As kids we’re taught that the way to win a staring contest is to not blink. We’re supposed to keep our eyes open longer than our opponent and not blink. But, have you ever considered that if no one blinks, both players lose? I mean sure, by the technical rules of the game, no one is a winner, but if no one is a winner then, aren’t both players losers? Watch this parody of commentators covering a Staring Contest “event” and then try to tell me both players aren’t losers if neither blinks.

The other night I voluntarily watched, in the theater, Something Borrowed. If you haven’t seen it, you really should. It’s well scripted, with witty dialogue and an outstanding performance by John Krasinksi. There’s a great many themes, but one of the most important, I think, is the the least discussed or acknowledged: The Staring Contest. In the movie, we have two people who want to be together. They deserve one another. They should be together. But, neither has the confidence to express their feelings to the other. This leads to both characters being miserable with other people, instead of being happy with each other. Neither character wanted to blink. Neither wanted to make the first move. Tragic.

Sometimes you have to think about things in a different light. I try to do this all the time. Maybe too much. But, I think I’m on to something in this case. Have you been out with a group of friends when the topic for where to eat comes up? Have you been part of the misery that is, everyone not wanting to make a decision or a recommendation and instead electing to just be agreeable? Painful, right? That’s everyone choosing not to blink.

Blinking takes courage. It holds you accountable. You’re on record as being the person who blinked. Could this be why everyone middle school dances are always portrayed in movies as the girls on one of the gym and the boys on the other, with only a handful of couples in the middle? Rejection is certainly a deterrent from blinking. We fear rejection by default. We’re conditioned to be fearful of it. And why not? It stings.

In Malcolm Gladwell’s book, Blink, he discussed at length, with great examples that our brains are smarter than we think. Our ability to make smart decisions quickly is there, but we’re conditioned not to make decisions quick because when we do they are considered rash and irresponsible. We applaud the person who takes a methodical approach to solving a problem or reaching an answer and we frown upon the person who is quick to arrive at an answer. There’s a litany of data that discusses the psychology of jurors and how even when they know “their answer” they deliberate longer so that they can feel better about the decision they arrive at.

But, the world needs blinkers. We need people are willing to take the lead, make a decision, be bold and go after what they want. Maybe, that’s why I love blinking so much. I love being on the offensive. Ironically, as I kid, I was also pretty awesome at playing the staring contest game. Guess, I’m just lucky!

If you’ve been around long enough you’ve heard the idiom, “well, that’s like comparing apples and oranges.”  The idea of course is that you can’t compare an apple against an orange, because they are inherently different things.  Some example of how this would play out are:

• Sports car vs. SUV: you can’t compare a car designed for speed that holds 2 people against one that’s designed for holding 6 people and hauling stuff.
• Baseball vs. Hockey: you can’t compare two completely different sports; especially when one is played on ice and the other on a field.
• The Beatles vs. The Killers: you can’t compare music from the 60s with music from the 2000s.
• Babe Ruth vs. Alex Rodriguez: you can’t compare two different eras of baseball because the equipment, technology, travel, etc. were too different.
• The Shining vs. The Catcher In The Rye: you can’t compare Stephen King’s horror work against the great american novel; the genres are too different.
• Your First Crush/Love In Middle School vs. Your Wife: you can’t compare your emotional maturity at 14 against your emotional maturity at 20-something.

On the surface, you’d believe that the logic for why you can’t compare apples against oranges, or as listed above, The Beatles against the Killers.  For years, I abided by that same concept.  My dad and I would try to debate if Michael Jordan was a better player than Wilt Chamberlin or some other player.  And, inevitably we’d end up agreeing to disagree because you can’t compare guards against centers, different eras, different rules they played under, etc.

But, I’m here to tell you today, that I think it’s a cop out when people say you can’t compre apples against oranges.  Granted it’s not easy, but it can be done.  Often the problem is people don’t want to put in the effort to define the criteria to use for comparing the apple against the orange.  For example, I’ve been in meetings where someone will say, “you can’t compare Facebook against TV, they’re simply too different.  It’s like comparing apples and oranges.”  Really?  You’re trying to tell me that we couldn’t develop criteria to compare those two options?

I can give you 5 different ways to compare:

1. Straight up cost
2. Reach
3. Ability/ease to target
4. Steps to convert (whatever the conversion is)
5. Speed to launch

Now, granted you may not like comparing Facebook against TV, using that criteria, but the fact is, we can do it.  Too often we fall into the habit of relying on what we know and our comfort level with things…not to mention, we also try to avoid conflict.

Conflict, you say?  Well, my favorite example of this is when your current significant other asks you how they stack up against previous ones.  Of course, the “correct” answer is, “well you can’t really compare, you’re all unique, with different features, pros, cons, but the fact of the matter is I’m with you right now.”  In a work scenario, this situation comes up when you’re asked to evaluate your staff (or as it was known at ConAgra Foods, “force rank”).  How do you compare a designer against a strategist?  What about a business analyst against a quality assurance manager?  Clearly, you can’t because they are apples and oranges.

Folks, the reality is, you can compare anything, so long as you establish the evaluative criteria.  Rarely, is this done, which leads us to supporting the cop out of “you can’t compare apples and oranges.”  Make the time and effort up front to develop truly meaningful criteria for evaluating options, people, decisions, platforms, etc. If you do, not only will your decisions be smarter and more well informed, but you’ll also be in a position to better determine if your decisions were the right ones.

I have an issue with how we, in the undustry, look at clients. Too often we get caught up in this desire to do “Good Work.” Many agencies and people view good work as the ability to do things that are “creative,” “out of the box,” “showcase worthy,” or “award worthy.”

I disagree. “Good Work” is work that drives our clients’ business. Good work is work that generates results. Good work is work that makes our clients look and makes us look like good partners.

Good Work, is not always about being edgy, different, or new. Often, good work can be considered boring. But, boring can be good work. We need to remember that fact and be happy to be doing good work that while not sexy, makes a real impact.