 |
|
|
|||||
The retail platform eBay is set to acquire fashion resale app Depop from Etsy in a $1.2 billion transaction. Ostensibly, the deal will help eBay to cultivate a new audience of Gen Z and Gen Alpha shoppers. But I think theres a deeper reason that eBay might want to lock Depop down: its simply the best looking resale interface out there right now. The deal was announced on February 18 in a press release from Etsy. Its expected to close some time in the second quarter of 2026, and, per an email sent to Depops customers, after the merger Depop will remain a stand-alone brand within eBay and retain its name, brand, and platform. For eBay, acquiring Depop makes a good measure of intuitive sense. Generally, resale is trending upward: Based on ThredUps 2025 Resale Report, the secondhand apparel market is expected to reach $367 billion by 2029, growing 2.7 times faster than the overall global apparel market. Millennials, Gen Z, and Gen Alpha shoppers are some of the strongest drivers of that trend, with 39% of younger generation shoppers having made a secondhand apparel purchase on a social commerce platform in the 12 months before the study was published. Depop is one of the top platforms for young people looking to buy and sell clothes. In 2025, the brand achieved approximately $1 billion in sales, including nearly 60% year-over-year growth in the U.S. As of December 31, it had seven million active customers, nearly 90% of which were younger than 34. That user base will be a major boon for eBay, who says that millennial and Gen Z consumers have been two of the biggest drivers of active buyer growth in the past three years. As a Gen Z vintage clothing enthusiast, Ive shopped on pretty much every resale site you can think of, from Poshmark and ThredUp to eBay, Facebook Marketplace, Mercari, and Etsy. Among all of these options, Depop is far and away the best resale site to look at and the easiest one to use. Thats not to say that Depop doesnt have any issuesa brief glance at the sites subreddit will reveal plenty of user grievances, not least of which is the tendency of certain Depop sellers to price a Brandy Melville baby tee at a cost that could put your checking account in the red. But from a pure UX and design standpoint, Depop is far outperforming its competitors by taking its major design cues from popular social media apps. And for a digitally native generation thats used to doing most of their shopping online, that makes a big difference. A social media-esque app experience Depop knows that its customers are young, tech savvy, and probably spending most of their phone time on social media sites like TikTok and Instagramand it shows in the apps design. Depop homepage [Screenshot: courtesy of the author] When you open the Depop app, youre immediately greeted with a Suggested for you page that’s functionally similarly to TikToks Explore feature. Here, the Depop algorithm presents you with an endlessly scrollable page of items curated based on your searches, likes, and saveslike how TikTok or Instagram might serve you videos according to your interests. In contrast, eBays app homepage looks more similar to a standard e-commerce webpage, directing users to its different goods categories and promoting whatever deals and sales are currently trending. eBay homepage [Screenshot: courtesy of the author] In terms of its layout, Depops app is simple and aesthetically pleasing. Its interface is almost identical to Pinterestwhere many customers are likely looking for outfit inspirationwith a subtle bar of categories at the bottom of the page and about four spotlighted items on view at a time. The minimalist information density encourages you to keep scrolling to find more items, rather than overwhelming you with a sea of information. Other apps, like Poshmark, eBay, and ThredUp, seem to opt instead for presenting users with a wealth of options to choose from when they first log on, which, counterintuitively, can make scrolling feel less appealing. While I tend to open my computer if I want to browse other retail sites, I almost always open Depop on my phone, and imagine it in a similar category to social media apps. Considering that the secondhand apparel market is becoming so popular among younger shoppers, other resale platforms might want to take note. Simple selling UI Over the past few months, Ive developed the niche hobby of restoring and selling vintage wedding dresses online (typically for a profit of about $10 apiece, but Im in it for the fun of the game). Having used both Depop and Etsy to sell my own products, I find Depops seler UX more intuitive and simple to follow. [Screenshot: courtesy of the author] From an app standpoint, Etsy has two separate platforms: one app for selling, and one app for buying. On its website, sellers also have to navigate to a shop management platform to look at their listings. Depop, on the other hand, is consolidated into one app experience, where sellers can manage all of their listings and their purchases. Creating an actual Depop listing feels akin to making a post on Instagram. Sellers navigate to a + at the bottom of the app (like Instagram), add a series of photos and a caption (also like Instagram), and include a few key tags for their item. Depop also handles shipping through a system that lets users provide an estimate of their items weight and then creates an appropriate label. Shipping on Etsy is more seller-directed. While some more experienced sellers might prefer Etsys approach, Depops feels more beginner-friendly. A final refuge from AI listings One of my biggest personal gripes with the current state of resale shopping is the absolute deluge of AI-generated product images that seem to have flooded certain sites over the past few months. From top: Depop, eBay, Etsy. [Screenshot: courtesy of the author] In my experience, eBay and Etsy are the biggest offenders of this trend. Searching for the term fantasy dress, on eBay and Etsy, for example, leads to at least one out of four top results with all the hallmarks of an AI image. The same search on Depop yields results that all seem to be real photographs. This example is just one small microcosm of the shopping experience on these sites: while AI photos are becoming increasingly common in resale, buying on Depop still largely feels like sifting through a strangers closet, which was the sites original charm. Its unclear exactly why AI photos seem less prominent on Depop; though it may be related to the companys regulations against stock photos. In its guidelines, Depop instructs sellers to Only use photos taken by yourself. Depop didnt immediately respond to Fast Companys request for comment on its AI imagery policies.
