Monday through Friday

Monday through Friday contains 120 hours and makes up 71% of our lives.  I've been thinking a lot about what I do during these hours and whether or not I'm using them as effectively as possible. 

Here's the breakdown for me:

• 54% - Work (65 hours)
• 33% - Sleep (40 hours)
• 4% - Exercise (5 hours)
• 4% - Spending time with friends and family -- in person or over the phone (5 hours)
• 4% - Chilling out -- reading, watching TV, internet, research, paying bills, etc. (5 hours)

Because a reasonable amount of sleep, or at least rest, is a requirement for me, I'm spending 77% of my Monday through Friday doing something that is more or less involuntary.

If you're anything like me it's crucial that you're getting a BIG return on the effort you're putting into your work. 

Twitter

Ashton Kutcher now has one million Twitterers following his daily twits.  This is actually pretty significant news. 

I signed up for a Twitter account today. I don't plan to post anything or use it all that much at this point but I have to say that I'm completely fascinated by it.

I've read a ton about it and I truly don't think anyone fully understands the power and magnitude of this technology.The telephone, arguably one of the world's most revolutionary technologies, gave us the ability to have a real-time conversation with someone that's thousands of miles away. Now it turns out that Twitter allows us to have a real-time conversation with millions of people that are thousands of miles away. The ramifications for marketing are hard to imagine.

Another good quote

God gave us one mouth and two ears. So do half as much speaking as you do listening.

FlyCast

A few weeks back, I wrote a post about the things I'd like to be able to do on my BlackBerry -- one of them was to listen to live radio. Specifically, I wanted to be able to listen to WEEI, Boston's sports radio station.

I just downloaded an application called FlyCast that allows me to do just that with the click of a button. Very exciting.

'Sully' Sullenberger

'Sully' Sullenberger, the pilot that successfully landed a plane in the Hudson River, is making the rounds through all of the popular media channels this week -- starting tonight with 60 Minutes.

I'm really looking forward to hearing from this guy. Because I live only a few blocks from the Hudson and I flew into LaGuardia on the day of the "water landing", I've been paying pretty close attention to the developments.

So much has been written about this so I really don't have all that much to add. But after hearing the calmness in the voices of the pilot and the air traffic controllers, the next time I fly I'll be a bit more comfortable. Twice, Sullenberger said that he was going to try to land the plane in the Hudson. I kept waiting for the air traffic controller to say, "YOU'RE GOING TO WHAT?!?"

Instead, showing zero emotion, he calmly suggested alternative runways.

Marketing this Blog

To date, I've had virtually zero traffic on this blog. I've also done zero marketing.

The primary reason I haven't marketed it yet is that I'm unclear on what the value is for someone other than myself. I only blog because I like to write. And this seems like a fun place to do it.

There are a couple things that need to fall into place before I'll start actively marketing:

• A more narrow focus of topics
• Time and ability to regularly provide content that is remarkable; something that people will tell their friends about

Lastly, I'd like this blog to be an outlet for a certain area of expertise; an expertise that supports my career. I'm the best in the world at something -- something specific and narrow -- but I haven't identified it yet; I have some ideas, but I want to be sure. I literally have no idea when/if these things will come together. But in the meantime, I'm ok with a few hits a month.

Good Quote

I just read a quote that I really liked. It's from anonymous source.

"You can't lead the cavalry if you can't sit in the saddle."

This is a great analogy for how I think about business and business people and the people I want on my team.

The Hype Machine

The Hype Machine is a music blog aggregator that trolls the internet to find out what's hot and to give it attention. They just released their Top 50 Artists, Songs and Albums of 2008. For the last two weeks, I haven't stopped listening to the Top 50 Albums. You can find them here.

While I consider myself a music lover, I also recognize that I have terrible taste in music. I've always gone for what's most accessible, catchy and easy to get listen to. Hype Machine's Top 50 is not made up of that kind of music, not at all. In fact, I've only heard of five of the 50 artists:

• REM
• Beck
• Coldplay
• Kanye West
• Lil Wanye

All of the others are completely new to me. I've already found a few new favorites:

• Frightened Rabbit
• MGMT
• Vampire Weekend
• M83

This music takes some time and commitment to enjoy, but it's well worth it.

Of course, the best part of Hype Machine is the Bloggers that are discovering and writing about the music.

Here are a couple of quotes that will inspire you to listen to the music and appreciate how cool this site is:

• "...could be the soundtrack to an early morning drive down a country road."

• "Who'd have thought the classic "American" punk album would be reinvented by a New Jersey punk band rocking out the basement circuit."

• "Good music to listen to while jumping on a trampoline."

• "It's dark, creepy and if it happens to be raining where you are, it'll be the perfect soundtrack."

• "...an album best listened to alone, or at 3am at an open-minded party."

• "It's the musical equivalent of reading someone else's diary."

• "It's like watching the sun rise over distant mountaintops, over and over, familiar and captivating all at once."

If you haven't heard of a lot of these bands, I highly recommend giving it a listen.

