The compass sat on the wooden desk. The metal was heavy. The metal was cold. The compass had a sharp point on one leg and a lead tip on the other leg. This compass belonged to Eva R.-M. Eva R.-M. is an archaeological illustrator.
Eva R.-M. draws the things people find in the dirt. Eva R.-M. uses the compass to measure the diameter of broken pots. The compass creates a circle. The circle represents a boundary. Inside the circle is the pot. Outside the circle is the unknown.
The circle feels safe. The circle is predictable. People love the circle.
A marketing plan is like a circle. The marketing plan defines what the company will do. The marketing plan defines what the company will not do. Most marketing plans stay inside the circle. The circle is the safe zone. The safe zone is where the risk framework lives.
The Anatomy of a Safe Mistake
The risk framework is a document. The document has columns. The document has rows. The document assigns numbers to ideas. A low number means the idea is safe. A high number means the idea is dangerous.
I watched a creator present a plan . The creator had a bold plan. The plan involved a series of unconventional videos. The videos were strange. The videos were beautiful. The videos required a large budget. The creator showed the plan to the manager. The manager opened the risk framework. The manager looked at the plan. The manager looked at the columns.
The risk framework asked about the budget. The budget was high. The risk framework asked about the history. The history was short. The risk framework asked about the certainty of the result. The certainty was low. The risk framework gave the plan a high score. A high score means the plan is risky. The manager shook his head. The manager did not like the high score. The manager wanted a low score.
The manager asked for a different plan. The team produced a different plan. This plan was boring. The plan involved posting short clips from old webinars. The team knew the clips would not perform well. The team knew the clips would get very few views.
The team knew the clips would not grow the channel. But the risk framework loved the plan. The budget was small. The history was long. The certainty of the result was high. The result would be mediocre. The risk framework gave the plan a low score. The manager smiled. The manager approved the plan.
The 3 AM Toilet Leak
I have made this mistake before. I fixed a toilet at . The toilet was leaking. The water was on the floor. I looked at the pipe. I had two choices. Choice one was to replace the entire pipe. Replacing the pipe was expensive. Replacing the pipe required a trip to the store.
Replacing the pipe felt like a big project. Choice one felt risky. Choice two was to use a cheap sealant. The sealant was in the cabinet. The sealant was easy to apply. The sealant cost nothing. The sealant felt safe.
The “Safe” Choice
The Cheap Sealant
- Zero cost
- Zero effort
- Low perceived risk
The Reality
The 6 AM Flood
- Ruined floor
- Soaked carpets
- Exponential costs
I chose the sealant. I told myself I was being smart. I told myself I was avoiding the risk of a big plumbing project. I applied the sealant. I went to bed. I woke up at .
The water was everywhere. The water had ruined the floor. The water had soaked the carpet in the next room. The cheap sealant had failed. My safe choice was the most dangerous choice I could have made. I thought I was managing risk. I was actually ensuring a disaster.
The risk framework in the office is the sealant. The risk framework measures the danger of doing something new. The risk framework does not measure the danger of doing nothing. The risk framework does not measure the danger of stagnation.
If a YouTube channel stays at 100 subscribers for a year, the channel is dying. The cost of that death is not on the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet only sees the cost of the video production.
Eva R.-M. tells me that a broken pot is a story. The pot broke because of a flaw. Or the pot broke because of an accident. But the pot existed. The pot was used.
A pot that is never fired in the kiln cannot break. A pot that stays as raw clay is safe. But a raw clay pot cannot hold water. A raw clay pot is useless. Many companies are full of raw clay plans.
The plans are safe because the plans are never tested. The plans are never tested because the plans are useless. When a creator wants to launch a new channel, the creator faces a wall. The wall is the algorithm.
Changing the Math
The algorithm likes data. The algorithm likes views. The algorithm likes engagement. A new video has no data. A new video has no views. A new video has no engagement. The risk framework says that investing in a new video is risky. The risk framework says the probability of success is low.
This is where the framework fails. The framework assumes that the “safe” path of organic growth has a high probability of success. It does not. The probability of organic growth for a new channel with zero views is nearly zero. The “safe” path is a guaranteed failure. To break the cycle, the creator must change the math. The creator must add force.
