Author: Leslie Burns

Carol Dweck, a Stanford professor, has a new book out that I intend to read very soon. It’s called Mind Set: The New Psychology of Success and I’m simply fascinated by the theme. Dr. Dweck posits that there are essentially two different mindsets in the population: the fixed and the growth.

Someone with a fixed mindset assumes that his/her intelligence, abilities, etc., are, essentially, pre-determined. That is, either you have the potential, smarts, whatever to do something or you don’t. If you say to yourself “I can’t do math” you may have a fixed mindset.

A fixed person also hates to make a mistake and sees any level/type of failure as a serious negative. So, if, for example, the fixed person thinks she can’t do math, she won’t even try to learn math because she might not be able to do it well right off and that would, in her mind, prove her point–“I can’t do math–I tried and I failed–period.”

This mindset causes fixed people to be risk-averse and, in the long run, limits their potential for success.

The growth mindset person, however, accepts that failures aren’t fun, but what they do is give a person an opportunity to learn and to grow. Growth people take risks, make mistakes, and keep trying. Because of this attitude, growth people are more often successful.

A growth person might say “I’m not very good at math” but, knowing that math will help her career goals, she would take classes to get better. If she struggles, she’ll seek out other sources for help (tutors, etc.).

Dr. Dweck, according to the reviews and interviews with her I have read/heard, offers help to change. If you’re a fixed person, you can become a growth one. Even before reading her book, I can believe that because that is what I have done in my own life.

So, which are you? If you’re a fixed person, are you willing to take the first risk and try to change?

…in 3 easy steps!

Step 1: Take 19 days to reply to a customer service-type question.

Here’s a real-life example. My husband and I have what we call a “sucky thing”–one of those vacuum sealer things to preserve food. And boy-howdy, does it suck. It has, in fact, broken after hardly any use but months after its purchase. I contacted the maker asking what could be done about it. Here below is the reply.

From: RivalService <RivalService@speedymail.com>
Date: July 9, 2007 12:39:15 PM PDT
To: XXXXXX@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Rival Comments/Questions – From Leslie Dell’Acqua [#1751106]
Reply-To: RivalService@speedymail.com

Leslie,

It can be replaced under warranty and you would need to send the seal a meal back to us and pay for all of the shipping and handling charges. Feel free to contact the Holmes customer service line at 1-800-777-5452 to have it replaced under warranty. Ruben

–Original Message–
From: XXXXXX@gmail.com
Date: 6/20/2007 1:30:18 PM
To: RivalService@speedymail.com
Subject: Rival Comments/Questions – From Leslie Dell’Acqua

Sure, they offer to repair/replace it if I pay for shipping both ways (about the cost of a new one, btw, maybe more with the mysterious “handling” charge), but note the date on my original request (6/20) and the response (7/9).

Step 2: Call your email “speedymail” (note the return email address) but take almost 3 weeks to reply.

Step 3: Get your customer’s name wrong (left out the “Burns-” part).

We won’t even mention that the correct spelling of the product’s name is “Seal-A-Meal”– a registered trademark with hyphens.

Sure, your clients might take forever to get back to you, and often they won’t even bother to let you know when you don’t get a project, but you don’t get that same luxury. Reply within 1 business day to any contact–even if it is just to say “I’m swamped and will get back to you shortly.” Also, get her/his name right. And yours, too.

Think I’m going to buy another Rival product any time soon? Your clients have even shorter fuses. It’s a simple thing to stay in contact today, and its payoffs are big.

Ah…after a few days off I am back at my Mac and hoo doggie, it looks like I missed some dust-ups on some of the forums. Lines were drawn and insults not-so-subtly thrown in my direction, and all without me being able to defend myself.

Oh well. No biggie.

Why am I not so concerned with the fact that someone said, essentially, and very publicly, that my advice was not only bad, it was actually harmful? And why would I be crazy enough to share this with you readers who may have missed it on its original forum?

Because I know that it is simply not true.

I know that I spend way too much time doing research, asking questions, reading, learning everything I can in my field (and a few related others) to think for a second that my advice is harmful. And hearing from past clients that I have helped them and their businesses confirms this knowledge. In fact, my advice is good and helpful for many. So whatever anyone may choose to say about me, good or bad, I know that it is just someone’s opinion and not the truth.

I don’t need to defend myself because I respect and honor my own experience. I also don’t need to attack others because I respect and honor theirs. In this case, this other person has taken data/information and come to an opinion on action that is different from mine. I don’t even think she is “wrong” and I am “right” but rather that we weigh different aspects of that data differently and therefore come to different opinions of the best actions to take. Of course, I think my advice is more likely to give positive results–or I would not hold the opinion that I do. But, I understand her opinion as well and it is not baseless–it is simply not the same as mine.

So, for those of you who may have been wondering, no, I’m not going to bring up what was said a week ago and hash it out on that forum. It’s in the past and those who know and respect me and my work will continue to do so, no matter what someone else (not a client, mind you–if a client had bad things to say, that would matter very much!) says. And I will continue to respect myself and do what I can, the best I can, just as I always have.

I think every photographer who is really a photographer should be able to make his/her living doing photography. Is that clear? No. Wait. I have to define “photographer” to make that better…okay, a photographer is someone who is passionate about photography and, if told “you can’t be a photographer, pick something else,” would have a difficult time finding something else to fill that immense void in her/his soul.

Better. That weeds out a lot of the wannabes with great equipment and the like of photography, but not the love/passion of it that a real photographer has.

Okay. Now that’s clear.

