Published August 18th, 2008 by
Bob Burg One of the many blessings resulting from a free-enterprise-based economy is that it allows a person to find ways to add value to people’s lives and be rewarded for it. And, because of this incentive, people will find remarkably creative ways to create that value. And, the consumer will benefit greatly.
Often, the incentive is personal; inspired by an unhappy experience that results in feeling “Hey, I don’t want anyone else to have to go through it.” Combine that with an ability to provide value in that area and you have the makings of an excellent business.
This is what Becci Hall did in founding Our Financial Concierge, a Des Moines, Iowa company that handles a host of financial details for those people who are either too busy, or unknowledgeable in this particular area.
Her story is really quite touching and – to me – inspiring. There are certainly plenty of ways to serve others and be well compensated for that service. We just need to keep our eyes and ears open for them.
Who do you know (perhaps, you?) who has found creative ways to provide value, “a la Becci”?
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 3 Comments »
Published August 13th, 2008 by
John David Mann The other day we got this note from Adrienne Schultz, our amazing editor at Portfolio:
So on my way to work today, I was walking through the Times Square subway station—a busy spot, as you can imagine. There was a man walking against traffic, nearly bumping into everyone as he passed by. I was a bit annoyed, until I realized why he was so distracted. He was reading—was engrossed in—The Go-Giver! That just made my morning.
Ours, too.
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 2 Comments »
Published August 5th, 2008 by
Bob Burg In her blog Office-Politics, Franke James, Editor & Founder of Office-Politics®, dissects The Go-Giver and wonders if she knows people who indeed exemplify the Five Laws (i.e., could she “spot a go-giver?”). She shares one fascinating story in particular regarding a gentleman with a superb idea for “adding value” to the marketplace (simply for the sake of adding value), who then served lots of people with that value and profited greatly as a result.
Excellent, very well-thought-out article by Ms. James. Give it a read, if you’d like, and then follow the link to the page where she lists some more of the go-givers she knows.
Can you spot the go-givers in your life?
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 4 Comments »
Published August 1st, 2008 by
John David Mann For years, I’ve been talking about what I call the Treacherous Dichotomy: the deeply ingrained idea that operating in our own interests and operating in others’ interests are mutually exclusive. That is, looking out for yourself is selfish, looking out for others is altruistic, and you’re either one or the other.
Bob and I have argued that this is an artificial distinction, that these two perspectives are not mutually exclusive—and in The Go-Giver, we let Nicole Martin make that argument for us.
So . . . are you ready for some fascinating research? Turns out, that Treacherous Dichotomy may not be purely a matter of upbringing and societal values — it may have a neurological basis.
In the captivating book Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior, author-brothers Ori Brafman and Rom Brafman report results of a series of studies that suggest there are two distinct centers in the brain, a “pleasure” center and “altruism” center. And get this:
”Unlike, say, the parts of our brain that control movement and speech, the pleasure center and the altruism center cannot both function at the same time: either one or the other is on control. . . . It’s as if we have two ‘engines’ running in our brains that can’t operate simultaneously. We can approach a task either altruistically or from a self-interested perspective [emphasis added].” (Sway, pp. 1412)
What implications does the research have for being a go-giver?
Seems to me, it underlines the importance of something I’ve heard Bob say: just as we willingly suspend our disbelief when entering a movie theater so that we can enjoy the film, in life we can elect to willingly suspend our self-interest (read: temporarily switch off the brain’s pleasure center) while interacting with others, so that we can more effectively make choices and decisions that serve others (that is, switch on the brain’s altruism center).
When we’re watching a movie, we “know” the events we’re observing aren’t really happening, yet we still react to them emotionally as if they were. (As the saying goes, “You laugh, you cry, you kiss nine bucks goodbye.”)
Likewise, when you temporarily suspend your self-interest (pleasure center) and act from your altruism center, you know that you’re still looking out for yourself: you can’t not do that, it’s the survival impulse hard-wired into the organism. Yet you put that awareness to the side (just like your awareness that you’re sitting in a theater seat), and engage fully in the altruistic impulse—and the feeling you have is as real as your Hitchcock chills or Marx Brothers laughter.
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 6 Comments »
Published July 28th, 2008 by
Bob Burg In his response to an article highlighting the Five Laws of Stratospheric Success written by the venerable author and Real Estate speaker, Dr. Bernice Ross, a successful Realtor® by the name of Dave Robison suggested the following:
Those are great laws and are so true. On the flip side, you can see how people tried to make money without obeying the laws. Many people tried “flipping homes” without adding any value to the home. This is speculative and is considered quick easy money. Thus our market is being punished by trying to make money without adhering to these laws. You make money two ways in real estate: either by time, or by adding value. Those who know this make money in any market. Sounds like a great book.