Category:
E-Commerce
“I really want to see a mass driver on the moon that is shooting AI satellites into deep space,” Elon Musk said last week when he announced his plan to go to the moon. “It’s going to be incredibly exciting to see it happen.” He’s right. I want to see it too, although probably we will both be dead before his vision is realized. The lunar mass driveressentially a cannon that uses magnetic power to accelerate an objectis a key component to launch the million satellites Musk wants to put in orbit around the Earth. But Musk wasn’t the first person to come up with the idea. Smarter people than him thought about this in the 1970s as the solution to a key problem for human exploration. Launching spacecraft from Earth is extremely expensive. Every pound lifted from Cape Canaveral to low Earth orbit costs thousands of dollars in fuel, hardware, and operational complexity. The farther you want to go in space, the more massive and complex the rocket has to be, increasing costs. Chemical rockets must carry their own oxidizer and propellant, which means most of the vehicle’s mass is just fuel to lift more fuel. This tyranny of the rocket equation has strangled space development for seven decades, only slightly eased by the economics of reusable rockets like the Falcon 9. A mass driver could break that stranglehold by using electricity instead of explosives, turning launches into a utility-scale operation rather than a high-wire act. On the Moon, where gravity is one-sixth of Earth’s and there’s no atmosphere to create drag, this technology could launch payloads at a fraction of the costa few dollars per pound in electricity. Compare that to the $1,200 per pound it currently costs to launch a payload on a reusable Falcon 9 rocket. [Image: Xai] An elegant design American physicist Gerard O’Neill and MIT physicist Henry Kolm built the first prototype of a mass driver in 1976 with a $2,000 budget. The Mass Drive 1 could fire objects at 131 feet per second while experiencing 33 times Earth’s gravity. Their next version achieved 10 times greater acceleration with a comparable funding increase. University of Texas researchers subsequently priced a serious version at $47 million for a device capable of launching a 22-pound payload at 13,400 miles per hour. A mass driver is basically a very long track stretching across the lunar surface, angled gently skyward at its far end. The track is lined from end to end with hundreds of electromagnetic coils, which are simply loops of wire that snap into powerful magnets the instant electricity runs through them. A payload sits inside a magnetizable carrier called a bucket. To move the bucket, the coils fire in a precise sequence, one after another, each energizing at exactly the right moment as the bucket reaches it, grabbing it forward, then cutting off the instant it passes. The result is a cascade of invisible magnetic hands, each passing the bucket to the next. The bucket never makes mechanical contact with any surface: It is held aloft and guided entirely by the interplay of magnetic fields, which is why these systems have a theoretical operational lifespan of up to millions of launches with negligible wear. Musk describes it as a large maglev train, the same levitation technology that holds high-speed trains above their rails in Japan or China. But the mass driver reaches much faster speeds than any train on Earth: about 1.5 miles per second, enough to escape the gravity pull of the Moon. To achieve that speed, the mass driver uses two distinct engineered stages. In the first, the coils sit at equal intervals and their electrical timing locks to the bucket’s exact positioneach successive push arrives at precisely the right instant, so the force compounds as velocity builds. In the second stage, the interval between coils progressively widens, which paces the pushes further apart in distance and holds the rate of acceleration constant rather than letting it keep climbing so the increase in acceleration doesnt destroy the bucket or its cargo. At the terminal end of the track, the bucket releases its payloada xAI satellite according to Musk’s visioninto space at a minimum speed of 5,300 mph, enough escape the Moon’s gravity. The trajectory that the load follows depends on the position of the Moon at the moment of the launch, following the orientation of the mass driver relative to the space. Then the bucket gets caught by a braking system, recovered, and sent back to the beginning for the next launch. No combustion. No exhaust. No rocket equation. No problems. Its a beautiful solution. Its also doable, as ONeill and Kolm demonstrated practically. According to independent researcher and author Keith Sadlocha, a working lunar mass driver would require a track between 1,620 and 5,350 feet long, operating at accelerations between 30 and 400 times Earth’s gravity in standard operation. At those forces, only rugged, non-human cargo survives the ridewhich is exactly what Musk is planning. Musk has his sights set on manufacturing AI computing satellites on the lunar surface. The