For one thing, there is some interesting research in the works of creative artists that led to an idea called the Old Masters and Young Geniuses theory.  This theory suggests that people either work painstakingly over a lifetime to achieve mastery; or that their inspiration and creative gifts begin early.  If Zuckerberg is an early genius, he NEEDS to be young!

Any high-potential new area is going to be massively uncertain.  If you want to have a big-stakes win, you’re going to have to be prepared to deal with the risk that comes from not knowing.  By the time you’re in the world of the tried and true, you are eliminating the risk premium that you could get.  The smart way to do this, as I've argued for some time, is to have options.  Like venture capitalists, you need to realize that there isn't much you can do about failure rates, but what you can control is the cost of failure and the discipline you apply to making investments.  The rules?  

• Make sure there is a big upside
• Limit the cost of the downside
• Cut losses on losers early
• Spread risks across a portfolio and;
• Make sure you have an exit strategy.

In most industries, there is the need for a fair amount of experimentation before we figure out what the business model really is. If you want to participate in the ultimate win, you have to be there from the beginning.

I would also editorialize that the stock market’s fascination with steady-state performance is suitable to the ‘exploitation’ phase of a competitive advantage and not very suitable for rapid growth and scaling or for restructuring – there are horses for courses, even in the financial markets. 

And remember - by the time Alexander the Great turned 30, he had conquered most of the known world! 

The real issue for anyone trying to make money from advertising is whether the ads are regarded as generally positive or as an intrusive – even creepy – nuisance. 

Ads for offers someone genuinely might be interested in, that are funny or intriguing, or that provide genuinely useful information are typically quite welcome by consumers.  What other rationale could there possibly be for the existence of channels like QVC?? 

The problem is that poorly targeted, dull, heavy-handed or as I said, even creepy, ads are far more often the norm.  Facebook will never be able to monetize its reach and access if it can’t raise the game on the quality of the advertising on the site.  Myself, I get wierded out when I get ads for “female consultant? Click here to learn the 7 secrets of..” or worse yet, “are you a woman business owner?”.  It’s also tedious to be bombarded with ads for products one is not in the market for, that are a poor fit for what you do, or which are just plain completely irrelevant.  The company that can change the business model of advertising from ‘throw it against the wall and see what sticks’ to ‘here’s information about what we do that you will actually welcome’ is the company that I suspect will do best at monetizing their social assets.

The integration of ‘social’ searching with Microsoft’s Bing Search engine is just the beginning of a new model of applications, in which applications talk to other applications, rather than operating in standalone mode.  Although the ostensible competitor in so-called social search is Google, this is just the beginning of a much more complex and nuanced game, in which Apple is far more likely to experience some of the fallout than Google is.

What Microsoft has done is to create the platform on which applications can share information with other applications, a form of connection that Apple does not support.  So rather than finding scraps of connections with other people that are locked within specific applications, using Microsoft software, you can find everything in one place – mail, “likes”, updates, locations and more.  Further, Microsoft’s solution is more compatible with cloud-based services, in which the software is constantly updated and you are always using the latest version (like Skype, Facebook or yes, Bing).  The Apple model is actually a throwback to an earlier time – when you bought software, downloaded or installed it, and it required continuous updating. 

As many web sites have noticed, recommendations from other customers count a lot in helping people to make purchasing decisions.  Hence the ubiquitous search engine support on sites such as Amazon, the posting of reviews on Yelp and the free availability of opinions on any number of shopping sites.  Well, imagine how even more powerful this idea would be if the recommendations are actually from people that you know, so that you can know how much credence to give to their opinion.

While I wouldn’t say this is a “Google” killer, or even an Apple killer, it does have the potential to introduce what some call the App Economy to us, an economy in which a broad platform, such as Microsoft’s, will allow data to flow from application to application, rather than being stuck in single-purpose software.  It will be interesting to see the competition playing out.

I shared my perspective that I think Zuckerberg has been pretty smart about preparing himself for the role and for making sure the the company and product don't suffer because of his own blind spots and personal preferences.  One gets the feeling that he has gone about learning to be a manager and leader kind of the way a great engineer would - by studying role models, learning from other people and getting lots of feedback from others who have been in the tech world.  He's also brought in terrific people to support him - Cheryl Sandberg comes to mind.  I'm very impressed at how he has developed both his own skills and the strength of the company.  And it helps that he isn't the very first twenty-something to ride a technology company into world-class size.  My guess is that he learned a lot from Gates, Jobs and all the other young entrepreneurs who took their shot at building something great. 

