understanding why the art work existed and persisted.A patient is the opposite of the agent, the receiver the object of action. It is important to note that these diagrams don’t appear in Gell’s book. They are my interpretation of the process. Gell attempted to develop a matrix type of framework to organise his ideas on the relationship between the elements above. My interpretation makes use of systems modelling convention known as systems dynamics, or stock flow diagrams, or cause-effect diagrams. Although there are no arrows in this diagram assume action occurs in an anticlockwise direction. Therefore, the artist acts on the index in an iterative manner to produce the work of art. The index-prototype-artist cycle represents the process of creation. The material from which the index is created on is acted on by the artist with a prototype in mind, but the material also acts back producing effects not necessarily sought by the artist. During the process, the material of the index, the artist and the prototype may be transformed together.
- This slide highlights the different type of objects that have been referred to as art. Each must embody a prototype, that something that the artist creates with the purpose of transforming or influencing the receiver in some way. The diagram also indicates a separation of the receiver and the artist and there’s no way to the artist can guarantee the target of the art work will receive his or her prototype. The next slides show two strategies for making this more likely.
- The first strategy would be to engage with the receiver, to inform her of the meaning embodied in the index/art work. The diagram shows the possibility of engaging with a potential receiver as the index is transformed.
- In this second strategy, the artist does not engage with the receiver, but with a teacher who understands the meaning embodied in the index and interprets it for the receiver. I’ve suggested here that an individual teacher could be an elite group of people who decide what art is, and who can become an artist. This is the current situation with the Western art world. There is a huge and influential group of ‘teachers’ who help interpret what they say are works of art. They also influence the huge and influential receivers who become buyers of art works. But when the meaning becomes divorced from price, that’s when art fails, and when artists fail also.
- This is the full art nexus with arrows showing the direction of transformation with what are essentially feedback loops.
- This and the following slides show indexes as agents. This painting from J.W. Turne demonstrates Gell’s belief that some works of art are multiple agents in the sense that different parts can each act on the receiver in different ways. The painting also demonstrates something Gell calls enchantment. We are totally intrigued by how Turner manages to create the effects he does. This enchantment of mastery of his painting craft.
- This is an example of how a receiver can act as an agent by commissioning an artist to create a portrait. Doing so the receiver also provides at least the initial prototype.
- This ‘engraving’ is in the Christian catacombs of Rome. It contains codes that indicate the person buried nearby is a Christian. This is symbolised by the fish (the apostles were fishermen), and the anchor which is a disguised cross.
- What is the prototype here? Was it commissioned? What does it signify?
- This is part of a purse found in the Sutton hoo anglo saxon burial. What is the prototype?
- This is the idea or new product nexus. All I’ve done is change receiver by investor, who can also be a straight customer/user, index to product/idea (but a novel new product idea could still be an index if you wish), artist by inventor, invention instead of prototype, but I’ve kept the idea of the ‘receiver’s’ prototype, or their interpretation of the novel product/idea. The question is, who is the teacher? Is it a customer? Is it cultural context?
- Dyson (vac), Bayliss (clkwrk radio), and Habeman (anywayup cup), all had difficulties getting buy-in for their ideas.
- This is another perspective of a product nexus. It’s my interpretation of Steve Blank’s customer development process for new startup companies. Being enterprising is a fundamental human activity. Everyone is enterprising because we are social animals. It is natural for us to want to do good for others and that requires organization, or managing. Enterprise begins by identifying someone with a problem or someone who you would like to delight or excite, or otherwise improve, in some way, their existence. In solving the problem a relationship develops. Conversation is the means by which a proposed ‘good’ is articulated and out of which a relationship forms. Sometimes, often(?), doing good for someone means organising others to help. Others can be: i) those who know, or who have knowledge or experience you need, ii) those with material you need, iii) those who have money you need to buy materials or knowledge. Forming relationship in this way is also achieved through conversations. The same process is involved when creating a community of practice, or a new business (like customer development in lean startup) Informality is normal. Being enterprising an informal and often discrete way of doing good, is also normal, and every body does it every day. Starting a business can begin informally, but in the end has to be formalised. Nevertheless, the process normally begins in an informal way (effectuation). A business exists to do good for lots of people, who become customers. Because they are no longer in close proximity to you, the do-gooder, the solution maker, mechanisms have to be established to share in the good you offer, especially if the solution involves a physical product. So you set up a physical distribution channel. To make sure as many people as possible know you want to do good for them, that you have something that will solve a problem or delight, then you need a channel for information sharing (advertising etc). It would be good to get feedback on how good your ‘good’ is, so establish a channel for getting feedback. IN THIS WAY YOU MANAGE TO ESTABLISH A FORMAL ENTERPRISE, A BUSINESS. BUT WHAT IS MANAGING? AND CAN EVERYONE DO IT?