Tweet If you checked out the business section in the Philadelphia newspaper this morning, you probably spotted the main article about John Maketa (one of the authors of Now You’re Thinking!).  The article talks about how the authors worked with Pearson Foundation and We Give Books to help donate 12,000 books to 3 military charities.  In addition, the author notes that now more than ever, critical thinking is essential for career growth. Unemployment numbers are still astonishingly high, and many people have been out of work for years.  This is the time to re-evaluate your thinking.  The article notes that Now You’re Thinking! provides a concise guide to understanding the RED Model of Critical Thinking so readers can learn to Recognize their Assumptions, Evaluate Information, and Draw Conclusions. In addition, readers can then go online and learn their thinking style through theMy Thinking Styles assessment. The article goes on to explain how today’s employers are finding a large gap between the critical thinking skills of applicants versus what is needed to compete in the ever-changing business world. To read the full article by Theresa Hegel, click here.   (photo credit to Kim Weimer / Staff Photographer)

Ben Hutt's blog post was featuredOnce Upon a Time, There Was One Internet and It Was Open to Everyone...Businesses have faced several crises and threats in recent years. The gradual and lingering fallout from the global economic crisis and shifting consumer confidence have touched all. Yet despite such change, the most dangerous risk to business has been ignored by many: Internet censorship and control.In its most basic form, the Internet is open sharing and access to information. Openness and free competition driven by innovation is great for consumers, businesses and economies, but it’s coming under increasing risk.Growing Government ControlGovernments across the globe are seeking Internet control, which often results in a heavy-handed approach to Internet legislation. In Europe, we’ve seen the fallout of such an approach with Google pulling its Spanish Google News service following a law that requires aggregators to pay publishers for linking to their content. This essentially amounts to subsidisation of industries under pressure (newspapers / media businesses), and equates to old school protectionism. Closer to home, the UK has come under fire for blocking sites such as those that promote LGBT rights and was last year named one of the "Enemies of the Internet" by Reporters without Borders.The negative impact of limiting individual web access is well covered, but it’s effect on business is even more damaging. Recent research from The European Union Chamber of Commerce in China found over 85 per cent of respondents cited increased Chinese restrictions on Virtual Private Networks (used to get around China’s internet firewall) were negatively impacting their business.Although some believe this type of issue only impacts businesses born in the digital age, this view underestimates the Internet’s powerful influence. According to McKinsey & Co, 75 per cent of companies that reap economic value created by the Internet are those you can define as operating in "traditional industries." In other words, it’s not just new businesses that have a lot to lose if international attempts to censor the web increase.An Inconsistent ApproachAnother challenge for business lies in how attempts to restrict and control Internet access are enforced inconsistently between countries. When governments begin developing complex and counterintuitive online rules for their various jurisdictions, any semblance of global development is broken down. The resulting risk is that we will be left with multiple internets, each with their own rules, laws and guidelines.The classic example of this which causes unnecessary complexity for web businesses like ours, are the differences in approach to privacy legislation different jurisdictions take. The practical outcome they intend is the same, but the mechanisms are different. Similarly, data sovereignty.We are, as they say, at an interesting point in time. On the one hand we’re caught up in compelling conversation about our internet-of-things future -- a life made easier by fridges that talk to supermarkets and cars that automatically book themselves in for a service. On the other, we face a future of increasing censorship by governments and the emergence of "the internets" -- a world where the ways in which governments control web access varies significantly.The implications of such a future is bad news for economic and social development. Businesses today already face huge challenges establishing an international presence and operating in multiple markets. The rise of "the internets" will destroy any hope these companies have of developing consistent and consumer-friendly products and services, let alone a uniform brand image that consumers trust.Protecting the InternetThe Internet has long been heralded as the great equalizer, a globalizing force for good that will empower economies and businesses to grow, offer new services and provide world-wide consumers with increasing services. All being well, there’s a bright future ahead -- not least because two-thirds of the world are yet to get online.The move to a world of internets puts this all at jeopardy which is why we have a decision to make --- a decision to protect an internet that provides information and opportunity to everyone or an internet that is controlled by the powerful elite where information is ‘hidden’ behind virtual walls.I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to sit around the campfire with my children and tell them of the good old days of the Internet, of a time when information was open and businesses and consumers prospered.That’s why I believe business and industry leaders must unite and take action to defend what we have or else watch the Internet as we know it become a fairy-tale, a forgotten annex in the grim tales of the filtered future.Ben Hutt is CEO of The Search Party. See More

