Peter Winick argues that thought leaders often chase monumental ideas when incremental refinements work better. Small improvements to existing frameworks increase relevance and clarity for specific audiences, making the work more usable than swinging for breakthrough contributions.
Hi there, it's Peter Winick. I'm the founder and CEO at Thought Leadership Leverage, and here's the idea that I'd like to share with you today, and that's this: many thought leaders strive to put something out into the universe that's monumental, and that's worthy, that's admirable. However, for thought leaders that have been practicing a while, that have their names out in the field, that have their work out in the field, Incremental is often as important or more important than going for monumental. A little improvement, a little adjustment in your model, in your method, in your framework to make it more applicable to a specific audience or make it easier to understand for a leader in a business unit. So I think the question really underneath the idea is when is it time to strive for something that's monumental and put in the effort that that takes? And when would it make sense to add some incremental to your body of work? Love to hear your thoughts.
