In this episode I share my opinion that artists must live in the moment to create great art. I hope you enjoy it.
Author Archives: CJ Powers
A Creative Approach to Productivity
Andrew Carnegie never intended to use right-brain thinking to increase production volume between the night shift and the day shift, but he stumbled upon it the day he wrote the number of items produced by the night shift on the cement entryway floor with chalk. That morning the day crew surmised what the number represented and by the end of the shift, erased the old number and replaced it with a larger one.
The night shift didn’t want to be beaten, so they got creative in reducing the process steps and placed a larger number on the floor at the end of the shift. The day shift wasn’t about to be undone, so they came up with creative ways to increase volume and capacity. This continued for several weeks until the factory was consistently producing more items than before the chalk incident.
The funny thing was “when” Carnegie wrote the number on the floor that started it all. He had come from a meeting were he asked leaders to increase productivity by 10% and they fought him with a myriad of comments about how it was impossible to create double-digit growth. But thanks to right-brain thinking on the part of the workers, Carnegie saw triple-digit growth within several weeks.
While some might suggest that friendly competition was to be praised for the growth, it was actually the creative juices of brainstorming that looked at the processes differently. The idea of reworking what had always worked is a right-brain event. Dropping unnecessary steps is also a right-brain activity.
The left-brain was represented in the meeting that said no to a double-digit increase based on the way it had always been done. The left-brain also suggested that there is a ceiling for everything and therefore no reason to conclude that a ceiling can be broken.
When I managed the receiving department at a warehouse retail store, I timed my team’s ability to breakdown pallets and move the merchandise to the sales floor. When the store manager required us to do it his way, the team broke down 4-6 pallets during the four-hour window. This was due mostly to his required set up that was easily interrupted by unscheduled truck deliveries and the top-priority customer service team accessing stored items for customers.
When I asked the team to come up with a creative solution that avoided the customer service pathway, they were able to breakdown 12-14 pallets. Then I asked how we could better facilitate the process to avoid truck deliveries and customer service people. One person came up with a circular approach requiring less physical steps that allowed the team to breakdown 18-20 pallets.
Then it happened. I stumbled upon a guy over one weekend that lined everything up the length of receiving using half of the pathway, so anyone could get in and out without any interruptions. I also noticed that every time he broke down a pallet, he immediately packed it out in the store, dramatically reducing the workload of the night crew.
This creative approach solved the problem of having congested aisles during sales hours. It also reduced the number of non-packed out items returning to the back room at the end of a shift, again reducing the workload of the night shift.
Unfortunately, no one in upper management noticed the increase in productivity, so everything eventually went back to business as usual. The reason was simple, it takes right-brain creativity to find a new way of increasing productivity, but it takes left-brain logic to manage and sustain it as the new process going forward.
Copyright © 2015 by CJ Powers
A Few Differences: Faith-Based and Redemptive Films
This week I was asked about the difference between faith-based films (a genre), as defined by Hollywood, and redemptive stories (not a genre). One person asked why a film couldn’t be both. Another inquired about who created the definition. And, the biggest question was, “Why do redemptive stories generate 10-20 times more revenue than most faith-based films?”
Since its difficult to categorize the two for comparison (one being a genre and the other one not), I’ll do my best to answer the questions based on known presentation and marketing information.
The faith-based genre definition was generated by a marketing department and ad agency. The team’s task was to release a picture to a market and generate 2.5X more revenue than the picture and prints cost to make. In order to do so, the team had to describe the picture in the right way to the right audience and convince them to purchase tickets.
All of the major studios did the same over several years and watched the measurable results. The definitions were adjusted with each release until the marketing departments and ad agencies were able to reproduce positive results with multiple titles. The elements involved in reproducing similar results led to the definition of the faith-based genre, which was supported by church audiences. However, with the definition in place, it didn’t stop Hollywood from trying to market non-faith-based films as faith-based films.
The biggest difference between faith-based and redemptive stories is in the delivery of the message(s). Faith-based films typically preach or teach one or more messages, while redemptive stories visually demonstrate one message. Please understand that one type of film is not “better” than the other, but very different.
For instance, if it’s done in the right light to raise the significance of the story’s redemptive value in the eyes of the audience, a redemptive story has no problem (within reason) demonstrating non-gratuitous violence, language and sexuality. The bigger you want grace or mercy to appear at the climax of the film, the greater the depravity must be demonstrated in order to create the emotional contrast – Known to most as story conflict.
In a faith-based film, conflict and depravity are rarely demonstrated, but instead are alluded to, for fear of making someone in the audience feel uncomfortable or lead them astray. Because of this choice, the emotional contrast can’t be visualized and therefore the messages are presented through dialog – teaching and preaching.
In other words, redemptive stories are filled with conflict, highly emotional, visually demonstrated, and can be a part of any genre, while faith-based stories are safe and explained, but most importantly are labeled as a genre unto itself.
We also see this affect in the funding requirements. Church funded films must be safe, not lead anyone astray, and many times present the Gospel message, driving filmmakers to create faith-based films. Privately funded films must create a profit, which forces filmmakers to heighten the conflict, visual and emotional contrast within the story.
The market is large enough for both faith-based and redemptive stories to coexist, however, marketers still need to work on differentiating the two types of films. There’s nothing more disappointing than sitting in a theater to watch one type of film and find the other playing on screen.
As for the difference in revenue, it’s anyone’s guess. The best argument I’ve heard suggests that few people want to be told how to live (faith-based), but most want to learn from watching other’s experiences (redemptive).
Copyright © 2015 by CJ Powers
CJ's Corner 