Summation Push

Auren Hoffman's Summation Push for February, 2003

This issue:

* Auren Joins Blumberg Capital as an Entrepreneur In Residence

* First Names vs. Last Names Personality Test

* My Generation - Will There Be No More Class Reunions?

* The Connector: Party Planners

* Book Review: Generations -- by William Strauss & Neil Howe

* Reader Responses:

* Friend of Auren: Andrei Cherny, author of The Next Deal

* Summation Push Pick Links

* Hoffman Reading List

Note: There are currently over 11,000 people subscribed to Summation!

--------------------------------

AUREN JOINS BLUMBERG CAPITAL AS AN ENTREPRENEUR IN RESIDENCE

I recently joined Blumberg Capital (http://www.blumbergcapital.com) part-time as an entrepreneur in residence (EIR). Blumberg is an early-stage venture capital firm (investments of up to $3 million) located in San Francisco that generally invests in software and communications companies. I can always be reached at auren@summation.net

--------------------------------

FIRST NAMES VS. LAST NAMES PERSONALITY TEST

By Auren Hoffman 

Some people identify more with their first name than with their last name. Some people are just the opposite. Ever wonder why?

People who adopt first names as their identity are more individualistic. Think of politicians: Newt, Slick Willie, W, Gipper, Trickie Dick, Rudy. Think of entertainers: Britney, Sting, Madonna. This phenomenon is obviously more likely to happen with people that have distinctive first names but it even exists with people who have very common names: "Be like Mike!"

People who are known more by their last name are generally more team players. Think of any team sport -- most players refer to one another by their last name.

(What name do you identify with most?   Write auren@summation.net)

-------------------------------------------------

The objective of Summation is to make you think. Pass it on to a friend.

-------------------------------------------------

FMY GENERATION
Will There Be No More Class Reunions?

By Auren Hoffman 

Talking again about the oft-classified Generation X ...

My high school never had a reunion. We never had a five-year reunion -- but I guess that is not so odd. We never had a 10-year reunion either. The class president didn't "deal" with it. He didn't want to be bothered - and neither did anyone else. No one stepped up. Most of my friends did have 10-year reunions, but most of them didn't go. Those that went were generally disappointed with the turn-out - "a measly 30 people at a bar" is how one person described their moment of nostalgia.

Nostalgia is such an interesting word. There are always people nostalgic for something. There are civil war buffs who love history. There are readers of Stephen Ambrose about WWII and Brokaw's Greatest Generation. People even like to visit the 1950s-style diners where waiters serve your food on roller skates. (Trent Lott is even nostalgic for Strom Thurmond).

But my generation isn't nostalgic. Most civil war buffs are over 40. In 10 years, most will be over 50. My generation isn't as interested.

Sure there are exceptions (I'm personally an exception). There are people in Generation X looking forward to reunions and interested in history, but we are few.

But what does this trend actually mean? Is it a good thing or a bad thing? I'm not sure ... but there could be a silver lining. For one, our Generation is looking forward, not backward. We seem to want adventure but we don't want to be hampered by the past's mistakes, judgments, prejudices, and the like...

[See more discussion on our generation in the book review Generations below]

In April I will be making a presentation on Generation X to the National Kitchen and Bath Association (NKBA) convention in Orlando. Here is a copy of the slides:
http://www.summation.net/030411_NKBA_Generations.htm

(What do you think?   Write auren@summation.net)

-------------------------------------------------

Share Summation Push. Forward it to the smartest people you know.

-------------------------------------------------

THE CONNECTOR
Tools for Increasing Your Network

PARTY PLANNERS

You know the people that are always planning parties and events? Those people are a special type of connector. Generally they are very social people who truly enjoy creating large events (or planning a vacation) and inviting many people to share the experience with them.

Many people, me included, rely on these planner connectors for social outlets. Without them, many of us would be confined to our living room watching movies every Saturday night. Most of the vacations I have taken have been planned by someone else -- whether it was my recent trip to Sundance or a summer trip to Mexico.

A "connector" delivers value to all those who know her. Party planners deliver a ton of value. Everyone wants to know the party planner. So these connectors are always getting contact information from people and always have a reason to send mass-broadcasts (because parties/vacations are done often). We all know people like this -- people we rely on to increase our "fun" intake (or even our brain intake).

(What are your thoughts about the party planner connector?   Write auren@summation.net)

--------------------------------

Useless Fact:

"Did you know that Japan has over $6 trillion in debt? That's astonishing!"

