Friday, December 31, 2010


If we know they are listening, we should be thinking deeply about what we want them to hear.  Chances are the message size is limited and that content will be passed up the command chain based on relevance to the executive level. A conversation best serves both parties.

One idea. Two interpretations. Confusion. But the idea is over two centuries old, world famous and well regarded. Reconciling the two applications of the principle seems difficult, but important. A founding document is hard pressed to anticipate every contingency.

"Above the law? That is not an easy question to answer without knowing the subject and the jurisdiction well. One hopes that there are guiding principles that can be universally applied.  This is as good a test of that concept as I can imagine."

"May I think out loud for a moment?", she asked.


"Well, that is a big part the issue is it not? If the process of generating something new is in the open, ownership and the baggage that comes with it is less of a problem?"

"Ostensibly, ownership is a major incentive to create.", he pointed out.

"Perhaps we should revisit whether that is really what is happening?"

They had, at this point, come full circle. Ownership is pivotal to the motivation to create a new idea. Nearly every child experiences joy from the process of creating, it is as natural to them as breathing. The ability to transfer that ownership, while often increasing the value to the creator also comes with the vulnerability that the new owner may have motivations counter to the creator's intent. In short, ownership of the new can be, in a sense, abused.

© 2010 Buzz Hill

No comments:

Post a Comment