Unfortunately, the trouble comes when people take that idea I first listed and warp it ever so slightly to “Every real photographer deserves to make his/her living doing photography.” Me, I just don’t believe that is a good way to think.

In my opinion, no one inherently “deserves” anything; we must each earn our way. Life isn’t a magical place where if you are a good person, everything will be honey and roses. Even when we love our work, it is still work and we must do the work to get to our goals. Wishful thinking is good, but you have to act on those thoughts as well.

So, work is good. And working for what you want, is even better than you might know.

There have been studies that have shown that when a person is given something, that something loses value in the person’s mind much more quickly than if that person had earned that thing. In other words, while it would be nice to have someone hand me an iPhone just for being me, working to earn the money to buy my own at some point will mean that I will appreciate the iPhone more and for longer. I will be happier and happier longer with that thing.

Same goes for achievements in professions. Maybe even more so.
Now, happiness is an important thing, in an of itself. It seems that being a happier, more optimistic person may mean that you spend more time and/or effort working towards your goals and making relationships that help you, etc. So rather than being happy because you are successful, the opposite may be, in fact, the case.

So, work is good.
Being happy in your work is good.
So if you love what you do and you work your ass off doing it, you are more likely to be successful doing what it is you love doing which is why you are doing it so well in the first place which makes you happier which is the way most people really define “success” anyway.

In other words, stop thinking about it and go out there and do what it is you love! Take the damn pictures already, instead of talking about taking them! Make the image! Get in that groove. Exploit (in the very good sense of the word–“to use to best and fullest advantage”) that passion as much as you possibly can! Then use that fabulous stuff you’ve made, and loved making, to promote your business so that you can get gigs that pay for you to do this, more and more regularly.

*****

That’s it from me for a week. I’m on vacation for the next 7 days and will be back and raring to go a week from Monday! Happy 4th to the Americans out there!

Many of you know that I advocate creative play whenever possible. Here is a silly fun thing to do that can qualify as creative play: make your own Simpsons avatar! And, to show that I practice what I preach, here’s mine.

(Hat tip to Åsk from Adland for the link)

Don’t tell me great design can’t make someone interested in something s/he would never, ever normally be interested in. One perusal of this site and now I want to have chickens in my back yard.

The New York Times has an article (registration, free, may be required) about the predicted total money to be spent on ads for this year and some predictions about next year. It has some interesting information, particularly about the decline in local buys due in part, perhaps, to the loss of local companies to large corporations like the evil Wal*Mart. It also explores the increase in new media use.

It’s the new media use that I really want to point out. Far too many photographers are throwing in or hardly charging for web use in its many forms. The web is not free, web ads most certainly aren’t free, and new media uses deserved to be considered as a valid and vital part of any usage license…and its fee.

So, today’s lesson is a two-fer: shop at local companies and to bill appropriately for new media uses.

You’ve probably thinking that the blog looks a tad different than it did yesterday. You’re not hallucinating–it is different. It’s been renamed Super Premium, to keep with the auto-related motif, it has a new image to go with the name, and places I like to visit and/or which inspire me are now listed on the right, under Blog Injectors.

Thanks to JCBurns, my brother & Mac/tech guru for his help in making this happen.

As for the content, no change there–it will continue to be my thoughts, ideas, and position paper-ish tirades. Hopefully, more of you will gird ’em up and start commenting with those who already have. It’s great to have some form of dialogue and I sincerely like and appreciate the thoughts and opinions of others.

(Btw, here’s what Ethyl is, for those who don’t know)

Seth Godin tells us how to make a million dollars. I know a lot of photographers who need to read this, internalize it, and start acting like they really get it.
Not you, I’m sure. 😉

*****

Newsweek, via MSNBC, has an interesting article on luxury products and services. Note how the folks with money are not only willing to pay more, they are wanting to pay more, if it means they get something special.

Photography and other creative services are perfect for this–the best clients not only have money, they have lots of it and not everyone can do what you can do.

I noticed a question on one of the photo forums, which I will answer shortly, but I thought I’d share it with you here. The person was asking if it was standard practice to base a cancellation fee on “some percentage of your dayrate” depending on how far in advance the cancellation occurs.

The answer to this is both yes and EEK! I’m sure you can guess the “EEK” part–the use of the term “dayrate.” Sigh. When are we going to get past this notion?

Now, having said that, the “yes” part is that you should indeed have a schedule for cancellation fees and they should be based on your Creative/Shoot Fee for the time canceled–but not your Usage Licensing Fee–and, of course, any Production Charges incurred to that point.

It’s the part about not using your Usage Licensing Fee as a part of the Cancellation Fee that is going to honk off some people. The argument will be something like “I had made time in my schedule now I’m not going to be making the money I was expecting/promised and I can’t book something else then.” Well, yes, that is true, but it was a mistake to count those chickens too soon.

Yes, you have lost that time for a billable client (probably), so you should be recompensed for that time lost, but as there was no usage, it is unfair to include the Usage Licensing Fee in your Cancellation Fee. There was no license generated, so it is unreasonable and unfair to your client to bill for one.

Even if you believe and agree with the argument that you should be compensated for the lost usage to some extent, the good relationship you will build with this client by NOT billing for a non-existent usage license will be greater than the money you would have gotten. And, if you do bill for the license, you are likely to generate resentment and distrust–very costly to your future relationship with this client.

So, if your client cancels 3 business days or less before the shoot, figure out your scale (50%, 75%, and 100% is a good one) and bill ’em. But keep it to the Creative/Shoot Fee and your incurred Production Charges only.