Sometimes I don't see the big picture...

And when I do I end up costing myself time, money and opportunity. But I’m not alone…when visiting boards like this one I notice many others having the same problem. For the lack of any apparent strategy they fritter around with one project after another. You can tell there is no master plan involved because many of these projects are totally unrelated…there is a unifying theme tying the projects together. It leads me to believe that we’re much better ‘tacticians’ than we are ‘strategists’. I don’t think that comes as a shock to anyone reading this.

Let’s take a look at the difference between ‘strategy’ and ‘tactics’.

Here are non-military definitions:

Tactics-A procedure or set of maneuvers engaged in to achieve an end, an aim, or a goal.

Strategy-An elaborate and systematic plan of action.

Just for the sake of comparison let’s look at the military definitions also:

Tactics-The military science that deals with SECURING OBJECTIVES SET BY STRATEGY, especially the technique of deploying and directing of troops, ships, and aircraft in effective maneuvers against an enemy.

Strategy-The science of military command, or the science of PROJECTING campaigns and DIRECTING great military movements; generalship.

Still fuzzy? Let me give you a couple military examples.

At the beginning of the American Civil War, aging Union General Winfield Scott, put together a plan (named ‘Anaconda’) to damage the South’s ability to wage war. This plan (strategy) would call for a federal blockade of the entire Confederate coastline. Even today that would be an ambitious plan but in 1861, the possibility of doing something like this, given the then small size of the U.S. Navy, this goal was truly challenging…but Scott put the wheels in motion (tactics) to fulfill the plan. He knew it would take time…a great deal of it but it was a powerful way to strangle the South economically. Very little cotton and other products were able to be exported and very little in war material and supplies could be imported. The South’s ability to generate cash was severely curtailed. The passing of this strategy was not a ‘slam-dunk’…many people opposed it for various reasons but in the end it was one of the chief reasons why the North eventually won the war. Scott was strong enough not to deviate from his strategy even though his tactics probably had to be altered from time to time. The strategy was all-important…his tactics, much less so.

In the spring of 1864, U.S. Grant created a strategy to, in his mind, finish the war. He held a big view of things. He knew that to defeat the South that he had to think beyond the capabilities of one army. He needed to blend together the operations of four field armies spread over thousands of miles. Like Scott’s Anaconda plan, this was a monumental task for the time. Sometime just for grins look at the size of the eastern half of the country from Louisiana to the Atlantic Ocean. This is a huge landmass and couldn’t be controlled by just a single army, so Grant put together a plan utilizing four independent commands, each with specific goals. The commander of each army was relatively free to use whatever tactics where necessary to achieve the final goal. Things did not go smoothly. Armies failed in their short-term objectives and tactics needed to be changed. In May of 1864, the Army of the Potomac’s portion of the strategy required it to engage the Army of Northern Virginia under General Robert E. Lee. At first the Army of the Potomac used ‘sledge-hammer’ like blows to try to destroy Lee’s force. Grant kept urging forceful attacks but by the middle of June switched tactics that resulted in the siege of Lee’s army in Petersburg, Virginia and eventually the capture of the South’s main force. Now contrast this with what the Federal armies did in the spring of 1863…The Army of the Potomac was essentially operating on its own, without the benefit of any specific strategy other than ‘Trying to win the war’ which is like us saying our strategy is ‘Trying to make money’. Basically there was no strategy. The Union army skillfully maneuvered (even more so than what Grant would do the following year) against General Lee and his army, which resulted in a blood bath and retreat of the Union forces back to where they came. In 1864 Grant would do essentially the same thing but with the important difference that he continued to push Lee back (in the face of thousands of casualties) instead of retreating to craft a new set of tactics. Grant had a grand strategy in place where there was none in 1863. Now understand this, the Union tactics at the beginning of 1863 where possibly even better than what Grant would use in 1864 but the lack of overall strategy doomed the effort.