Mobile News

I mentioned in an earlier post that I use the WSJ Reader on my Blackberry which allows me to read news updates and my favorite WSJ columnists (Jenkins, Mossberg, Morgenstern, etc.) at no cost. Even better, it pulls in feeds from my favorite blogs (about 15-20) in real time. I'm convinced that I get more news and information from the reader than I do through any other medium (TV, newspaper, magazines, etc.).

Whenever I add another blog I think about how great this thing is...for me. But what's the WSJ getting out of it? Probably a few things:

• Advertising fees (though very minimal, there's very little space for ads)
• Click throughs: once in a while I'll wind up clicking through to their website to "get more information"
• Branding/Loyalty: I've cancelled my newspaper subscription but WSJ remains top-of-mind for me and I continue to consume their product.
• Word of mouth: because I'm reading columns and articles from the WSJ, I'll continue to talk and write about the WSJ
• Upsell opportunity: they show ads for other Dow Jones products

But I think there's something much bigger and potentially brilliant going on here: The Wall street Journal has built a platform for all the news a reader could want that carries virtually zero distribution costs. Or, put another way, the WSJ Reader solves the two fundamental problems with a newspaper's business model: limited space and big costs. The jury is out on how well mobile attention can be monetized but my sense is that the WSJ is doing something pretty smart here...I'm sure I'll be writing more on this in the coming months.

Work That Matters

I just read a fantastic quote from Tim O'Reilly, the coiner of "Web 2.0", that I think is right on point for those of us trying to spend our time doing work that matters.

"You should regard money as fuel for what you really want to do, not as a goal in and of itself. Money is like gas in the car -- you need to pay attention, or you'll end up on the side of the road -- but a well-lived life is not a tour of gas stations."

Job Losses

Today's Wall Street Journal and Financial Times front pages' declare that the U.S economy lost 2.5 million jobs last year -- the most since 1945 -- and the unemployment rate hit 7.2% in December. As an optimist, I'd like to take a quick look at the bright side of this horrible news by asking the question: why have so many jobs been lost? My answer: three reasons.

1. The fundamentals of the economy are weak and companies are adjusting expenses consistent with projected revenue reductions (after all, Wall Street only rewards profits).

2. Panic.

3. Smart executives are using the credit crisis and talk of a depression as an excuse to get rid of underperforming, redundant and overvalued human capital.

The bright side comes from #3. The fact is that most large companies are extremely inefficient, and most executives know it. Most large companies could probably produce the same results (maybe better) with only half of the employees they currently have. I've heard that all of the value of a company truly comes from the top 10% performing employees.

But for a myriad of reasons (morale, fear of lawsuits, bad press, etc.) big companies can't fire people. However, the doomsday news surrounding the credit crisis has presented smart executives with a market oddity (or what they might call, an opportunity). They can, more or less without consequence, massively reduce their headcounts and, conversely, massively improve the efficiency (and eventually profits) of their organizations. Job losses are a side effect of economic cycles. Profits decline and companies cut jobs, then profits increase and companies hire. 

Because of #3, which isn't a part of every cycle (at least not to this extreme), this cycle should complete itself much quicker than it normally would. That's is, profits declined, companies ruthlessly slashed jobs -- more than they have since 1945 -- profits will increase (that much faster) and companies will begin hiring (that much faster). Predicting what the economy will and won't do is ways a bad idea but I do think the above is legitimate. Combining these realities with the bailout and the new administration, it'll be interesting (and hopefully exciting) to see where we go from here.

Art Appreciation

I like to write about writers that have inspired me to write more. But Joe Morgenstern, the movie critic for the Wall Street Journal, has inspired me in a different way.

For most of my life I've taken art at face value. That is, if an artist can do something that I, or the average person, can't do, then I'm impressed. If, on the other hand, I can do it, I'm not impressed.For example, the average person could never paint a landscape like Bob Ross. But the average person could easily duplicate at least half of what you see at MOMA (ok, not easily, but you get the point). So in my mind, that has been the difference between good art and bad art, lots of talent and not a lot of talent.

I've talked to a fair number of people about this that seem to agree. And I think it's pretty understandable. It's like looking at art through the same lens that one would use to look at sports; most people would pay more to see professionals play football than they would to see a 12 year old play Pop Warner. Why? Because professionals are much better than the average. More talent and skill = more quality.

I've been reading Joe Morgenstern's movie reviews for several years and I'm finally beginning to appreciate movies at a much deeper level. His amazing writing and insight into movies isn't just enlightening, it's entirely legitimate and logical. He sees things that the casual movie watcher does not. And after several years of reading his column, he's starting to rub off on me.

I now watch films with a more critical eye. I consider meanings that aren't immediately obvious, I watch how characters are built, how they make us think about ourselves, and the conflict that builds when we cheer for them when maybe we shouldn't, how we dislike them when maybe we should. I've realized that sometimes it's not the happy ending that makes the movie worth watching, often, the story itself is the gift.

From a technical perspective, nearly any film maker with the budget could make, say, Little Miss Sunshine. But very few could create a movie that connects with an audience like it did. In short, and thanks to Joe Morgenstern, I've begun to appreciate film for more than I see on the screen. I've begun to appreciate art. And I think that's pretty neat.