No excuses

Do not find fault, find a remedy (Henry Ford)

   At the time of transfer of the former director of marketing for his successor, he wished him luck and gave him three letters saying that when you face a real crisis then open the first one, that when he got to meet a second  big problem open the second, and keep the third to attack a third critical problem. Thanked with detail the new director took the 3 letters and put them away. 

  Time passed and became the first extreme situation, cornered decided to open the first letter that read: "Blame your predecessor." He did so and saved the situation. Later he found a new problem that could not resolve, so he opened the second letter: "Blame your team." Again allowing work forward. Then came a third crisis that only found the third one as a solution, it said: "Start typing 3 letters".

   This is a typical story that appears in equipment management courses. The first time I heard it I thought of the incredible ability we have people making excuses and take balls out and how much it costs us to recognize errors. 

   This story has several versions or even you can give some orientation depending to the course you want, but I'm staying with this: This speaks of the assumption of consequences of self-deception (How many times self-convinced of the excuses we built?), to buy time wirh excuses base, the need to look at yourself because there comes a time when the excuses are not needed and doesn't work ... you can even read in terms of ethics within the company.

   In chess can fall into this, we can convince others and even ourselves in that game or the tournament had bad luck, I had a headache, had not slept well, had a fly distracted me or that the moon was in waning ... the reality is very stubborn and always eventually agree. 

  Of course, we are human and we have ups and downs, we get sick and can we sleep badly, but these things should not use them as placeholders for not face ourselves. If we look honestly at ourselves looking for the why, we will have taken the first step to improve ... something else usually makes the ball bigger and that the blow stronger reality.

   We don't lose or win due it was penalised a penalty unfair or because someone slipped when launching the decisive triple or because the sun was over the face or blowing wind. We do it because we made a series of decisions and our opponent takes other, as the balance between each other, and the outcome. 

   Chess allows us not only unexcused external review the consequences of what we do but it also allows us to compare the reasoning processes on an equal footing with others: In one board position different people choose different  valid options under its various schemes reasoning, personality, circumstances or knowledge, which can enrich us with these other visions expanding our own views and diagrams.

   Companies spend lots of money on courses for their managers to develop (among others) these skills, both self-criticism as the revision of their reasoning and management processes... as a chess player  I think I have lucky to explore these fields with something I like as much as chess.

The original post was published in Spanish in my collaboration with the website Chesslive.com

How I used the chess to win a bet in the office?

"A player who is surprised is half beaten" (Proverb)

   At this time I worked in the Strategic  marketing department of a large company Mobile.

    The situation came just after launching a new range of price plans that showed some aggressiveness within the schemes that existed in the market these days. In the "launch day", our director called us for a meeting and invited us to think about the answers that could give our main competitor.

   In the round of the interventions, my comrades talked about classical schemes managing  the price per minute, and the amounts of Mb or minutes to be included in the offer, respecting fringes morning-afternoon-evening-weekend

   When I had to speak, I thought as I do during a game of chess ... putting myself in the place of my opponent, trying to think in terms of what would be the best for him, trying to take advance avoiding his best options

   Using this scheme I thought: Right now we have a larger market share (which in chess could be assimilated with an advantage) Our offer is focused to maintain the same way consolidating the advantage, if I was "my opponent" try to break this dynamic, so I should not make a move conservatively to keep the situation (fight scheme price within the same ideas), try to find counterplay to see if they can find weakness in the position of the side that has the advantage ... this requires aggressive action, surprise, not without risks, but in the end you have to catch up.
 

  My answer, following this reasoning chess, was that a family would fare spread the "promoted" hours in different bands, ie, if the "traditional" was to provide 6-8 hours of morning / afternoon / evening would let something like take 3 morning and 3 in the afternoon .... I thought it could be,  without an analysis of returns, something he had not offered by anyone on the market until this time and could attract attention, and, above all, could baffle the competition .... By doing this, they'd get counterplay with which, taking risks, could return to the fight for customers.

   The reaction of all my colleagues was "you have no idea", "how it shows you do not know anything about pricing", "the business case would never profitable" "absurd"

   To settle the matter, I proposed to make a little bet to see who was closer to the type of response. All of them accepted.

   A month later, the business proposal from the competitor was based on the distribution of hours in 2 bands of 4 hours, with their restrictions, but gave the client a flexibility that no one else offered that time ..... I took a few coffees with money from the bet

    The other consequence was that competition began to get more customers, getting cut our market share, which led us to "copy" your offer ... using chess terms, we lost the lead and our lead was in danger

   In this anecdotal situation  I used schemes any chess player, no matter his level, has internalized:

• Situation analysis (what is on the market and what's not)
• DO NOT underestimate the opponent (always think about what would be your best guess, and it is assumed that you will make the best choice for him)
• The principle that when you have an advantage you have to play trying to limit the opponent's counterplay capacity, and is at a disadvantage when you have to play aggressively to try to generate weaknesses in the opposite
• NO complacency in a better position,  because all we play games that have been taking advantage and we've  lost due to "relax a moment" or by an badly-timed error letting recover our rival.