system can fire one payload every 10 to 11 seconds. Scaled to Musk’s stated target of one million satellites in orbit, that cadence, sustained continuously, is what makes the economics viable in a way no rocket ever could. But to accomplish this, you will need a lot of electricity. For Musk’s purposes, system requires 8.7 to 20 megawatts of continuous power, enough to run a small town. Delivering that on the lunar surface requires between 400,000 and 634,000 square feet of solar arrayssomewhere between seven and 11 NFL football fields’ worth of panels according to Sadlocha’s calculations and NASA’s estimates. That’s using solar panel’s with an efficieny of roughly 30%, the figure NASA uses for cells especially designed for space use. Since the Moon endures two weeks of total darkness every month, this means the mass driver either sits idle for half of every lunar cycle or relies on supplemental power to keep firing through the night. NASA and the U.S. Department of Energy are developing a solution: The Fission Surface Power (FSP) project, which builds on the earlier Kilopower research program to produce compact nuclear fission reactors targeting 10 to 40 kilowatts of continuous output each, capable of running for a decade without refueling. Each FSP reactor will produce enough electricity to power just a few homes. Bridging the full gap between those modest reactors and a mass driver that demands the output of a small power plant would require deploying them not one or two at a time, but in the hundreds. That is not a technology problem so much as a logistics oneevery reactor has to be launched from Earth, landed softly on the Moon, and connected to the grid before the mass driver fires its first payload. The program, however, is still in development and a lunar deployment is not expected before the late 2020s at the earliest. And thats extremely optimistic, given the constant delays of those nuclear projects and the Moon return plans. [Image: Xai] Unrealistic timeline Scaling from the $47 million 22-pound-launch prototype that University of Texas researchers projected to a working lunar installation capable of launching huge satellites is where you begin to feel just how vast the distance is between a compelling idea and a functioning machine. Sadlocha estimates that a full lunar mass driver system requires approximately 362 metric tons of hardware. Thats 24 heavy-lift rocket launches worth of components that must be manufactured on Earth, survive a 239,000-mile journey through the void, and be assembled by people wearing pressurized suits on a surface thatbathed by radiationis extremely hostile to humans. That surface is coated in lunar dust too, ultra-fine abrasive shaped by billions of years of micrometeoroid impacts into particles with microscopic cutting edges that never dulled, because there has never been wind or rain or any erosive force on the Moon to round them off. It clings electrostatically to visors, suits, seals, and coil windings alike. The payload carriers themselves face thermal melting at extreme velocities, demanding materials that do not yet exist in proven lunar-rated form. You can argue that maybe Musks Optimus robots can avoid this, but his robots can barely function on Earth. Musk’s stated plan is to mine lunar silicon and oxygen and manufacture the server hardware on the surfacea bootstrapping strategy that, if it works, would reduce Earth-launch dependency over time toward what he called a self-growing city capable of rapid expansion from local resources. The Moon does contain silicon, oxygen, helium-3, and water ice at the poles. But the superconducting coils at the heart of the mass driver require precisely manufactured materials that the lunar industry will not be able to produce in decades. Every critical component rides to the Moon on Starship until that changes. We know that Starship is so behind schedule that it has pushed the first mission back to the Moon from 2027s NASA projected time to 2028. Sadlocha rates the technology at readiness level 5 on NASA’s 1-to-9 scale components validated in laboratories, not yet tested in space. Realistic deployment, his study concludes, will take between 5 and 15 years from the moment serious investment begins. That can take the project into the 2040s, easily. Thats why Lluc Palerm, satellite research director at Analysys Mason, said to PC Magazine that Musk’s lunar server plan carries a magnitude of challenge equivalent to a Mars mission. But like we already pointed out, Musk’s timeline is fantasy, or “aspirational” as he qualifies his predictions. The gap between his ambitious renderings and actual functioning hardware remains a dream measured in decades, not the 10 years he’s promising investors before his planned June 2026 initial public offering targeting a $1.5 trillion valuation. Musk is no JFK, and building factories and a mass driver on the Moon is orders of magnitude more complex than just putting boots on the Moon like the Apollo program did. It’s doable, yes. We’ll get the mass driver, eventually. Just not on Musk time.
