Welcome! Well, what did you think of the book? My first thought when I opened the book for the first time on an airplane a couple of weeks ago was, oh-oh! Quitting! Mr. Godin refers to the book on his blog as a "mind grenade" and I think that is a good description of it. There is so much focus on succeeding we don't think about what it takes. Sometimes, we have to quit.
As many of you know, I've been at my job for a long time. As I re-read the book, I thought about all the things I've quit over the years. For example, I quit sending management circulation statistics, because I have a virtual collection and nothing to circulate. I don't think I would have looked very good in the eyes of my management, if I continued to send monthly reports covered in zeros. By quitting various tasks over the years, I was able to take on new tasks and responsibilities and remain current.
I was impressed by the logic and efficiency of Godin's idea: quit before you have wasted time getting only half way through an endeavor, or quit when you find you can never get out (the cul-de-sac). Don't continue to invest in a career or endeavor that has no future. Godin is talking opportunity costs here: if you are doing activity A, you cannot be making progress on Activity B. If A is going no where, then why pursue it?
He also points out that lots of folks quit halfway through a project. The investment they have made in their Activity A is thrown away. He argues for pushing through the Dip to complete whatever Activity A is, and then being selective about choosing the next activity.
Two themes struck me: 1) recognize the influence each of us has on the way a project develops (he uses the idea of leaning on the curve to shape it to our best interests); and 2) be selective of where we invest our time and energy, since that is what both careers and happiness are made of.
I liked his advice: change strategies and tactics that are not working, but don't give up on an idea that has potential.
Posted by: Claudia Dold | May 22, 2008 at 06:28 AM
One thing stood out above all else as I read this book: Godin doesn't provide sources for his information. To me, this is big. My job is all about sourcing. When I answer reference questions, I provide the source for my answer. Even if I know the answer, I am still expect to check my knowledge against authoritative sources. By not presenting outside verification of his premise, Godin requires me to accept him as the ultimate authority on the subject. I don't know enough about Godin's qualifications to accept him as such an authority. I found the Godin's ideas interesting, but he presented a weak case for why I should embrace them.
Posted by: Neal Smith | May 22, 2008 at 03:09 PM