The Dip: The Atlas Shrugged of Marketing

JoeM's picture
Submitted by JoeM on Sun, 2007-06-24 01:56.

Seth Godin. THE DIP: A LITTLE BOOK THAT TEACHES YOU WHEN TO QUIT (AND WHEN TO STICK)

"40 year Decline." "It's not that bad." "Imminent Theocracy." What's a good Objectivist to do, Shrug or Perservere? "Should I stay or should I go now?".

I've already mentioned the PURPLE COW concept, now I'd like to mention Seth Godin's new book, THE DIP, a neat little book that looks at how and when "to shrug." OK, not in the way Rand meant, but still applicable, nonetheless, and with no self-martyrdom. So now I'd like to ask, should Objectivism/Objectivists continue to push towards a mass acceptance of Objectivist principles, or focus more on applying the philosophy for themselves?

Godin mentions the difference between The Dip, "a temporary setback that you will overcome if you keep pushing," and "the Cul-De-Sac, which will never get better, no matter how hard you try." The argument is that "what sets superstars apart from everyone else is the ability to escape dead ends while staying focused and motivated when it really counts." With this in mind, it's easy to think of the Dagny and Reardon's struggle in ATLAS, and the lead of John Galt to escape said cul-de-sac.

Highlights from the book:

THE REASON NUMBER ONE MATTERS

"You're not the only person who looks for the best choice. Everyone does. As a result, the rewards for being first are enormous. It's a curve, and a steep one." (9)

This is THE DIP, the obstacle created by the first entry into the market. The immediate competitors have a head start over anyone else who comes along later. The DIP insures that anyone who is not really serious will not climb up that cliff created by the dip. It's quality insurance.

THE INFINITY PROBLEM

"The problem with infinity is that there's too much of it. And in just about every market, the number of choices is approaching infinity. Faced with infinity, people panic." (12)

THE CUL-DE-SAC

"It's a situation where you work and you work and you work and nothing much changes. It doesn't get a lot better, it doesn't get a lot worse. It just it. That's why they call those jobs dead ends. There's not a lot to say about (it) except to realize that it exists and to embrace the fact that when you find one, you need to get off it, fast. That's because a dead end is keeping you from doing something else. The opportunity cost of investing your life in something that's not going to get better is just too high."

IF IT'S WORTH DOING, IT'S PROBABLY A DIP

"The Dip creates scarcity; scarcity creates value....the Dip is the secret to your success. The people who set out to make it through the Dip-the people who invest the time and energy to power through the Dip-those are the ones who become the best in the world. They are breaking the system because, instead of moving on the the next thing, instead of doing slightly above average...they embrace the challenge."

MOST PEOPLE ARE AFRAID TO QUIT

"It's easier to be mediocre than it is to confront reality and quit. Quitting is difficult. Quitting requires you to acknowledge that you're never going to be number 1...At least not at this."

YOU SHOULD BE ANGRY NOW
"I'm angry with all the worthwhile organizations that stick with a Cul-de-Sac instead of leaving it an investing their resources where they belong. I'm angry at all the people who have wasted time and money trying to get through a Dip that they should have realized was too big and too deep to get through with the resouces available..

"The challenge is simple: Quitting when you hit the Dip is a bad idea. If the journey you started was worth doing, then quitting when you hit the Dip just wastes the time you've already invested. If you can't make it through the Dip, don't start. If you can embrace that simple rule, you'll be a lot choosier about which journeys you start."


( categories: )

Look past the particulars

JoeM's picture

Scott: "Im becoming impatient with books that offer vague or abstract analysis which amount to trumpet-blowing for the insight of the author and little else. with books that offer vague or abstract analysis which amount to trumpet-blowing for the insight of the author and little else."

To be fair (and if I understand you correctly), these type of books usually do offer examples, I've just ommitted them from commentary.

Scott: "I just see alot of this 'advice' and it bugs me."

No great argument from me there. I just found it an interesting concept in relation to Objectivism, Francisco's words to Reardon; because of the relation of Objectivism to business and businessmen, it's interesting to see Rand's ideas as business advice (whether directly acknowledged or implicit.)

The greater purpose of this post is to take ideas from the business/marketing world and see what kind of applicability they have in the larger cultural/political battle that Objectivists want to win. With all the "ism's" out there, Objectivism, if seen as something to sell, has to compete, and acknowledge the current trends, even if they're bunk, if only to understand the minds of the potential buyers. And to determine whether it's worth it to try to be a mass market product. As a topic for discussion here, it's timely with the recent rabble over numbers and argument that Objectivism is in a decline.

************************************************

Spaceplayer Sight and Sound


Im becoming impatient

atlascott's picture

with books that offer vague or abstract analysis which amount to trumpet-blowing for the insight of the author and little else. 

It is easy to be a Monday morning quarterback, esp in business. It is near-impossible for an actor to determine whether he is in a "Dip" or "Cul-De'Sac" and my main problem with sort of analysis is tht many people in business wil tell you that the main problem with people in business is that they give up too easily.  You must be ready, willing, and able to tough it out if you ever want success.

Of course, there is always the anaomaly of the 25 year old who sells his web startup to Yahoo for 50 million.   Compare the numbers of those who have been able to do that versus the number of web start-ups who went belly-up and you'll see this is an anomaly.  Thats not really building a business.

This analysis reminds me of a book I recently read about investing.  It told you that you can invest in the market and get 20 or 30% return, and that you need to seek those companies out and invest in them.  No shit, really?  But that's really the trick, isn't it?  Just like figuring out whether you are in a dip or cul de sac...

That's my impression of the 'advice' in the book, but of course, I havent read it yet.  I just see alot of this 'advice' and it bugs me.

Scott DeSalvo

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur!


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.