Thinking a little deeper about quantifying the combination with behavioral technologies came to my mind… more general: antidisciplinary...

The Antifragile becomes stronger with added stress. The word defies easy definition and I think NN Taleb introduced it, because the non-fragility is not equal to resilience or robustness.

Antidisciplinary is all about non-elephant animals 

The MIT Media Lab uses "antidisciplinary" as position for doing research and learning. I enjoyed reading about it in Joi Ito's Blog: Antidisciplinary. It is another word that defies easy definition. It is not the same as interdisciplinary. It is a specialization on the non-specialization. Joi Ito says: "it is all about non-elephant animals".

It's against fragmentation of disciplines in thinking, speaking, doing…Thinking mathematically without restricting to special functions, operators…? In combination with computer science it is maybe about knowledge based languages to program everything? Make "everything" computational.

Behavioral theories of finance or quant finance?

Behavior theories of economics haven been accepted in financial circles. But more than as the feedback of financial markets cocktail parties? Quants may think they are all treated in features, like mean reverting…and behavioral economists may not think about turning them into something quantifiable?

Modeling Volatility and Valuing Derivatives under Anchoring

About 2 years ago, Wilmott, Lewis and Duffy published a rare connection between anchoring - a big idea in behavioral theories - and practical quant finance. They introduced a complete-markets model with volatility smiles, tractability, and intuitive appeal as an anchoring or habit-formation model. A derivatives valuation model that has a memory.

Joi Ito may say: instead of impressing a small number of experts, taking the high risk of an unconventional approach.

Does antidisciplinary need disciplines?

Paul Wilmott's approach requires different thinking but also heavy algorithmic mathematics.

The antidisciplinary space needs disciplines and a rich technology stack, but also openness to ideas between disciplines.

Me Talking To Myself In The Future

This piece of the Canadian performance artist Marie Brassard inspired me to look playfully at the past from a future perspective.

What have I become and what will I become? I change, and inevitably I move to the person I'll end up. But not only memy brand, my company, my community...

I'll check in the future whether I became more willing to explore, more generous, more confident, a better market risk optimizer? When I'd arrive by time machine, what would I show myself? It's speculative…but worth trying...

It's about my transformation from an innovator and innovation marketer to an innovation marketer and innovation marketing advisor…

What I may have done right technically

Predict the fast move to more quantifying. Quant innovations supports systematic investigations of observable phenomena via computational techniques in fields where this was not so common - social sciences, journalism and even law and politics. 

Defend the multi-model and multi-method strategies against the one-size-fits-all hype of master machine learning and AI algorithms, Big Data…It was my strong belief that connectionists, evolutionaries, Bayesians, symbolists and analogizes must cooperate with modelers and numerical analysts…

Recommend developing technologies products and solutions orthogonally. Develop a technology stack first…technology that isn't devoted to a context at first place. Develop you products transformative and make your solutions by tying things together. It's the only way to make smart connected things

The contextual technologies help recommending develop front-ends that explain complex concepts to non-experts…by contextual technologies and media. 

How my brand promise changed accordingly

My brand promise was helping innovators leverage their businesses by assessing their innovations and help them to connect purpose, position, team and client experience. To deliver a brand that is the meaning that clients attach to their innovations.

As I increasingly convinced innovators to provide not only innovation-use-training, but give full explanation on the methods behind and finally unleash the programming power behind their innovation (to make their innovations a solution and development environment in one)…I've decided to do the same by sharing my methodologies for the assessment of innovations…

What I'm proud of

My diagnosis tool The Innovation Mesh and a paradigm to understand how to optimize market risk of innovations…how to deal with the known and uncertainty, how to find the barrier between them and how to optimize…and how to apply Real Options as one tool to maximize the value of an investment project.

This is what I'd show myself when I'd arrive by time machine…

But there's one more thing

Putting my work into a higher context (like politics), and inspired by a high level process technique…I've introduced the reaction-convection-diffusion metaphor to marketing. It helps to optimize the market risk qualitatively…put (the story of) an innovation into the pot (market)…it will
  • react with worldview, states, solutions…in market segments related to its change potential and requirements
  • circulate by convection at borders of segments with gradients in expectations, knowledge, persuasion
  • diffuse through the market promoted by multiplying actors
Marketers can observe the "heat and speed" and control the process by adjusting access, information, education…avoid that the "pot" freezes the story or boils over with negative reactions.

It works even better as quantifying emerged and conquered new fields, sectors and segmentsWhen a quant innovations work, the reaction-convection-diffusion metaphor in marketing will help optimizing market risk even in new markets. 