--------------------------------

BOOK REVIEW:

Generations
by William Strauss & Neil Howe

Every so often, I read a book that really affects the way I think about things. In 2002, I read three such books: The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell, The Prize by Daniel Yergin, and Generations.

About six months ago I got an email from Doug Kilponen at Digital Impact telling me that I needed to read Generations. He said the 1991 book (and the subsequent follow-on books written by the same authors) changed his life.

I'm not sure that the book "changed my life," but it did massively change my perspective on history. But Doug had it right, and it was definitely worth the read.

Generations studies the history of American generations from 1584 to 2069. That's right, 2069! - the book attempts to predict the future. The book discusses how at any given time in history, there are four relevant Generations (given that the average generation spans 21 years, four generations would span up to 84 years and cover most of the population). Given that, Strauss and Howe believe that each of the four generation has a specific characteristic and that these traits repeat themselves in sets of four.

The four types of generations are:
(a) Idealist
(b) Reactive
(c) Civic
(d) Adaptive

Right now in history, the authors suggest that the Boomers are Idealist, Generation Xers are Reactive, and the Millenniums (born after 1981) are Civic. From these patterns, Strauss and Howe believe that history can be better explained and that the future can be better predicted as they believe most major historical awakenings and crises stem from clashes between the generations.

This way of looking at history is very controversial and I do not agree with many of the assertions, but the book itself is a masterpiece and I highly recommend it.

Summation: Read Generations

-----------------------------------------------------

The objective of Summation is to
make you think. Pass it on to a friend.

------------------------------------------------------------------

READER RESPONSES AND OPINIONS

Regarding last month's article on "Will There Ever Be a Generation X President" (see http://www.summation.net/push0301.html) David Gimpelevich remarks:

Your take on the Generations concept is very interesting. I read the book recently, and its thesis has a great deal of initial appeal. Still, as I began examining individual examples, the theory began to break down. I know of many people who do not fit the generational profile presented. Enough exceptions and the rule begins to be sorely tested. Does your own experience completely bear out the thesis? It is worth thinking about. Also, the book's premise that it is the generational pressures that produce external conflicts and determine their outcome is overly simplistic. There are more convincing arguments based on other factors, such as for instance interactions among great powers and changes in industrial capacity.

... and Michael Tchong, CEO of Iconocast, gives the following population stats to support the theory:

Boomers: 1946-64, (78 million)
Generation X: 1965-1978 (<20 million)
Gen Y: 1979-1994 (60 million).

... and Jim Strock, author of Theodore Roosevelt on Leadership, adds:

On the generational issue, is the question really whether "Gen X" will have a president from its ranks? There are so many contingencies that come together in the selection of any president-in some ways it is every bit as arbitrary as a monarchy, just more legitimate! Dr. King was a "silent"-but his influence historically will surpass many presidents. In some times leadership from other areas is more significant than the White House-think 1865-1901-and, some argue, 1988 to the present. Also, while generational distinctions can be useful in the aggregate, they may or may not be as helpful in understanding individuals. George W. Bush, arguably, is much closer to Gen X in many of his values than to the Baby Boomers. He chose to reject many Baby Boom values beginning as a young man, without peer support at Yale or a clear alternative-and one can see he is distinct in some ways from the archetypal boomers in high political office, such as Clinton and Gingrich, Gore and Lott (my guess is that history will come to view them all of a piece, with their differences far outweighed by their similarities). Maybe, in the conjunction of 9/11-with its heavy imprint by Gen X from the beginning-and the presidency of George W. Bush, Gen X has its president now.

... and Charles Goldberg of Harry Walker Speakers Bureau proposes:

Heh Auren, Perhaps you will be our president!

... and Lance Brown writes:

I read your thing about a Gen X President, and I just wanted to mention that plan to be President, and I'm a GenXer (born 1972). I launched my campaign in 1994, and I will be running in 2008, at age 36. If I don't win then (which is obviously very likely), I plan to run again in 2016, and then again in 2024, when I'll be a 52-year-old GenXer. ;-) I have a campaign blog here: http://freedom2008.com

Regarding last month's article on "The Connector" (see http://www.summation.net/push0301.html) Hunter Walk of Linden Labs chimes in:

Your note on contact mgmt software indirectly hit one of my favorite topics - social networks. If the number of " requests you update your contact info" messages I've received recently is any indication, the programs you mention are catching on with early adopters.