Dave makes a great point. Still, I’m not sure I agree 100 percent. (Then again, I’m certainly not a real estate expert, and Dave is!)
Here’s my question: Don’t real estate flippers provide value? After all, they keep some people from losing their home to foreclosure. And, they help others to own a home. I’m not sure time is an indication of value in the “flip,” any more than a Realtor® who lists a home and sells it in just one day adds any less value than one who sells it in 63 days.
As far as flippers only being “speculators” . . . I think that adds value in and of itself, as well. After all, without speculators being willing to take a risk (speculators often get a bad rap, but remember, by their very nature, they also risk losing money), the market would not have nearly the movement it has, and prices would be much less predictable.
My point is not to disagree with Dave. He seems like a great guy (and he might be correct). On the contrary, I appreciate his opinion. The point of this post is to pose this question:
How do you personally define and/or consider value as being created in a marketplace? We value your thoughts.
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 4 Comments »
Published July 22nd, 2008 by
John David Mann This week an amazing treat landed in my mail box: the hot-off-the-press Japanese hardcover edition of The Go-Giver. The people at Bungei Shunju Ltd. did a phenomenal job: gorgeous production values. Even though I can’t read a lick of Japanese, leafing through this book is an experience.
For one thing, it’s illustrated—and in the most hilarious, creative, practically hallucinogenic Japanese fashion. Sort of Saul Steinberg meets Manga.
(“Joe,” from the Japanese edition of The Go-Giver)
And this is no casual production: whoever did these illustrations took incredible care, and has an uncannily intimate knowledge of the text. And a helluva sense of humor.
For example:
- In Chapter 2, when Pindar says, “Have you ever heard people say, You can’t always get what you want?” and Joe grins and says, “You mean, the Rolling Stones?” — in the Japanese edition, so help me, there is a full-page drawing of Mick Jagger on stage belting out The Song.
- Accompanying the description of Rachel’s history in Chapter 7, “Rachel,” is a drawing of Rachel serving coffee. Behind her is a Mellita the size of a well-fed black Labrador Retriever, and a vivid rainbow arcs out of the cup in her hand. (The artist, I think, has seen the film “Yellow Submarine” more than once.)
- How would you illustrate the story’s dramatic conclusion, at the end of chapter 13, “Full Circle”? The artist devotes the facing page to a single image, tucked into the lower-left corner: a simple black and white drawing of a cup of coffee. What a brilliant touch.
- Finally: bonus points for the first reader who can write in and tell me what book is sitting on Gus’s table when we first meet him in Chapter 1. I’ll give you a hint: it’s by Stephen King, and it’s one of my favorite books. (How did the artist know that?!)
I can’t wait to find someone who can read Japanese to walk me through parts of the book. For example, the chapter titles. They all look about the same length as the English ones, except for Chapter 7. In English, it’s “Rachel.” In Japanese, it’s, like, a whole sentence, with a dramatic dash in the middle. I wonder what the heck it says?
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 5 Comments »
Published July 18th, 2008 by
Bob Burg As you know, if you’ve been following the comments after my July 9th posting, “Is The Tradeoff Real?” I’ve been reading Felix Dennis’s new book, How To Get Rich (I’m currently halfway through). This resulted from an interview with
syndicated columnist and podcaster Anita Bruzzese, where I was asked for my opinions regarding several very “anti-go-giver” type quotes attributed to the British uber-entrepreneur and multimillionaire in a Time magazine article.
It was my suspicion that the quotes were taken out of context and – reading the book and seeing the quotes firsthand along with the context – indeed they were. While Mr. Dennis says some rather curious things (in my opinion, unnecessarily so, perhaps in order to appear to be a curmudgeon of sorts), his book is an excellent look at how a hugely financially successful man came to be that way. The book has been a delight and pleasure to read. And, by and large, his principles are in total alignment with the Five Laws John and I share in The Go-Giver (again, when everything is taken in context – always an important consideration).
On page 130 he makes a wonderful point about courtesy that – with the permission of his publisher, Portfolio (coincidentally, John’s and my publisher, as well) – I’d like to reprint here and then add my comments.
“I cannot give it a chapter or even a subheading to itself, because being courteous and always failing merely makes you a courteous loser. Courtesy is not a cardinal virtual in getting rich, I admit. But it helps. It works. It greases wheels where force will not prevail. Out of the mouth of anyone on their way to becoming rich, it lends a certain gravitas and creates the impression of someone you might like to do business with.”
He’s so right: courtesy helps, and it helps a lot. It adds credibility and elicits the “know you, like you, trust you” feelings toward you in others that can make a huge difference in your success.
