People Judge You First, Then Your Idea
maxmckeown.tumblr.com
maxmckeown.tumblr.com
In undergrad I did some retail electronics sales. When I first started if I didn't know the answer to something I would find out and be back to the customer within 30-60 seconds. That's all it took for them to not buy over and over.
Meanwhile, the best selling reps would say, "Absolutely!" to questions they had no idea what the answer was. Even if they were wrong the customer likely wouldn't come back and if they did they could usually be pacified enough.
Interesting lessons back then. I solved the problem by learning everything so I too could say, "Absolutely!" Took awhile though opposed to faking it.
As in... how prestigious your school and prior work was; how you speak and what it says about your intelligence; what social class you're in based on clothes, grooming, material possessions, where you vacation, who your friends are; how you look; how you speak.
I absolutely detest this idea because I feel like it lets too many inferior ideas dressed in the right packaging get investment and get built (see Startup.com documentary for a prime example of this), depriving the world of better solutions.
But the more I'm around the world of investors, entrepreneurs, and B2B buyers, the more I realize it's reality and it's not going away, so you're best bet is to adapt to it without selling your soul.
The general underlying point is that there is a deluge of ideas, features and suggestions, and folks put up filters like the above to sort them out. The unfortunate flipside is that some filters are more arbitrary - like the prestigious school prejudice.
I don't think it's true (anymore) that people judge you by your ethnicity, social status, clothes, gender etc as I feel this article may imply without stating explicitly.
At the end of the day people are drawn to (not too) confident people with (not too) strong direction who are reliable and have a good idea.
Perhaps less pertinent than before, but I suggest its still extremely important.
I can't think of a better link, but OKCupid shows how peoples (by default private) expressed beliefs in questions were significantly different from their actual actions (http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-race-affects-whether-...)
http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspi...
In practical terms, most times the proposer knows his subject more than the proposed. It takes the receiver of the information time and attention (both of which are scarce in decision makers) to deeply understand the pros and cons. So they fall back on heuristics: "Did this programmer meet their deadline last time?" "Are they wearing a suit?" "Did they go to a school I respect?"
Early in my career, I thought, "It's only the content that matters. Anyone who disagrees is an idiot." It took a while to realize there are sound psychological reasons behind the other heuristics people use to choose. It took even longer to learn the game theory behind why some of the "Who you are" matters more than the quality of the idea in question. That's much too long a post for a writer who hasn't had their first coffee.
One last thought... The Karma factor in part is a signal to judging people. (Or rewarding) Of course most of read the articles first, before looking up the credibility of the poster. :-)
Also "Only about 1% of proposed ideas are ever accepted.": I would love to see the empirical testing that led to this conclusion.
That said, there's too much benefit to these 'irrational' heuristics to discard them.
And he says things like "Only about 1% of proposed ideas are ever accepted." -- That means he knows how many ideas get proposed in the world and whether or not they are accepted.
He's full of shit.