Category:
E-Commerce
Stacie Haller, a consultant for executives, recently had a meeting with a former business owner in his early 80s. Hed sold his business, started playing golf, and discovered something about himself: he found golf extremely boring. And now, even though he doesnt need to be, hes back on the job market. Im so vital, hed told Haller, Im still in the game. Haller is a senior herself. She says could have stuck with retirement after getting furloughed from her recruiting job during the pandemic. Instead, she started independently consulting for senior executives and for Resume Builder. Now? Shes working part-time and earning as much as she did before. I’m happier now in my career than I’ve ever been, she says. According to recent survey of more than 3,500 U.S. seniors by Resume Builder, around one in eight have returned to work as of December 2025, or are planning to do so. Another 16% have never retired, and 4% were actively applying for jobs. Another survey, by financial advice company The Motley Fool from October 2025, found that 54% of 2,000 Americans who get Social Security benefits have returned to work or considered going back because Social Security benefits are so low. But, as in the case of Hallers former business owner, thats not the only factor driving what some call unretirement. The number-one answer is usually related to money, but it’s not the clear winner,” says Robert Brokamp, senior retirement adviser at The Motley Fool. “There are many people who do go back to work because they got bored. They got lonely. They needed something to do. When you are older, you actually have an opportunity to try something newor not have as much stress with your job, says Haller. While these reasons keeping seniors working may have applied in the past, theyre arguably driving more of a trend now because of how work has changed since the pandemic: Flexible, hybrid, and remote work opportunities make it much easier for seniors, who may have health or mobility issues, to remain in the workforce. Rising costs of living Brokamp says that theres no question that people in their 60s through 80s are returning or continuing to work at increasing rates. With people living well into their 90s, theyve got a lot more time to budget for, especially in todays economy. In Resume Builders survey, 54% of respondents attributed continuing or returning to work after an initial retirement to the high cost of living. I don’t know a person that doesn’t go to the supermarket and walk out and say, Are you kidding me? Haller says. Such everyday costs also amplify concerns seniors have about Social Security and Medicare, which 26% and 19% in that survey, respectively, cited as their reasons for working. Though Social Security did undergo a recent 2.8% cost of living adjustment increase, 54% of recipients told The Motley Fool that wasnt high enough. With inflation at 2.7%, that increase might seem like enoughbut the problem, says Brokamp, is that inflation often plays out differently for working professionals than retirees. The inflation rate for healthcare is over 3%, he saysa major cost for seniors, who not only may visit doctors more regularly, but also tend to spend more on prescription medications than their younger counterparts. Other financial factors that drive seniors to return to work include not having saved enough for retirement, having to pay off debt (medical or otherwise), and needing to support their children, per Resume Builder. This picture, of course, looks different across different wealth brackets. Geoffrey Sanzenbacher, a research fellow at Boston Colleges Center for Retirement Research, has found that people whove earned less income during their careers, and therefore dont have as much emergency savings, can get drawn back into the labor market with a single health shock to them or a family member. Unlike other surveys, Sanzenbachers research points to a low unretirement rate of 1.9%, which he says comes from looking at narrower timelines (as in, seniors working at the time of the survey, not within that year). Right now, you have a perfect storm of reasons why the unretirement rate might be low, Sanzenbacher says. That includes a not-great job market (more people unretire in good job markets because they have more opportunities, he says) and a high stock market. So, retirees relying on 401Ks, for example, should be well in the black. This, to him, suggests that people unretiring now must be doing it because they really need the cash. Continued vitality, personal fulfillment If seniors are reentering the workforce by choice post-retirement, theyre likely doing it to have some funand are perhaps more likely to be doing more independent work, like starting their own businesses, which doesnt rely on getting hired. Haller mentions seniors whove emerged from retirement to start their own Etsy shops, and Sanzenbacher brings up the idea of a retired worker whos always wanted to be a tour guide finally fulfilling that dream. The desire to return to work to try something new, says Sanzenbacher, is very common among higher income or more educated workers. Typically, he adds, those post-career jobs relate to the former retirees original career. They were a lawyer, and now they’re an arbitration judge who works one day a week on Zoom, suggests Sanzenbacher, or they were a teacher, and now they’re a tour guide. Sometimes, these reentries are part of long-term plans. Other times, says Sanzenbacher, it can be [from] the realization that retirement isn’t as fun as what people thought. The evidence on whether retirement is good for us is very mixed, and it really depends on what you’re retiring from and what you’re retiring to, says Brokamp. Many people have boring, stressful, arduous jobs, and retirement is very good