He’s also right that courtesy while failing is exactly that: failing. This goes hand in hand with what John and I say when we’re asked, “Do nice guys/nice gals really finish first?” The answer is, “Yes, as long as they are doing the correct things in the success process that allows a person to succeed.”
Courtesy, kindness, fairness, honesty and all the other positive characteristics that one can and hopefully does have are very important, and very helpful. At the same time, they must be combined with the other success principles.
Your thoughts?
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 1 Comment »
Published July 12th, 2008 by
John David Mann A few months ago, I posted a piece about a nonprofit organization called the Giving USA Foundation that compiles annual statistics on charitable giving.
Well, they’ve just released Giving USA 2008, their newest report. Their findings? “Despite worries about gas prices, mortgage crisis and [the] housing market,” says the report, “giving rose by 3.9 percent (1 percent adjusted for inflation).” In 2007, American charitable giving hit a record $306 billion, “exceeding $300 billion for the first time in history.”
Hmm. Let’s do some math. Current US population is just over 300 million—which means that on average, last year we gave away an average of about $1,000 for each man, woman and child.
According to the Foundation’s report, Americans on average give 2.3 percent of their disposable income to charitable causes. And individuals account for by far the largest share of this outflow: most charitable giving—$229 billion, or about 75 percent of the total—comes from individuals, not corporations or other organizations.
The report also found that Americans rank first in the world in giving as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), at 2.2 percent for 2007.
Land of the free, home of the brave . . . and Giving Central.
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 8 Comments »
Published July 9th, 2008 by
Bob Burg Tuesday I was interviewed by Gannett News/USA Today columnist Anita Bruzzese on her national podcast, “Smash the Ladder.”
Anita asked for my thoughts on the philosophy discussed in the soon-to-be released book, How to Get Rich: One of the World’s Greatest Entrepreneurs Shares His Secrets, by British billionaire Felix Dennis.
Apparently, according to a recent article in Time, he says such things as, “Being a team player is for losers,” and, “If you’re going to be [rich] it’s going to be at the expense of such things as happy family relationships and friendships, and you’ll need to accept the fact that many people will think of as a jerk.”
How does someone who espouses to be a go-giver respond to that? Here’s what I said to Anita (in brief—you can hear the entire interview here).
1. Without having read his book (which I look forward to doing — I love learning from billionaires, and guarantee there are some terrific nuggets in there), I can’t know whether those words are totally out of context, or just a way of promoting his book by making it sound “sexy” (i.e., “forget all the nicey-nice stuff, I’m going to show you how to really get rich!”).
2. Even if he truly is the nastiest person who ever lived (which I doubt, as a brief Internet search shows he is loved by many), the fact is this: For him to have gotten wealthy, he had to provide lots of great value (Go-Giver Law #1) to the lives of many, many people (Go-Giver Law #2).
3. In Good to Great, by Jim Collins, there is a fascinating chapter on what Jim calls “Level Five Leaders.” These are top CEOs who’ve earned tremendous incomes and are hugely respected within the business world and the other circles in which they travel. These people — as well as the many hugely successful people I’ve had the privilege to know — tend to base their lives and actions on values and characteristics such as honesty, integrity, humility, encouragement and, more than anything, adding significant value to every relationship in which they’re involved.
Can one get wealthy by being nasty? Well, one can get wealthy AND be nasty, providing they also find a way to add lots of value to the lives of lots of people. But, by and large, success – financially and in other areas of life that are so important – is easier to obtain by being a go-giver . . . and it’s a lot more gratifying.
Your thoughts? We’d love to read them.
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 14 Comments »
Published July 4th, 2008 by
Bob Burg Yes, the next word is “Action.” And, just as the only “condition” put on Joe in exchange for the counseling he’d get to receive from Pindar and his friends was that he had to put the Laws into action “right away, the very same day you first learn it,” it’s worth making that point here, as well.
John and I have both been delighted by receiving emails from readers telling us that they “really got that part.” That they understood the emphasis we put on taking action on the ideas you learn. In fact, many of them have made that commitment to us — and more importantly, to themselves — that they would apply the Laws and principles they learned in the book right away, that very same day.
Interestingly enough, this concept has been coming up again lately in both John’s life and mine, and without knowing about it, we both wrote articles on the topic. Me, in my weekly ezine newsletter, “Winning Without Intimidation,” and John in his own excellent blog.
By the way, later this summer John is taking some very significant action; he’s getting married to the very beautiful and charming Ana McClellan. And I’m taking action, as well: I’m going to fly up to Massachusetts to attend. 
Please write in and let John and me (and the other readers of this blog) know how you are taking action, not only regarding to the principles in the book, but in other areas of your life.
How do you feel about the importance of taking action? (Of course, we’re talking about well-thought-out action, not acting irresponsibly or acting on a whim. But, you knew that).
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: | 5 Comments »