I ask you how often have your good ‘tactics’ been undermined by the lack of an overall ‘strategy’. Heck, mine have several times…maybe even beyond several. There have been times when I have leaped from project to project trying to find the one that ‘made money’ (my grand strategy). How foolish is that? I’m trying to reduce or eliminate this flaw. Why? Because it keeps me from achieving my ultimate goal (in simple terms) of having a successful direct marketing company. I’m sure there are many reading this that is suffering from the same thing. Like I, you’re a great ‘tactician’ but you’re a lousy ‘strategist’. Even the most business savvy people that visit and share on these boards are guilty of the same thing. They leap from project to project without the appearance of a common thread tying them together or they abandon one project for the next ‘project of the week’ at a moment’s notice.

You see its strategy that keeps us in line, which allows us to keep going when things are the most difficult. And no, this isn’t some sort of ‘rah-rah’ speech. Ben Suarez lost thousands before he found the right tactics that supported his strategy. So did Gary Halbert. So did Henry Ford. So did Edison. Without a clear strategy in mind, how can you even consider changing tactics? What do you measure those tactics against? Sales that week? This might be good in the short-term but it is no long-term answer. How many folks are willing to lose a few thousand dollars in order to accomplish their strategy? I’m willing to bet not many. But you know, looking back, I can see where my successful short tactics where much more meaningful when they supported my grand strategy as opposed to just sticking a few dollars in the bank. I read about people having some success with the tactics they are using but don’t seem to parlay that success into anything bigger…why not? My guess is a lack of overall strategy. Consequently my reverses where also less painful when a set of tactics, supported by a grand strategy, blew-up in my face as opposed to tactics that were not supporting a grand strategy.

Another way of telling if someone doesn’t have a strategy? They harp on the excuses. You know, “I’ve got kids and I can’t afford to do ‘x’ right now” or “I don’t have any time to pursue what I what”. I talk to these folks all the time…I read their comments on boards just like this. So instead of jumping into that next project, think about your strategy and how your tactics fit into that strategy.

I thank you for your time and input,

Mike Winicki

Great post, Mike! As a former naval officer, I appreciate your examples. And, the lack of strategy isn't limited to those of us with smaller businesses. I see it every day doing corporate consulting.

A good book that covers this area in a somewhat different manner is "Good to Great" by Collins. It documents the differences between 30 or so established companies (i.e. Ford, Gillette, GM, etc.) and details the reasons why some became "great" and some didn't.

Interesting reading and has principles applicable to all sizes of businesses.

Thanks again,

Bob

Hi Mike,

Thanks.... That was one of those posts which can cause you to rethink you're whole approach to everything!

I know about strategy.... But what your post made clear to me is that I'm not really applying what I know!

One thing which used to confuse me on this topic was what seems to be a difference between military and business strategy. In military strategy, you usually have a clear "enemy", and you also have to consider the physical environment and geography. For example, the fact that the Confederate South was reliant on its sea ports (a fact determined by geography), helped to determine General Winfield Scott's strategy.

In business, the main factors are your target market and your competitors. What do your target market want, and what are they getting already (and NOT yet getting) from your competitors? These factors will help determine your strategy....

Mike, how do you think we should go about creating a good strategy for our business? I've never seen it this way before, but after reading your post I realize a "business plan" is essentially an outline of a "business strategy"... I've created one business plan before, but it was for a business which was never created. (A friend and I entered a business plan competition with it.) I'm starting to think it's time to create another business plan in order to help organize a good strategy....

I'm keen to hear more of your thoughts on this, Mike, or anyone else...

- Dien

Dien -

One way to plan a strategy is to define your long term objectives and plan backwards to actions that should be taken today.

As Michael pointed out above, strategy is the big picture and tactics are the actions taken to achieve the big picture. Planning with the end in mind (to paraphrase Stephen Covey) allows you to mesh day-to-day tactics within the framework of your strategy.

A great example of this is given by Michael Gerber (author of the E-Myth series). He says the purpose of starting a business is to eventually sell it so you can get on with enjoying your life. Given that, you would develop an overall strategy to create a business that will be valued at some large figure at some designated future date, and one that will stand alone without your day-to-day involvement.