for them. On the other hand, many people had decent jobs that they actually somewhat enjoyed, and when they retire, they feel adrift. This rings true for a lot of the seniors Haller speaks with about unretirement. After enjoying work, at 54%, Resume Builder survey respondents described non-financial factors like combatting boredom and to socialize as significant reasons to keep working or go back to work after retirement. Mark Brodsky, 72, director of Field Associate Learning at Lowes, has barely even conceived of retirement, though people often ask him when hes going to do it. Usually, without missing a beat, I say, The day I have no further value to provide and or my value is not needed or wanted. This could mean never retiring. Did Picasso stop painting? he asks. I spent 50 years developing my craft . . . Why should I put that on the shelf? Flexible work, more options Haller, for one, says she can work as much as she does because working remotely, or in hybrid positions, has become such a norm. Our bodies age, says Haller. Honestly, I’m not getting on a commuter train for two hours a day anymore. The flexibilitythat often comes with remote or part-time work fits with what most seniors returning to work from retirement are looking for, anyway. I don’t know any 70- or 75-year-old who really wants that high-pressured, C-suite job if they’re going back to work, Haller says, and they should make this clear to employers if theyre looking for the kind of work that requires getting hired (instead of working independently like Haller). Haller suggests seniors tell hiring managers that theyre looking for more relaxed positions than in their previous careers. Otherwise, hiring might assume seniors are looking for the same, high salaries they retired with, and not want to spend that much money on an employee whos likely not going to remain in the workforce for very long. We have to overcome that objection, Haller says, by making it explicit to employers that salaries commensurate with past full-time jobs arent what unretirees are requesting. Make that known in cover letters or networking conversations, Haller suggests, and emphasize the pros youll bring to the office even if youre not necessarily in it for as long as younger workers. Seniors coming out of retirement have probably seen every situation in the workforce already, Haller says, and can keep a cool head encountering problems while valuably mentoring younger colleagues. Brodsky calls this scar tissue: Life provides you bumps and bruises, and scar tissue is actually an attribute . . . If I were hiring a senior executive for important work, I’d want to bring on somebody who had scar tissue. Regardless of the reasons for returning to work, the overall message is clear. We don’t go off into pasture when we turn 65 anymore, Haller says. We have choices now.
Category:
E-Commerce
From Silicon Valley to Wall Street, many executives think that bringing employees back to the office is the secret to restoring productivity. But theyre wrong. Thats not what’s happening in those newly populated offices. Instead, your employees are more likely to be joining video calls from company desks and wearing noise-canceling headphones while doing work they could have done at home. Only now they’re paying $20 to commute and eating sad desk salads to get through the day. The timing couldnt be more ironic. A new wave of return-to-office (RTO) mandates arrive just as companies pour millions into AI initiatives designed to automate work, eliminate roles, and drive bottom-line efficiency. Leaders advocate for AI as the engine of the future, one that can streamline and modernize how work gets done. So, why are they forcing people back into offices designed for workflows that AI is actively making obsolete? Recent research shows what many employees have known all along: RTO mandates dont improve productivity, innovation, or team connection. But they do weaken morale and accelerate attrition. If companies want better long-term performance, they might consider paying attention to the employee experience instead of treating it as a footnote to investor expectations. And they should also recognize that unpopular RTO policies reflect a deeper tensionone that AI is making increasingly clear. The Quiet Part Out Loud RTO mandates arent failing because the concept of in-person collaboration is flawed. Theyre failing because the justifications are. Executives keep saying they want to rebuild culture, but the real motives often tell a different story: investor pressure, managements discomfort with remote autonomy, or the convenient use of office mandates as a cover for workforce reduction. At a time when AI is openly positioned as a way to reduce labor costs, some companies appear to be using RTO as a secondary mechanism to achieve this, nudging employees to quit so severance costs stay low. Its a cost-saving strategy dressed up as culture building. When employees become line items, distrust becomes the default operating model. Other companies are stuck in the past, clinging to the office as a symbol of managerial control. But if an employee underperforms remotely, geography isnt the issue. Leadership is. At its core, the return-to-office push reflects a deeper tension: companies urgently investing in technologies that decentralize and automate work, while simultaneously doubling down on physical presence as proof of productivity. Its a contradiction that exposes a lack of coherent strategy for the future of work. Two Transitions Collide: AI and the Office As AI reshapes job responsibilities and absorbs repetitive tasks, two seismic organizational transitions are happening at once: shrinking the demand for human labor and shrinking the relevance of the physical office. Its not hard to see how these