Presently:

• At Code BEAM Stockholm Lite, skipping a talk to write this :-)
• Filming a travel vlog about going to Code BEAM Stockholm Lite. I think this vlogging thing might be something I do more of. Pretty fun!

Innovation and refinement

Whether it is picking a speaker, choosing a software stack or building a company I think it holds true. If you want interesting, challenging and innovative you need to go towards the edge. The edge of your hill, you bell curve, your possible local maximum. What got you here won't get you very far beyond here. If you want polished, rehearsed, refined, well-documented you need to stick with the established, stay near the average.

You do not have to innovate in everything you do. I'm at a conference so that metaphor is close at hand. If you innovate on talks you might decide that innovating on food or venue is not as important. Or you might try to push the boundaries of every part, disrupt the whole paradigm. That disrupted paradigm will not be polished.

It is more typical to innovate in certain areas or almost not innovate at all. A lot of ventures hew incredibly close to the mean, defaults, standard. Take a consulting company, decide to do a mainstream tech stack or even more generic, do "tech" in general. Do completely normal average efforts on culture, aspire to average results, keep average rates and face average problems. This is the most uninspired approach I can imagine that is still, likely, a perfectly viable business. The sales pitch is kind of hard to write but you can just make up whatever you want for the context you want to work for. Your company is a gray blob after all. All the paths are well-trodden, there should be no surprises unless you are failing at your intent of being average. Your failures should also be normal, regular and as expected.

You also have no competitive advantage, you have no hold, you are utterly expendable and replaceable.

If you are doing something innovative that no-one else knows how to do well. If you are using tools that give some advantages. Then you will probably not excel in terms of polish and refinement. You are trading off something for that edge.

I'm convinced you will not find your innovation by only making boring choices.

An edge is a useful tool because it can cut.

I gotta go off and conference some more. If this shook a thought loose for you, let me know. I enjoy getting your input via email or federated at me through lars@underjord.io or as @lawik@fosstodon.org.

Thanks for reading, I appreciate the attention to my letters.