With that as a strategic plan, you could then develop the tactics (i.e., action steps) to develop the business to the end result at the desired time. Certainly, the tactics will change with market conditions, etc., but the strategic plan would remain relatively stable.

We used a similar process when I ran a division for a large corporation. Our strategic plan called for gaining computer services business with a majority of federal agencies in the US government by providing superior service and technology. Our tactics differed by agency and politics, but we never wavered from the strategic objective - to maximize our revenues by dominating the market.

It worked, as we made several hundred million in revenues in under two years, despite corporate pressure from above to cut corners for quicker cashflow, and severe political lobbying efforts from the competition.

Anyway, just my take on how to employ strategic planning in a meaningful way in any size business.

Regards,

Bob

Aw, Jeez!

In case I don't say it, thanks for a GREAT post!

I was also a soldier.

No, I had no chance to go to war and defend my country. But I DID work for a large corporation that has grown even larger since I left. I was a corporate soldier.

My job was long range planning for information systems.

Now, that company promoted from within, and it kind of didn't matter whether you knew what you were about or not. They had "training" programs that would equip you to be whatever they needed.

(accept that automation was new, computers were these esoteric "thingys" that somebody surely knew about - your report showed up magically every month - and somebody realized that things were changing faster than the company was keeping up with them, ok?)

So here comes me. Long Range Planning. Find out what "they" are going to need, in time to give "us" a chance to be ready to provide it.

[Comes now, the major flaw in the premise that nobody cared about.]

"We (latter half of the sentence) didn't really give a rat's behind about what they (former part) needed. But more than that, we all knew what "they" needed, and "they'd" know it too, if they weren't so dumb!

Five years. I learned a lot. I'm dumb enough to understand that no matter what I know, there's more to BE known. So I checked out books, bought books, talked with people on the internet (actually, in newsgroups) and anybody else I could find to try to grasp what was required in my position.

[Revelation: I was paid an obscene amount of money to do what amounted to idiot work. I'd been a teacher. The most important thing anybody can teach (facilitate, actually) is thinking and learning. Learning how to learn. Contrast that to what seemed to thrill people who got paid a lot more than I . . . Apologies all 'round if that seems arrogant, but there's a back story that hasn't been told.]

Anyway, my study led me to understand that strategy had to do with an ULTIMATE OUTCOME that was desired to be achieved. The GOAL, if you will.

Objectives, on the other hand, were the steps you could check off when accomplished, and thereby gain some measure of how well you were progressing toward the goal. A measure of whether or not your strategy was viable.

In the corporate world, they signaled when and what should be changed to continue implementation of the strategy.

Stupid me.

"Of COURSE this is a RIGHT action! We, in the center of the USA (Missouri) are going to New York (east)! It makes perfect sense to go to California (wa-a-a-ay west) and get a plane to Honolulu (even way-er west). From there we can . . ."

It was hard. Then one day, in utter frustration, I decided to change my frame of reference.

Suppose, for a minute, that I might be right. Just for a minute . . . let's pretend, I imagined, that I'm not just a couple of "boxes to be checked off in compliance" on an "equal opportunity" form, I'm not "culturally deprived," and that somebody actually gave an ounce of credence to my demonstrated capabilities. Let's stretch it a bit: Maybe I ain't stupid!

[Sidebar: My division manager once asked me to write a letter to another division. He told me all I needed to know, but then he proceeded to write the letter to show me how! [I have a Master's degree, and a teaching certificate that is good for life in my state - english is one of the areas . . . ] Dude got kinda P.O.ed when I asked him why he didn't just do it himself, given that he was writing it all down anyway. . .]

Let's just suppose I got it right.

What would I think about the people above me? Next to me? Below me, even?

I came up with a lot of stuff, and I'm going to move to pencil and tape recorder to get it all down.

And the relationship of the stuff I've written so far to the topic at hand is that I learned that people - untrained corporate people - generally believe that "putting out fires" more slowly constitutes the strategy. And when that doesn't work, REORGANIZE!