forces collide. Some leaders seem to be using office presence to manage this uncertainty, both to subtly reduce headcount and to maintain control during a period when technology threatens traditional hierarchies. But proximity isnt a proxy for performance and visibility wont stop AI from transforming work. If anything, it simply delays the hard strategic conversations leaders need to have. What Actually Works A more effective approach asks deeper questions about the work itself. Which activities genuinely benefit from real-time, in-person creativity? Which roles depend on deep focus? Where does mentorship thrive? And crucially, what does our data (not nostalgia) tell us? At my firm, Orgvue, we took the time to analyze our own workflows end-to-end before deciding on an office working policy. And we found that our product teams saw real value from whiteboarding sessions in a physical space, while our customer success teams performed better with the flexibility to work from wherever made sense for their client base. A one-size-fits-all approach would have failed both groups. To enhance these in-office interactions, we redesigned our workspaces to introduce collaboration hubs for teamwork, quiet areas for deep work, and a podcast studiobecause modern work demands modern tools. People come into the office when it makes sense, not because a memo told them to. The Trust Test When companies issue blanket RTO mandates, they send a very clear signal: “We don’t trust you.” Thats a dangerous message at a time when competitors are winning talent with flexibility and autonomy. So, before you mandate a return to the office, it might be helpful to ask yourself the following questions: Can we prove with data that office presence improves productivity for specific teams? Have we designed an office people actually want to come to? Are we solving productivity challenges or satisfying executive preference? Skip these questions, and you may learn an expensive lesson: your best people have options, and they’re not afraid to use them. The Bottom Line U.S. businesses are at a crossroads. Those that demand five days in the office will be competing against those offering more flexible work arrangements. And when it comes to technology investment, the irony is clear. While companies invest heavily in AI to improve efficiency, agility, and independence, theyre simultaneously enforcing policies that undermine all three. In short, the organizations that succeed will be the ones that align their work models with their technology strategies. That means embracing autonomy and data-driven insight rather than badge swipes. Want higher productivity? Fix your management practices. Want better collaboration? Design better systems. Want more engaged employees? Trust them to do their jobs. Because if you need to see someone to believe they’re working, the problem isn’t remote work, and AI is about to make that painfully obvious.
Category:
E-Commerce
Below, George Newman shares five key insights from his new book, How Great Ideas Happen: The Hidden Steps Behind Breakthrough Success. George is an associate professor at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, and he has spent his career trying to unravel the mysteries of what creativity is and where it comes from. His research has been featured in the New York Times, The Economist, BBC, Scientific American, Forbes, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post. Whats the big idea? Most of us think great ideas are conjured from withinsome mysterious well of genius possessed by a special few. But if you listen closely to historys most celebrated creators, youll hear something completely different. They describe their greatest work not as something they conjured or invented, but as something they found. Not creation, but discovery. Listen to the audio version of this Book Biteread by George himselfbelow, or in the Next Big Idea App. 1. The five percent novelty rule Theres a famous story about Post-It Notes. In 1968, a chemist named Spencer Silver was trying to create a super-strong adhesive that could be used to make airplanes. Instead, he wound up discovering pretty much the exact opposite: a glue that was barely strong enough to hold paper togetherthough it could be used again and again without losing its stickiness. For years, Silver brainstormed different products. His first big idea was a sticky bulletin board. That went nowhere. The next idea, which came from his colleague Art Fry, was a reusable bookmark. That also flopped. Finally, after almost a decade of brainstorming, Silver landed on Post-It Notes, and the rest is history. Silvers story is often told as one of grit and perseverance. And, no doubt, stick-to-itiveness is an important part of creativity. But when you think about it, the sticky bulletin board, reusable bookmarks, and Post-Its were essentially three different versions of the same basic idea: paper + Silvers adhesive. Yet, only one was a major hit. Often, when we think about what makes certain ideas great, theres a tendency to focus on the differenceshow much a breakthrough idea towers above the rest. But rather than focusing on what differentiates great ideas, I want you to instead think about the similaritieshow close those breakthrough ideas are to many others just like them. Just like in the story of Post-Its, for every great idea we can point to in history, there were dozens, maybe even hundreds of ideas that were just like itnearly identical versions of the same thing that failed to catch on because they lacked a small, but crucial element. For example, when John Lennon originally wrote the Beatles song Please, Please Me, it was a slow ballad. George Martin suggested the group try speeding it up. Would the Beatles not have been The Beatles without