O que a NASA pode te ensinar sobre: Tomada de Decisão
By   |  Culture,  External Videos 
terra_vista-da-lua_1024x768

Antes de mais nada, para que você se sinta mais contextualizado, dê o play no vídeo abaixo: https://youtu.be/1UgOCTQ3qlY?t=2m27s Agora podemos continuar. Imagine-se na lua. Você está a 384.400 km distante da pessoa mais próxima, a gravidade já não exerce nenhum efeito, a comunicação é limitada e você está em uma máquina que, apesar de muito bem projetada, pode falhar a qualquer momento. Existe uma infinidade de coisas que podem dar errado e entrar em pânico só te atrapalhará na tomada de decisão. Ryan Holiday, autor do livro “The Obstacle is (Read more)

Antes de mais nada, para que você se sinta mais contextualizado, dê o play no vídeo abaixo:

https://youtu.be/1UgOCTQ3qlY?t=2m27s

Agora podemos continuar.

Imagine-se na lua. Você está a 384.400 km distante da pessoa mais próxima, a gravidade já não exerce nenhum efeito, a comunicação é limitada e você está em uma máquina que, apesar de muito bem projetada, pode falhar a qualquer momento. Existe uma infinidade de coisas que podem dar errado e entrar em pânico só te atrapalhará na tomada de decisão.
Ryan Holiday, autor do livro “The Obstacle is The Way”, escreveu sobre este desafio no trecho abaixo, que tomo a liberdade de traduzir: “Quando os americanos iniciaram a corrida para enviar o primeiro homem ao espaço, eles treinaram os astronautas com mais foco em uma habilidade específica: a arte de não entrar em pânico.
Quando as pessoas entram em pânico, elas cometem erros. Elas substituem os sistemas. Não cumprem procedimentos, ignoram regras. Elas perdem o foco do planejamento. Elas se tornam irresponsáveis e param de pensar claramente…” “… no espaço, pânico é suicídio.”
Diante de tantos desafios, as mentes geniais da NASA perceberam que se oferecessem aos tripulantes uma real “sensação de controle” o risco de alguém entrar em pânico seria drasticamente reduzido.
Qual é a melhor maneira de oferecer a alguém uma sensação de controle? Transformando a “sensação” em algo real e tangível: Antes do lançamento da missão, a NASA simulou cada pequeno detalhe da operação, desde sons, imagens e situações críticas. Todas estes eventos foram repetidos centenas e centenas de vezes, tornando cada situação muito natural aos astronautas, e caso acontecesse novamente no espaço, a sensação de controle os daria a calma necessária tomar as decisões certas.
Que tal mais uma atividade mental? Imagine-se executando uma tarefa como desarmar bombas, onde um erro pode ser a diferença entre a vida e a morte. Provavelmente os seus batimentos cardíacos iriam aumentar bastante, certo? Uma pesquisa relevou que os batimentos cardíacos dos profissionais do esquadrão antibomba ficam ainda mais lentos quando precisam desarmar uma bomba. Resultado da sensação de controle, que apenas anos e anos de prática puderam lhe oferecer.

Como estão seus batimentos cardíacos na hora de tomar decisões?

Este conteúdo foi traduzido e adaptado, para acessar o artigo original, clique aqui: http://www.bakadesuyo.com/2014/05/decision-making/

Gabriel Justo – Social Media Manager LC Brasil

Related articles
Vos estis sal terrae (Yup, It’s latin.)
By   |  Culture,  Social,  Strategy 
padre

Last month, I started an internship at Live Content as a Social Media Manager. In the beginning of this adventure I knew very little about the industry. I was introduced to new concepts such as promoted posts, leads, cpc or cpa. I understood what the work of a Social Media Manager was all about, created my Twitter account and became marveled with TweetDeck. I read Seth Godin and Byron Sharp. I discovered the SWOT analysis and was introduced to the meaning of “Ethos, Pathos and Logos”. While I’m aware that (Read more)

Last month, I started an internship at Live Content as a Social Media Manager.

In the beginning of this adventure I knew very little about the industry.

I was introduced to new concepts such as promoted posts, leads, cpc or cpa.

I understood what the work of a Social Media Manager was all about, created my Twitter account and became marveled with TweetDeck.

I read Seth Godin and Byron Sharp.

I discovered the SWOT analysis and was introduced to the meaning of “Ethos, Pathos and Logos”.

While I’m aware that I’m still in the early days of my journey, all this learning and daily analysis of the work that my colleagues were doing, both inside and outside Live Content, made my critical sense blossom.

I realized that for a vast majority of brands and/or clients wandering in this digital universe, Facebook is like Planet Earth. And, as some of them already understood, Agencies are the salt.