The original post was published in Spanish in my collaboration with the website Chesslive.com

How to use the match Anand-Carlsen to promote the local chess?

He that would have the fruit must climb the tree. (saying)

   Following the post where I talked about the match between Anand and Carlsen I've recived many very good comments, that I can only deeply thank. During these comments has made a  ​​"hard" prior analysis of product release from the marketing point of view (which, as we all know, is more than just making announcements)

• It's seen the potential of the product: The duel has a sporty and emotional potential quite high.
• There are intangibles associated with the ability to generate a myth.
• Quite a global collective will be watching the same event.
• There is a target in the medium-long term,  where this event is included.
• They look at how little the difficulties "of watching"  of the event for the uninitiated in the game.
• For the ultimate goal of promoting chess, this madtch can be a "point of atention" but not enough, we need to surround him with something more.
• It's tough to get a place in mass media outlets to increase the public.
• If achieved this slot in medias, what approach should be given to have a positive effect?

   In the current post I propose a personal idea of how to try to exploit this particular event (of course are totally debatable, expandable and can improve). As I said I think the best way for the popularization and consolidation of chess in the schools, with the inclusion of specific subjects and practice as a school sport. Go with the political establishment awareness of the benefits that can bring chess in personality formation and development of the skills of the students.

  A federal level I consider the need involvement in this regard:  arguments and people prepared to raise it are not lacking in the various levels of government (local, regional, national or European) can work agreements. Chess is not only dedicated to ask subsidies, is willing and able to contribute to society with specific aspects and benefits.

   Returning to the specific issue of the match between Anand and Carlsen, if I were in some federation and would be working the publicity campaign ... but it escapes me what specific plans they have and the approach they're working. Here I will focus on what is in the hands of any of us, our own environments. I would use this match as an excuse to raise awareness: we can not expect someone who does not know what this understand or value the subtleties and wonders they can do on the board, but it's possible call attention to approaching someone interested.

   As a first concrete proposal I can think of that can arrange hearings in clubs (ideally several) where either follow the games live or analyze and discuss the last game played (by days and hours) These analyzes can be staged so that without getting into technical nuances can convey to someone not chess that behind every move (or possibility) there is a world. This requires someone with "not a lot of" chess knowledge but someone with the ability to convey emotion and connect easily without getting lost in technicalities.

   In parallel to this can be arranged simultaneous, courses for children, courses for parents to see their children start to play and can do something with them, previous talks presenting the match talking about the characteristics of the players, etc ... In the schools are can make this activity as something that parents and children can do together outside of school hours in their own "neighborhood".

  Maybe it isn't very different from what we've tried from the various clubs, I think the difference may be to involve local media .... This is where the striking use of the event, which is global and can approach the local level:

Before to the dates, start a campaign presentation:

• Who are the opponents?
• How do they differ in styles? (here you can use to convey that, as in other sports, there isn't a unique style, such as a "no-chess player" could think)
• Why this match is special?

   Once it has begun, preparing press releases and appearances on radio to explain the various activities, put in nontechnical language what happened in that game , what can happen in the next. 

   When finished you can make it the same summarizing what happened, analyzing consequences, showing what has brought... 

   If this is done "well" and explain language is achieved to reach the "no-players" then...we would get to talk about chess in local media for two months (which could approach people to the clubs), and maybe get someone in the media considers continuing collaboration.

   What I think is important here is the working together of different clubs and players. Depending on the size of cities is more or less easy, but I think it is important for:

• Share Logistics and tasks: Resource Optimization pure and simple
• Give sense of closeness: Chess is not something exclusive to "who is" is something that is in your neighborhood and you can join your neighbors
• Do not split the target audience: Not the same join 2 people in each of the 4 clubs in a city (for example) that gather to 8 in one location.
• To the local media is always easier to access if you have something worked between various entities (and make no mistake, it is work that should do us) with a commitment to continuity.
• Always more positive to show that we are united in a common goal and not seek interests. Let our sports rivalries are healthy and do not prevent us from working together.

   Obviously it is not easy, it requires hard work, knocking on many doors and make an important exercise of generosity and altruism . Requires you really want to try and don't take refuge in that" it is very difficult" and to doing well a slow work in the medium term is required: Yes, it's difficult, yes, work is in the medium term, but if not try to take advantage events like this, we can not complain that none open doors to develop planned and serious work.

The original post was published in Spanish in my collaboration with the website Chesslive.com