TweetMonths ago Heather Ishikawa, a co-author "Now You’re Thinking!" said something that really stuck with me:  "If you can change the way you think, you can change the world." The statement still gives me goosebumps. Since then I have read hundreds of stories about ordinary people who challenge the standard way of thinking, break down barriers, try something new, and make the world a better place.  It’s time to honor those individuals. This is an example of an ordinary person who made an extraordinary decision that changed the world. Our first story is about Don Rawitsch, the creator of the Oregon Trail computer and video game.  Don was a student teacher in 1971 struggling to teach his students in a low-income area of Minneapolis about the importance of the Oregon Trail.  He had dressed up as historical figures to tell the students about the adventure, but felt he needed to take the lesson a step further.  On the floor of his apartment, he created a board game that the students could play to understand the day-to-day challenges of the journey. When Don’s roommates (Paul Dillenberger and Bill Heinemann) came home, they were impressed but thought it could be even better.  They had each only taken a few computer programming courses, but thought it would be a great computer game.  In a matter of days, the first iteration of the Oregon Trail was created and was a huge success.  Despite it’s clunky nature (there wasn’t even a computer monitor back then) and single-player functionality, students lined up to play and learn about the historic event. As a child of the 80′s myself, I clearly remember the excitement of "computer day" when we got to play Oregon Trail for an hour.  I remember learning to strategize and plan by buying supplies at the store, deciding how long to travel vs. rest, when to hunt (and how much), and whether to caulk my wagon or ford the river.  I remember members of my party dying of measles, dysentery, and exhaustion.  The message was brought home when that individual’s name was scrawled on a tombstone along the trail.  Not only did I learn what an amazing feat that travel was, but I would argue that the Oregon Trail video game was the first game that helped me build decision making skills. And it all started with a student teacher trying to teach a group of poverty stricken students about an amazing historic event.  Don Rawitsch was an ordinary person who thought differently, and changed the world.  He didn’t stick to the lesson plan.  He didn’t use the notes and activities handed down by teachers before him.  He didn’t limit himself by the lack of resources and opportunities available to his students.  He challenged the status quo. He changed the world with the most widely distributed educational game of all time.  Between 1974 and 2011, 65 Million copies have been sold.  This week, the Oregon Trail became available for play on Facebook. "If you can change the way you think, you can change the world."  It’s that simple. Do you remember playing the Oregon Trail video game? To read the full story of how the Oregon Trail video game was invented, click here. Image Source

