Mastery and Innovation Coexist with Clarity

It’s largely about trial, analysis, correction and repetition.

Innovation, on the other hand, is about breaking from convention, repetition and routine. via www.jonathanfields.com

That first one sounds like a continuous process of innovation.

The last one sounds like mastery. Masters break from convention, repetition and routine...the mundane parts of mediocrity.

Jonathan and I differ, often.

And that's ok. At least I think it's ok; he still allows me to subscribe to his newsletter and comment on his blog. I take that as a yes, it's ok.

And what makes it easy to disagree with Jonathan is his clarity and purpose. He's very clear with his purpose. He's very clear with what he writes, why he writes what he writes. He's very clear on his audience and their needs. And he's very clear on how he works to serve that audience.

So, in an instant, I can pinpoint the points where I disagree.

Why is this important? Maybe, it's not. But in a process of mastery, in a process of innovation, you have to be clear. Clear as Jonathan is clear.

And you have to ask for opinions. Jonathan explicitly asks for opinions. Innovation dies in an echo chamber. A group of true believers suck the life out of innovation. No one disagrees. The leader usually fails to ask for disagreement or rewards those who disagree with distance from him, the group, the benefits of inclusion.

And, one of the rewards of this first step of clarity is probably going to be a rash of comments from people you have shown clearly where the gaps are or appear to be.

That's a good thing, too.

Clarity is a key to innovation. Clarity in purpose. Clarity in process. Clarity in defining what is.

I hope I'm clear.