a small tempo change? It seems almost impossible to imagine, and yet, history is filled with examples that suggest exactly that. How many breakthrough ideas are sitting in someones drawer right now, just one small adjustment away from changing the world? Great ideas arent about inventing something radically new. Theyre about finding the missing adjustment, tweak, or change that unlocks an idea and makes it your own. We often get this backward. In my own research on creativity, I have found that when people set out to do something creative they often focus too much on trying to be original and different from everyone else. In one study, we had home chefs create sandwiches for a food truck. We found that our chefs thought that the more original they made their recipe, the more attractive it would be to others. But when we presented those sandwiches to customers, we found the opposite: the more original the chefs tried to be, the less willing customers were to try their sandwiches. Those chefs had forgotten the most important ingredient of all: making their food taste good. How many breakthrough ideas are sitting in someones drawer right now, just one small adjustment away from changing the world? We also analyzed multiple seasons of the show Top Chef and found the same thing. When contestants explicitly said they were trying to be original and different from everyone else, they were more than twice as likely to have the worst-rated dish and get eliminated. So, stop trying to reinvent the wheel. Just make it spin a little differently. The recipe for a great idea is surprisingly simple: Make the main dish conventional, something familiar and known. Then add something speciala spice or twistmaking it new, exciting, and your own. 2. Be a problem finder Okay, so you need to find that missing five percent. But how? One of my favorite studies on creativity comes from one of my favorite psychologists, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. He spent years investigating what distinguished truly creative individuals, and he found that the most creative people werent just good at solving problems. They were exceptional at finding them. In one study, Csikszentmihalyi and his colleague, Jacob Getzels, recruited a group of art students studying at the prestigious Art Institute of Chicago. One by one, each of the artists was led into a studio furnished with two tables. On one table was a collection of objects that artists might typically use to create a still life. On the other table were drawing supplies, including paper, pencils, and charcoal. The instructions were straightforward: Choose some objects from the first table, arrange them in any manner you like, then create a drawing. The artists were free to take as much time as they wanted, start over if they needed, and to stop only when they were satisfied with the outcome. Most of the artists quickly got to work. But some artists did something different. They spent time handling the objects, feeling their weight, studying them from different angles. Looking at the negative space that formed in between them. They were searching for somethinga problem worth solving, or a question worth asking. Then Csikszentmihalyi waitedfor 18 years. When he followed up with the artists nearly two decades later, the ones who talked about drive or ambition were not the ones who were successful. Nor was it the ones who opined generally on the importance of seeking beauty, or order, or harmony. It wasnt the artists who seemed confident, nor was it the ones who had worked out a deep, philosophical approach to their artistic practice. Instead, it was the problem finders, the artists who approached the drawing task without any preconceived notions and allowed the shape and structure of their still life to emerge from the situation itself. When we pay close attention to our surroundings, new opportunities and challenges begin to reveal themselves. When it comes to finding the missing element that unlocks a breakthrough idea, it is essential to adopt the mindset of a problem finder. When we pay close attention to our surroundings, new opportunities and challenges begin to reveal themselves. Our task then is to learn to recognize these signalsto see that creativity isnt about forcing solutions but about uncovering what an idea needs. Finding a great idea takes a ot of work, trial and error, and even a bit of luck. But theres also a lot that you can do to increase your chances of finding something great. Notice where there are problems, tensions, or places of resonance. Author Margaret Atwood doesnt just sit in a cabin waiting for inspiration. She digs through archives, historical records, and newspaper clippings to find the inspiration for her stories. Creativity isnt magic. Its about looking outward and remaining attentive to the world around you. 3. Push past the creative cliff Once youve found your problem, its time to dig. And heres where most people sabotage themselves. Researchers Brian Lucas and Loran Nordgren asked people to brainstorm ideas for five minutesthings like how a charity could increase donations. Before starting, they asked participants to predict their productivity: How many ideas do you think youll come up with in the first minute? How many in the second minute? And so on. People expected the first two minutes to be productive, followed by a sharp drop-off. Raffle, bake sale, door-to-door solicitationsreally, how many fundraising ideas could there be? But when people actually brainstormed, something fascinating happened. The first minute was strong. The second minute was even better. But then, instead of falling off a cliff, participants just kept generating more and more ideas. The third minute was more productive than the second. The fourth and fifth were even