With this in mind, I saw how Live Content and other agencies, in comparison, managed their Facebook presences.

No one became a prophet in his own town by repeatedly sharing things like:
– We won this award;
– We closed this deal;
– We made this thing.

By the end of the day, I felt like I was not the only one needing an internship like this.

As Priest Antonio Vieira said, “if the salt has lost his flavor, (…) it is thereafter good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under the feet of men.”

João Belchior

Related articles
people ain’t stupid
By   |  Culture,  Social,  Strategy 
beyonce

Now that some time has passed, we can finally agree on one thing: Tidal is the perfect example that people ain’t stupid. Being rich and famous and having a bunch of rich and famous friends isn’t enough. At least these days. Tidal was the perfect opportunity for the rich and famous to stand up for the not so rich and famous. I like to call that empathy. The smart kind. And people like that. Both in other people and brands. After all, Tidal for all. Is it? It’s like if (Read more)

Now that some time has passed, we can finally agree on one thing:

Tidal is the perfect example that people ain’t stupid.

Being rich and famous and having a bunch of rich and famous friends isn’t enough. At least these days.

Tidal was the perfect opportunity for the rich and famous to stand up for the not so rich and famous.

I like to call that empathy. The smart kind.

And people like that. Both in other people and brands.

After all, Tidal for all.

Is it?

It’s like if someone rich and famous told me: “We are now competing with Ferrari and you can have your own Ferrari, too; the one we created for you! And this time, you can afford the gas!”

No, I won’t.

Furthermore, we don’t want high fidelity music. Unless you’re a producer, no one cares about it.

That’s not why we bought walkmans or discmans or mp3 players, in the first place.

We don’t want curated content. We have Facebook and Instagram and Twitter, now, you know?

I can follow Rihanna and her curated content is fine with me.

You’re an artist. Just pay them more.

People ain’t stupid.

Related articles
who’s the leader of the pack?
By   |  Culture 

After a fairly peculiar and eventful week, I found myself discussing, with one of my coworkers, leadership, judgment, “the right thing to do”, and how to overcome and learn from the usual setbacks of agency work; all in all, the typical thoughts, at the end of the day, of tiredness and (de)motivation. Usually we have a quite similar train of thought and, almost every time, we share the same ideas. However, more often than not, we disagree on how to address the subject, or on which route to take to (Read more)

After a fairly peculiar and eventful week, I found myself discussing, with one of my coworkers, leadership, judgment, “the right thing to do”, and how to overcome and learn from the usual setbacks of agency work; all in all, the typical thoughts, at the end of the day, of tiredness and (de)motivation.

Usually we have a quite similar train of thought and, almost every time, we share the same ideas. However, more often than not, we disagree on how to address the subject, or on which route to take to get us to where we want to. Notwithstanding, and after a good half an hour spent questioning the ‘whys and hows’, the debate ends up focusing on his specific leadership style and on the various others we’ve come across.

And if the subject has always interested me, today it deserves my special attention and care for I too have a team to lead and only God – and many of you – knows what a challenge that is.

In the end, and to sum up, the question and the conclusion are quite simple: are people, in an unrestricted environment, able of act according to their good judgment without ever losing their sense of responsibility, freedom(s) and justice? He believes so. I have my reservations.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all in favor of a leadership style that empowers each of the team’s members, and allows them to act according to their consciousness and convictions (death to micromanagement!). So much so, that once, I defended tooth and nail the “please, just don’t make me tell you what to do” approach. Today, I can’t look at that statement without acknowledging in it some immaturity.

Curiously, this morning, I picked up a book that was lying on the shelf, gathering dust for half a year, and, without knowing it, it would make me question further about this particular matter right from the very first chapter.

The approach to justice that begins with freedom is a capacious school. In fact, some of the most hard-fought political arguments of our time take place between two rival camps with it – the laissez-faire camp and the fairness camp. Leading the laissez-faire camp are free-market libertarians who believe that justice consists in respecting and upholding the voluntary choices made by consenting adults. The fairness cam contains theorists of a more egalitarian bent. They argue that unfettered markets are neither just nor free. In their view, justice requires policies that remedy social and economic disadvantages and give everyone a fair chance at success.

Justice (2014), Michael J. Sandel

I realized that to speak of leadership is to speak of freedom. And that it’s impossible to speak of freedom without speaking of justice. Although the previous quotation is mainly concerned with the economy and with prosperity, it still raises some important questions and ties up a few loose ends.

Is the laissez-faire model one that allows, especially when things go wrong, for justice and equity in work relationships based on the premise that we are all sensible adults?