Contextual technologies build the perfect platforms…if they're understood.

Development Principles Revisit

The contextual age and technologies, the emergence of smart connected things and processes, the need to quantify more...force innovators finding new abstractions, automation and better user-system interplay…

This is what you should think of:

Develop evolutionary - Evolutionary development cycles will motivate developers and empower constant feedback

Let technology revolutionize workflows - Integrated model and demonstration building will help explaining complex concepts to non experts

Establish a bank of innovation - A lab to design, analyze and fund innovations will boost dynamism for transformative development

Build a technology stack and get the tools required - Enhance your platform and workbench to build a variety of products and solutions atop

Organize a fast path from lab to market - Remove deployment obstacles and close the client feed back loop

Support rule breakers - New approaches, methodologies and technologies will help to solve progressive problems

Think in development cities - Establish teams who do everything from development, deployment to services. Let developers communicate with clients and actors via the underlying theories, models, methods and technologies

This development principles will help you building big things with a comparatively small outfit.

It's Now Two Years...

that I've given my uni software plus into Michael Aichinger's hands - and launched my new business.

What's essential:

Exploit the wu-wei paradox

The wu-wei principle helps by letting the complex stream work for me. It was never so easy to share ideas, concepts and methodologies…understand and influence trends without reacting jittery to short-lived modes.

The continued work with my features partners made it easier to do things that matter for those who care….and having saved some time I could even develop new tools…

Develop technology and products orthogonally

It's becoming increasingly important to develop technologies without context first and develop contextual products atop them - transformative and adaptive. The intelligent combination of modeling with data driven methods (machine learning) is still the key.

Technology stacks may include domain specific languages, engines that implement them, data and communication services…all with hybrid programming features, being platform agnostic and inherently parallel.

You can inherit a lot from Wolfram Technologies - the internal value of building technology stacks easily…and the external value of its declarative nature that let you build functions, tasks and workflows like stories.

Avoid the fear of regret - but be aware of the eager seller - stony buyer principle

To remove this kind of fear is one of the big challenges in innovation marketing. As innovator you know that at first you make things for somebody, not everybody. You need to understand from the first prototype whether your innovation will work and sell. To understand this better, I've developed and shared The Innovation Mesh. It adds some emotional criteria to the assessment of your innovation.

Because, loss aversion of buyers can make sales figures disappointing, The Innovation Mesh also helps to get actors hooked to your innovation.

Get the bigger picture…

...of marketing, selling and branding. If buyers will not spend less but buy less expecting more quality, the inner story of your innovation will become more important than the outer struggle for existence.

And his will happen when products will become smarter and more connected. Consequently, you need to invest more in the development than in promotion. 

How did I move?

I've continued working on principles that help optimizing market risk of innovations. And I've applied my recommendation to innovators - pushing their innovations into a higher context - myself.

I've worked on my Quant Politics concept and decided to release it in book-form - self published in an evolutionary prototyping fashion.

I speak for the project

I'm a marketer at heart. But my trick is not to present the innovator, the maker, the client or the re-marketing partner...I represent the project. And I want to get paid for success…not for work.

If you're a startup or an established innovator…get the proof. Contact  me.


We had UnMarketing and UnSelling and now we have UnBranding (Fast Company calls it Debranding). It's all about the big pictures of marketing, selling and branding.

Brand Promise

I think, it's all about this: a brand promise connects purpose, positioning, team and client experience…It enables a brand delivery connecting with your clients (by head and heart) and differentiate your brand. In short, it's a promise about expectations, stories and relations…all related atop your innovations.

Even shorter, brand is the meaning that clients attach to your innovation.

Not Overdo

This is what I understand from the article: if buyers will not spend less but buy less expecting more quality, it'll become more important to combine the what and who. Products will not only be chosen because of its differential advantages, but if there's enough trust in your promise.

Yours worlds view, personality, values, visions...your communication, voice…your actions…how you build user experiences…will become more important related to your your design, imagery, messaging

Make clients feel good about their decisions.

Branding is Communication

It has never been so easy to communicate, but the media also suggest that everything is interconnected.  But innovations are special products that change more...So, the inner story of you innovation - how it works and integrates will most probably become more important then the outer struggles for existence.

Consequently, you may choose investing more in the development than in promotion?! Let your innovation do most of the story. It will strip branding to its core…and The Innovation Mesh will help making your innovation work and sell…in the sense of UnBranding.