more productive. And whats more, when other people rated the ideas, they scored the ideas from the latter half of the session as more promising than the early ideas. We call this the creative cliff illusion. People think theyll run out of ideas, but the opposite is true. Just when you think youve exhausted every possibility, thats probably when your process is really starting to heat up. Look at some of the most successful creators in history. Thomas Edison held more than a thousand patents, including duds like cement furniture and a creepy talking doll. James Dyson built over five thousand prototypes before finalizing his vacuum design. When Dua Lipa recorded Radical Optimism, she wrote 97 songsonly 11 made the final cut. When you think youre done brainstorming, keep digging. Generate a hundred or 500 names for your business, not just ten. Schedule multiple brainstorming sessions over several days, not just one. When it comes to generating ideas, more is more. 4. Great ideas are worth waiting for If youre generating hundreds of ideas, how do you know which ones are worth pursuing? Theres a wonderful anecdote about Albert Einstein that captures this perfectly. Years after developing his theory of relativity, Einstein was discussing his creative process with his friend and psychologist Max Wertheimer. Einstein explained that before his big breakthrough, hed been bothered by something. Not confused, not stuckbothered. There was a tension he couldnt resolve, a gap between what he observed and what the current theories predicted. That discomfort, that sense of something not feeling right, was the spark that eventually led to one of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in history. We become significantly better at evaluating our own ideas with a little time and space. The research shows that we can be surprisingly bad at knowing when weve struck gold. One reason is that great ideasespecially when we first think of themcan feel abstract and even a bit uncomfortable. A second reason is that we can become overly attached to an idea simply because we were the one who thought of it. Ive found that people actually have a great deal of difficulty evaluating the quality of their own ideas, in part because of the sudden rush of excitement we get when thinking of a new idea. One solution is simply to wait. We become significantly better at evaluating our own ideas with a little time and space. Another solution is to invite others inother people can provide a much more accurate assessment of an ideas promise precisely because they are less attached to it. Great ideas are worth waiting for. Studies of entrepreneurs have shown that the very first kernel of an idea can predict a products success just as much as the final product itself. Ideas contain structure; they suggest what comes next. As Andrew Stanton from Pixar once said, Youre digging away, and you dont know what dinosaur youre uncovering. But once you start getting a glimpse of it, you know how better to dig. So dont rush past discomfort. Lean into it. Bring others in. The ideas that bother you, that feel awkward or strangethose might be exactly what youre looking for. 5. Think about what you can take away Now comes the hard part: deciding what to keep and what to discard. In 1984, Paul Simon was in a funk. His marriage to Carrie Fisher had ended, and his previous albums were commercial disappointments. Then a friend gave him an unmarked cassette of street music from South Africa. Simon listened to it nonstop. By summers end, he knew he had to go to Johannesburg. Simon spent two weeks in South African recording studios, essentially jamming with local musicians, generating as much material as possible. Then he returned to the U.S. and spent an entire year editing. He selected engaging segments, pieced them together, overdubbed, and transformed those free-form sessions into songs. The editing was so extensive that Simon pioneered the use of digital audio workstations in studio recording. The result was Graceland, which many consider Paul Simons greatest work. But heres whats crucial: Simon wasnt looking for what he could add. He was looking for what he could take away. This goes against our instincts. Psychologist Gabrielle Adams showed that when improving a piece of writing, rather than removing the redundancies, most people add more material. In another study with visual designs, people almost never removed elementsthey just kept adding. Often, the biggest breakthroughs are revealed when we can strip away everything thats not needed. Its easy think about creativity like building a tower. You want to stack everything youve done, showcase all your effort. But your audience isnt in the tower business. Theyre in the raft-inspection business. Theyre looking for holes, for weak spots that will sink the project. So, when youre refining your idea, think about floating a raft. Remove anything that doesnt directly serve your core purpose. Often, the biggest breakthroughs are revealed when we can strip away everything thats not needed. Creativity isnt a mysterious gift possessed by a chosen few. Its a process of discovery that anyone can learn. Stop waiting for genius to strike. Start exploring, imitating, and problem-finding. Push past the cliff when you want to quit. Trust the discomfort of promising ideas. Great ideas are often hiding in plain sightyou just need to know where to look and what to strip away. The tools of discovery are available to all of us. You just have to be willing to dig. Enjoy our full library of Book Bitesread by the authors!in the Next Big Idea app. This article originally appeared in Next Big Idea Club magazine and is reprinted with permission.
Category:
E-Commerce
Sites : [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] next »