Will I always be able to know when I’m crossing the threshold of what’s acceptable in an office argument?

Will I always be able to understand that I must sacrifice for the greater good?

Will I always be able to [insert here any situation in which you doubted your own behavior/decision]?

The agency, in 2015, has no room for authoritarian/imposing types of leadership, and, if you still work in that kind of environment, it’s quite possible that its days are numbered. That’s just not how millennials work.

But, if the freedom and the autonomy required cannot be mistaken for not having any boundaries at all, one question remains. What is (if there is one) the best model to define those boundaries: the intra-definition or the inter-definition?

Do we still require someone one to guide us, or are we able to set our own boundaries within the limits of the pack?

Related articles
“sorry, amigo” OR you’re not the average consumer
By   |  Social,  Strategy 
helpyouhelpme

Every now and then, there comes an article that makes you think that, MAYBE, you’re not that wrong. That, MAYBE, you should keep on doing what you believe, no matter what. This is one of it: “Imagine for a second that you’re the brand manager for BigSave supermarkets. Your job is to build the BigSave brand so that customers prefer you to SaveMore, and HugeSave. You know how wonderful BigSave is. You want to spread the word. You want consumers to see inside your brand. You want them to know (Read more)

Every now and then, there comes an article that makes you think that, MAYBE, you’re not that wrong. That, MAYBE, you should keep on doing what you believe, no matter what. This is one of it:

“Imagine for a second that you’re the brand manager for BigSave supermarkets.
Your job is to build the BigSave brand so that customers prefer you to SaveMore, and HugeSave.

You know how wonderful BigSave is. You want to spread the word. You want consumers to see inside your brand. You want them to know how responsive you are, and how pleasant you are to engage with, and how willing you are to work with them and help them.

Building the brand is absolutely essential to your career and central to your life. Once you leave the house in the morning, it is the most important thing you do.

Now let’s talk about the average consumer. The average consumer couldn’t give a flying shit about BigSave.

If BigSave exploded tomorrow, the average consumer wouldn’t bother picking up the donuts.

The average consumer has other things on her mind. Like why she gained 2 pounds last week, and why her father is looking pale, and why the fucking computer keeps losing its WiFi signal, and why Timmy’s teacher wants to see her next week, and what’s that bump she noticed on her arm?

The point is this: our brands are very important to us marketers and very unimportant to most consumers. Please read that again.

Are there some brands each of us are attached to? Sure. Are there brands we buy regularly? Sure. Is our attachment to a handful of brands strong and nonsensical? Sure. The problem is we buy stuff in hundreds of categories and are strongly attached to only a few brands.

The idea that our attachment represents “love” or any of the other woolly nonsense perpetrated by brand hustlers is folly.

The clearest demonstration of the weakness of the cult of brands is the dismal performance of social media marketing. We were promised that social media would be the magic carpet on which our legions of brand advocates would go to spread the word about the marvelousness of our brands, and would free us from the terrible, wasteful expense of advertising. It has done nothing of the sort.

In fact, it is often the exact opposite. Social media is usually where people go to scream about the mistreatment we get at the hands of companies. And where companies go to beg forgiveness.

A recent study reported that among a brand’s fans, only .07% — that’s 7 in ten thousand — ever engage with the brand’s Facebook posts. On Twitter the number is even lower — 3 in ten thousand. And these are not average consumers. These are the brands so-called “fans.” (This is a correction from original post which had the number at .7%)

A study I quoted here recently by Havas claims that “in Europe and the US, people would not care if 92% of brands disappeared.”

Having a successful brand is very important to a marketer. But the idea that it is anything like that to a consumer is folly. Brand babble is just the faulty conflation of marketers’ needs and consumers’ interests.

Modern marketing is operating under the delusion that consumers want to interact with brands, and have relationships with brands, and brand experiences, and engage with them, and co-create with them.

Sorry, amigo. Not in this lifetime.”

Originally from: http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com.br/2015/03/what-brand-babblers-dont-understand.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+blogspot/lcfIS+%28The+Ad+Contrarian%29


Related articles
Categories
Most read
Must read
• All You Need to Know About Content Writing
What is content writing? Content writing refers to the craft of generating content cialis hair loss...
• The Different Types of Juicer Explained
The centrifugal juicers are still here offering cheap and fast juicing, this is what most of us...
• Reinvigorating Your PPC Campaigns With a Multi-Channel Approach
SEOs around the world felt the walls closing in when Google announced new privacy efforts that...
• Top 3 Problems With the Nintendo Wii
Video games have been in development covet fashion app cheats since the 1950s, but rapid progress...
spark