What are some of the interesting, weird features which might emerge as a result of these contact networks?

* Bidirectional Enforcement: If I delete your contact info from my address book, mine will automatically disappear from yours as well. Harsh but wouldn't this be socially fascinating?

* Birds of a Feather: All of a sudden you can create affinity groups based upon known information. Opt-in to allow your info to be crawled by friends-of-friends with common interests. Imagine receiving a message "Jane Smith [friend of Auren Hoffman] also likes jazz and invites you into the Jazz Birds of a Feather Mailing List." That's right, disintermediate the holders of personal data. Take it a step further and use my profile card to list the fact I have a 1997 Jeep for sale. Instant buyer-seller matching. Hmmmm, a decentralized competitor for eBay?

* Integration with Mobile Devices to create Smart Mobs. Unexpected trip to New Orleans? Upon landing use your Treo to automatically text message contacts within the geography (based upon their address or area code of course) with queries around "where are you now," "what's hot here," "where can I get a good coffee," etc.

Of course privacy concerns become quite interesting but so long as you can keep adding value, make participation opt-in only, protect data, etc it could become a very interesting world.

Adrian Vanzyl from Blumberg Capital writes:

Is the belief in free will more important than actually having true free will? (In terms of the way personal responsibility then shapes your actions). If so, does a political structure that makes people believe they have free work as well as one where they actually do have free will? So, if voting is not compulsory, and only the vocal minority shapes decisions, then do you have a democracy? Going back to my original question, is the belief that what we have (a democracy) enough, even though in my argument we don't truly have a system that represents the view of the people?

This is all to justify the fact that we have to vote in local elections in Australia, because surely if you HAVE to do something (against your free will) your actions can then represent your free will and you can shape the world around you, and thus by roundabout logic Australia and any country that forces compulsory voting is indeed a true democracy representing people of free will. ;-)

Catherine Haley offers a books review:

The Elegant Universe -- This book covers the idea of the superstring theory - pretty darn cool. Apparently micro-physics (quantum theory) and macro-physics (theory of relativity) look good on paper, but couldn't possibly work together by definition. Superstring theory relates the two

(Write Auren your thoughts.   Write auren@summation.net)

--------------------------------

Send Summation Push to a colleague.

--------------------------------

FRIEND OF AUREN (FOA)

[This section updates you an interesting person that is a member of Auren, Inc.]

Andrei Cherny

I met Andrei through my college friend Richard Schwartz -- they went to high school in Los Angeles together. Andrei was a senior speech writer to Al Gore when he was just 21 -- becoming the youngest White House speech writer in American history. He was also the author of the 2000 Democratic platform.

He is the author of The Next Deal which details the "third-way" approach of the New Democrats. Check it out on Amazon and you'll even find a favorable review by Newt Gingrich. Andrei is currently living in Southern California where he is consulting for large corporations and non-profits.

Because he understands all sides of the debate, Andrei is a Democrat that even a Republican can like.

See past profiled Friends of Auren at: http://www.summation.net/friends.html

--------------------------------
Send Summation Push to a colleague
--------------------------------

THIS WEEK'S SUMMATION PUSH PICK LINKS TO MAKE YOU THINK:

* Andrew Sullivan Blog (http://www.andrewsullivan.com) -- site talks to Generation X. Referred by Price Roe.

* Buttafly (http://www.buttafly.com) – thoughts from Jennifer Bishop. Referred by Brett Hurt of Coremetrics.

* You Are My Friend (http://Auren.Hoffman.youaremyfriend.com) – this is hilarious! Sent to me by Christian Bailey.

* Auren's Ryze page (http://www.ryze.org/view.php?who=auren) -- worth viewing.

* RSVP for the Party of the Decade (http://evite.citysearch.com/GGParty@eudoramail.com/2011Party) -- taking place on Nov 11, 2011.

*How to sell via e-mail (from the book "21st Century Selling") (http://www.summation.net/emailselling.html)

*What am I reading? The Hoffman Reading List (http://www.summation.net/reading.html)

NOTE: You may reprint in full or in part (for free) with permission from the author.

Auren Hoffman's bio can be found at: http://www.summation.net/hoffman.html

------------------------------------

Subscribe? Unsubscribe?

Comments: E-mail: auren@summation.net

SUMMATION

Subscribe Now!

Past Summations

About the Author

About Summation

The Friends