Mano ten Napel's blog post was featuredIf Google Glass Was a Joke, Then the Joke Is On YouI don't feel the following needs any elaboration, but for the sake of making my point I will do so anyway. When a device or software is in it's beta phase it means that it is near completion. Typically, beta is the latest version before the final version is released. The main reason why it is released is based upon the fact that the endeavors, or rather the efforts, that businesses make to create the next big thing are naturally based upon an hypothesis. Therefore the best way to find out if the hypothesis is anywhere near the reality is to simply test it on real life people in real life situations -- a point that was eloquently written about by Josh Bradshaw from WorkTechWork in his piece, The Wearables' Dirty Laundry.Personally, I feel that to actually pre-release a product or software kind of goes against our natural urge, simply because it takes a lot of courage to do so. Whatever you release puts your reputation on the line. If your hypothesis is completely off then what does that tell you(or even worse, others) about your level of insightfulness on the market as a whole. Going against that natural urge to protect what you have with the goal to do better should, in my opinion, be celebrated and embraced.The above is easily projected onto Google Glass, released February 2013. The fact that they did the price-psychology shuffle on early-adopters by making them pay a $1500 for the device can only be judged as a great marketing strategy. It gave the product the exclusivity it probably needed to get the right attention it sought.While the tech savvy among us are presented with more and more choices between devices, it is almost as if we are forgetting that we are still living in a time where wearable technology is still in an incubation period. Design limitations are a real problem even for the brightest people working with the most innovative companies. Some could argue that Google, Apple or any other tech company have their back against the wall on this issue.Maybe it makes more sense to have a look at our level of expectation, so we can realize that we should applaud companies like Google, who stick their neck out, knowing that they will probably be slaughtered for it. I am sure the jewelry designers Ivy Ross and Tony Fadell, who are both in charge of Google’s smart eyewear division, will be extremely happy with all the valuable data they have gathered during the first Google Glass project. The sign of self-reflection expressed by Google X boss or rather Captain of Moonshots, Astro Teller, at SXSW, where he stated that "We allowed and sometimes even encouraged too much attention for the program," isn't admitting a failure in anyway. Specially when it's put in the light of the amount of behavioral and user data they gathered.Luckily for some Glass enthusiasts, there are reports coming out in the tech media that although the initial project was killed on the 15th of January, that a Google Glass 2 might be on the horizon. Apparently Google has been showing the Glass to "some" of their more important partners. Whether this was before or after they pulled the plug it is hard to say. In conjunction with Google's press release, where new versions of the smart glasses were spoken about, I think it might take some time before the Google Glass 2 will be released. This is because I don't see Google using the same strategy again.Anyhow, I am sure even Apple has learned a thing or two about Google's trial release and the fact that slowly more news is published that they have set a team on researching the augmented reality space themselves speaks clearly. In my opinion Google's initial strategy was to innovative in the smartest way possible and it is unfortunate that everyone seems to be waiting in line to crush the company.Maybe they should be complimented for their marketing strategy. But if you don't understand that the best way forward for Google was to build the best possible smart glasses while being unafraid of failure then you probably don't want to. This to me kind of feels like someone making a witted joke but it's too witted for someone to understand it. If that's the case, then maybe the joke is on you.Mano ten Napel is the founder of the wearable startup Novealthy.See More

TweetWe’d like to thank Doylestown Bookshop in Doylestown, PA for hosting John Maketa’s book signing of Now You’re Thinking!  The crowd was quite excited to hear John’s experiences while writing this book and learning about how a Marine battalion saved the life of Amenah al-Bayati through effective critical thinking. John signed books, chatted with fans, took a few pictures, and within 2 hours the bookstore sold out of Now You’re Thinking! books! Thank you Doylestown, PA for making this book signing event such a success. If you’d like to book one (or all) of the authors for a book signing at your store or to speak at an event, please email breanne@nowurthinking.com.  Our authors are located in Philadelphia, PA, Minneapolis, MN, and San Francisco, CA but also travel frequently.

Anil Kumar, Bill Kratzer, Steve Bittinger and 42 more joined Innovation Insights

Murali Apparaju commented on Innovation Insights's page About

TweetAre you still crashing from last night’s sugar rush?  If you’re like most Americans, you either have a bowl full of leftover candy from trick-or-treaters that never arrived or you’ve sorted through your child’s bag of treats and pulled out some no-no candy (i.e. candy with nuts for children with allergies). So, what do you plan to do with that candy?  Eat it and loathe the extra hours you’ll have to put in at the gym?  Eat it and start saving money for the new clothes you’ll have to buy next month in a larger size?  Take it to work and pawn it off on your coworkers? Last night I tweeted about these questions and received some great responses.  A few of my Twitter friends were proactively trying to give their candy away by reverse trick-or-treating (going door to door and giving away their candy).  However, two of my Twitter friends pointed me to some really great post-Halloween candy projects. Fist, Homefront Hugs tweeted that I could send my extra candy to them and it would be included in a care package to the troops.  Actually, they have a whole list of items they need and all items can be shipped to: Homefront Hugs USA 1850 Brookfield Drive Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Next, my Twitter friend (and US Army veteran) @markvanbaale alerted me to a Halloween Candy Buy Back program operated by local dentists who then send the candy to the troops via Operation Gratitude.  At the Halloween Buy Back site you can search for local dentists who are participating in the program. What a great way to give back in a small way that also reduces candy waste in your house (and/or your waistline). Kudos to Homefront Hugs and the Halloween Candy Buy Back program for thinking differently about wasted candy!  Now You’re Thinking! What do you plan to do with your extra candy today?              

Lee J. Schneider commented on Mike Arney's blog post Managing Your Health? There May Not Be an App for That

Lee J. Schneider commented on Whitney Fishman's blog post Technology Marries Creativity