What are the risks for someone like Zuckerberg?  I think one thing that is going to surprise both him and those around him is that in a public company, there are some decisions you need to get a lot of buy-in on.  The acquisition of Instagram comes to mind.  As many have reported, the billion-dollar acquisitions was basically presented to the Board as a fait accompli.  Once you're a public company, a lot of investors are going to be uncomfortable with such high-handedness.  There is also the issue of Zuckerberg's famous about-face thinking on issues, in which opinions he held yesterday could change in an instant tomorrow.  On the one hand, I think flexible thinking and openness to new inputs is terrific and important.  On the other, again, the Street is a little like a political audience - it gets nervous when it observes so-called 'flip flopping'. 

Of course, becoming bigger and being dominant present different challenges than being a young upstart, as Google is busy learning.  It's one thing to have a great idea and build a company to deliver that.  It's quite another to build an organization that can thrive to produce another great idea. 

The topic of critical conversations was one I raised in a recent Long Range Planning article on business models.  It caught the eye of consultant Matt Stocker, who blogged about the idea as well. 

The core concept is to make sure that you are continuously exposed to people with a different perspective than your own, people who are either experts in technologies, new markets, or transformations that could potentially be disruptive to your business so that you pick up the early warning signals quickly. 

To date, the electric car has been a poster child for ecosystem mismanagement.  We’ve seen a lot of great innovation in the individual pieces: improved batteries, cars, charge spot deployments, etc.  But what has been desperately lacking is a strategy for pulling them together on terms that make sense to mainstream buyers.

Better Place breaks the mold in this regard.  They are doing something so interesting that I dedicated an entire chapter (chapter 7) of my book, The Wide Lens (www.TheWideLensBook.com) to exploring their strategy. 

 The power of the Better Place model is that that they are not trying to innovate the electric car, but rather to innovate the ecosystem around the car. 

 Two broad elements stand out.  First is the way in which they have completely reconfigured the e-car ecosystem to overcome the six key problems that undermine the traditional approach to the electric car in the mass market. (see http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-23/news/31227987_1_electric-cars-blind-spot-nissan-leaf)  By applying what is essentially a mobile telephone operator model to the context of automobiles, selling multi year contracts based on Note, however, that this entails controlling the urge to grow – first achieving commercial success in the early markets, and only then moving forward to pursue the bigger fish.  That takes a lot of discipline.

In the language of ecosystems, Israel and Denmark offer Better Place the opportunity to establish their minimum viable footprint. And from this position, they can leverage ecosystem carryover to accelerate their success in adjacent markets.

Their success is not guaranteed.  But they have a better shot than any other player on the field.

The Free Market Innovation Machine: Analyzing the Growth Miracle of Capitalism, 2002.

Baumol essentially argues that innovation, not price competition, is the growth engine behind the miracle of capitalism.  Innovation is also fostered by access to opportunities and a regime that rewards innovators. 

It is worrying that we seem to have lost this thread somewhere.

Daniel Altman, chief economist of Big Think and best-selling author of Outrageous Fortunes: The Twelve Surprising Trends That Will Reshape the Global Economy.

Monique Coleman, first ever UN Youth Champion, philanthropist, entrepreneur and actress best known for her role in High School Musical and Dancing with the Stars.

Rita McGrath, best-selling author of Discovery Driven Growth and strategy professor at Columbia University who's recognized as one of the top 20 business thinkers of the world by Thinkers 50.

Jonathon Prince, "athlivist" and runner who runs across the country to raise money for causes. September 2011 Jonathon announced plans to be the first man to run a mile on the moon by 2016.

Dr. Hans Keirstead, world-renowned scientist dubbed as the "Pied Piper in Stem Cell Science." Keirstead's patented treatment for regenerating damaged spinal cords successfully allowed rats to walk within six weeks and is preparing for human clinical trails.

Dr. Samuel Chand, listed as one of the top leadership gurus in the world. Chand counsels CEO's, senior executives, and ministries on leadership and strategy.

Tickets are limited, and can be purchased here.

The first is what Ron calls Co-innovation Risk, meaning the extent to which the success of a partiuclar innovation depends on other innovations being successfully commercialized.  The trouble is that when you are depending on someone else to do their part, and that someone is not under your own control,  you can find yourself with a really expensive launch budget that is slowly getting spent before a 'complete' product can be ready.  Why did MP3 players not really take off until Apple invented the iPod?  Because there was no easy (and legal) way to get digital music for the mainstream.

The second kind of risk Ron highlights is what he calls Adoption Chain Risk.  This is the risk to which you are exposed if you have to first sell the idea to some third party before your ultimate customers can judge how good your offer really is.  Many stalled innovations have struggled with this dilemma.  One that I'm following closely at the moment is alternative energy ecosystem company A Better Place.  If you meet, as I have, with their senior leaders, you'll be  utterly convinced that they have cracked a workable, sustainable solution to the electric-car problem, suitable for mass adoption and ready to shift our habits forever.  One small problem is that they are having trouble getting the other value chain partners in a row.  Powerful, entrenched interests such as those of existing energy companies are proving a powerful force of inertia. 

Maybe I should ask Ron what they should do - will keep you posted on what he says!