One way to add force is to build social proof quickly. Social proof makes a video look established. Social proof makes the algorithm take notice. People see a video with views and they stay to watch. People see a video with zero views and they click away.
To fix this, a creator might look for an
to create that initial spark. To a risk framework, this looks like an added cost. To a risk framework, this looks like an outlier. But to the creator, this is a de-risking strategy.
By adding views, the creator increases the chance that the high-quality content will be seen. The creator is not just buying a number. The creator is buying a chance for the content to survive. The risk of the video dying in obscurity is higher than the risk of the investment.
The sealant failed me because I did not want to spend the money on the pipe. The marketing plan fails because the manager does not want to spend the effort on the bold idea.
The risk framework is a mirror. The mirror reflects the fear of the person holding the mirror. If the manager is afraid of the boss, the framework will show danger. If the creator is afraid of the critics, the framework will show danger. Fear is a bad way to measure reality. Fear likes the circle. Fear likes the compass when the compass is closed.
Eva R.-M. uses her compass to draw the missing pieces of the pot. She sees the curve. She follows the curve. She knows where the edge should be. She does not stop because the clay is gone. She completes the circle because she understands the design.
The Integrity of the System
A good leader understands the design of growth. Growth requires a departure from the safe plan. Growth requires a rejection of the “low risk” mediocrity. If the framework says the bold plan is risky, the leader should ask a different question. The leader should ask: What is the risk of the boring plan?
THE BORING PLAN (CERTAINTY)
90%
THE BOLD PLAN (UNCERTAINTY)
20%
The framework picks the 90% chance. But the 2% return does not pay the bills.
The boring plan has a 90% chance of producing a 2% return. The bold plan has a 20% chance of producing a 500% return. The framework picks the 90% chance. The framework likes the high number of certainty. But the 2% return does not pay the bills. The 2% return does not build the brand. The 2% return is a slow death.
I spent four hours cleaning the water. I spent more money on the plumber than I would have spent on the pipe. I learned that the cheap option is often the most expensive. I learned that the “safe” path is often a trap.
We must stop using risk frameworks that only look at the downside. We must start measuring the risk of the status quo. If we do not change, we will be replaced. If we do not grow, we will disappear.
The creator with the bold plan should not be punished. The creator with the bold plan should be given the tools to succeed. If that means building social proof through a service like Noniba, then that is a rational choice. It is a choice to invest in the success of the idea. It is a choice to fight the stagnation of the “safe” path.
I still have that compass on my desk. It reminds me of Eva R.-M. It reminds me of the pots in the dirt. It reminds me that everything breaks eventually. The question is not whether we will face risk. The question is whether the risk we take is worth the pot we are trying to build.
“Stop choosing the sealant. Buy the pipe. Launch the video. Take the risk that actually has a chance of working.”
The water is rising. The floor is getting wet. The framework is just a piece of paper. The paper will not help you swim. The compass cannot measure the water on the floor.
Integrity Over Scores
Growth is a series of calculated departures. Each departure feels dangerous. Each departure is a threat to the current state of the company. But the current state of the company is temporary. The market moves. The audience moves. The competition moves. If the company stays in the circle, the company becomes a target.
I saw the plumber work. He did not use a framework. He used his eyes. He used his hands. He knew the pipe was bad. He did not care about the cost of the sealant. He cared about the integrity of the system.
We need more people who care about the integrity of the results. We need fewer people who care about the score on the spreadsheet. A spreadsheet cannot feel the flood. A spreadsheet cannot see the beauty of a video that changes a viewer’s mind.
A spreadsheet only knows the numbers we give it. If we give the spreadsheet fear, the spreadsheet will give us failure. If we give the spreadsheet ambition, the spreadsheet will give us a chance.
I fixed the toilet. The floor is dry now. I learned my lesson. I hope you learn yours before the water starts to rise. Launch the plan. Buy the views. Break the circle.
Use the compass to measure how far you have gone, not how far you are allowed to go. That is the only way to build something that lasts. That is the only way to leave the dirt behind.