Who owns the way you think?

Businesses and economies are living in interesting times. As more and more of what we exchange is not stuff but thoughts, we need not only to assign value to those thoughts, but to assign ownership. It looks like value is the easy part of the assignment.

It may seem evident to you that you own the way you think. We are, after all, talking about something that no one else in the world can produce. You are the only source for the particular blend of experience and expertise that you bring to your clients or employers. Since no one can tell you what to think, it seems to follow that no one can tell you how to think - and therefore that you are the only person with ownership of how you think.

There are two problems with this. The first is that your clients may be paying you for what you think, but your employer almost certaintly believes that it is paying you for how you think. As an employer, if you don't own the process by which you produce the goods/services you sell, you are in a shaky position at best. How can you ensure continuous supply if you don't own what you sell?

The second problem is that human beings have a fundamental tendency to believe we have more control than we do. It's entirely possible that how you think - and how you behave - are as much a function of your environment as they are of your personal competence. You might very well think differently (with a different process, and with different products) if you were working somewhere else. It is not impossible that your employer has as much influence on your thinking process and you do yourself - and therefore, perhaps, as genuine a right to ownership.

It's certainly worth thinking about.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Yes" sets for building agreement and manipulation

I recently watched a video of a solution-focus therapist working with a client. The clip began with a number of questions and statements with which the client would agree.  In hypnosis and sales, it's known as a "yes set." If you're not familiar with the concept, it works roughly like Simon Says.  In that game, you get into a pattern of doing what "Simon says" so that you eventually do what the leader says even when s/he does not insert the magic words "Simon says." In the "yes set," you get used to saying yes until such a strong pattern of agreement exists that you agree with statements or instructions you might not otherwise give your agreement. The more times in a row you have said "yes," the greater the probability that you will say "yes" to the next statement. Yes sets can be seen in two ways. The first is that you are offering someone evidence that you are observing and accepting their experience. When every
Read more

The hypnotic contract

Under what conditions would you allow someone else to tell you what to think?   If you have watched a stage hypnotist, you have seen what looks like one person exercising remarkable control over the thoughts and actions of another. It is fascinating, in part, because we have all seen it happen in real life. Suddenly someone we know seems to be relying on someone else to do the thinking.  Even if the influence is good, it is a little frightening. The secret is that there are no magic words.  In order to lead someone into hypnosis, that person has to be willing to go there. Often the people you see on stage are more than willing. For whatever reasons, they are enthusiastic about giving up self control and allowing someone else to take charge. They know that there are limits to what can happen on stage and they are only agreeing to give up control within those limits. What you see in hypnosis is an agreement between two people. Like all agreements between human beings, it stretches as far
Read more

The fine line between observations, suggestions and commands

I have been watching Tony Robbins this week in the documentary called " I Am Not Your Guru ." You can read a nicely ambivalent review in the Financial Times here.   I think the ambivalence is built into the process, which might be surprising given the loud celebration that characterizes the Date with Destiny in the film. For those of us whose work has evolved from NLP, there are lessons to be learned from modelling the most famous and successful practitioner of NLP (Robbins has far surpassed all the founders by all measures of success). Because he does so much so well, Robbins lets us see how fine the line is between observing and suggesting. Let me explain. Robbins frames his "interventions" both with the exercises and performances we do not see in the film and with his invitations. The film opens with an intervention with a young man who says he is suicidal; it is only later that we see Robbins say he is looking for someone who is suicidal to work with. Since
Read more