Further, I think that people believe that when they're doing something, ANYTHING! it is good activity. Thinking long term might lead them into thinking about an end - to themselves.

Can't have that, now can we?

It's as if they're all "up to their ears in alligators"

I'll quit writing now. Or, I will right after I tell you that I had one boss who was so "mentally deprived" that I actually said to him "God didn't really see fit to give you a brain, and I ain't gon' let you use mine no mo'.
(gimme my ghetto. cultural deprivation, collard greens
n cornbread, anyday!)

I thought (hoped and prayed) he'd fire me.

I was in the company another 12 years.

[When "birds of a feather" wanted to get rid of birds that didn't "flock together" too 'pretty good,' and they (the flockers) couldn't find a good reason to fire them, said non-flocking birds got promoted, as did I.]

Sigh.

Marye

> Hi Mike,

> Thanks.... That was one of those posts which
> can cause you to rethink you're whole
> approach to everything!

> I know about strategy.... But what your post
> made clear to me is that I'm not really
> applying what I know!

> One thing which used to confuse me on this
> topic was what seems to be a difference
> between military and business strategy. In
> military strategy, you usually have a clear
> "enemy", and you also have to
> consider the physical environment and
> geography. For example, the fact that the
> Confederate South was reliant on its sea
> ports (a fact determined by geography),
> helped to determine General Winfield Scott's
> strategy.

> In business, the main factors are your
> target market and your competitors. What do
> your target market want, and what are they
> getting already (and NOT yet getting) from
> your competitors? These factors will help
> determine your strategy....

Dien,

A business plan is important. Some parts being more long-lasting than others. Business plans for the most part are out-of-date once you print it off. Why? Many of our assumptions turn out flawed (very quickly I might add), which can render the plan useless unless it is kept up to date and kept flexible. Most business plans don't take into account the many angles and turns our lives take.

I say this from experience...one of my jobs is to help businesses in my county create business plans to get access to government loans. And most plans I work on are horrible. They fall apart in a number of areas. Mostly, they lack long-term vision and they are full of unmeasurable statements like, "We know are business will succeed because we will service the customer better than the competition"--unmeasurable, unquantifiable. A business plan needs things that can be measured so you know if you're on the right track or not. Many people don't know how to do that or they don't want to look like they've made incorrect assumptions.

Another point on your post. You mention two important areas that do need extensive coverage in a business plan...the target market and your competitors. Both can be strategized for and tactics developed.

Competitors and the target market are two-legs of the stool...what about the third (which rarely gets accounted for in any business plan)...YOURSELF. This is where (in my opinion) many fall down on and causes their plan to fail. What steps are you going to take to put your plan into motion. How do you know if you are making good progress everyday or just wasting time? How are you going to ensure you own success? The 'tools' out there are many...

Visualization
Positive Thinking
NLP
Networking
7 Habits of Highly Suceessful Poeople
Psychocybernetics
Pictograms
Goal Setting
Structural Tension

How do you know which will work and which will not? How will you quantify your progress?

Personally I see more business plans (and businesses) fail due to the failing of the founders/owners to plan for 'themselves' rather than the business failing due to competitors and the target market. I think money can be made in virtually any business sector with good marketing techniques. Someone's business will fail and they will blame market conditions or competitors rather than blame their inability to strategize for themselves. You are a separate entity from your business and you need a plan for yourself as well as a plan for your business. And then once you have the plan(s) processes have to be put in place to measure the results. And then we make changes and remeasure. And so on and so on and so on...

Take care,

Mike Winicki

> Aw, Jeez!

> In case I don't say it, thanks for a GREAT
> post!

> I was also a soldier.

> No, I had no chance to go to war and defend
> my country. But I DID work for a large
> corporation that has grown even larger since
> I left. I was a corporate soldier.

> My job was long range planning for
> information systems.

> Now, that company promoted from within, and
> it kind of didn't matter whether you knew
> what you were about or not. They had
> "training" programs that would
> equip you to be whatever they needed.

> (accept that automation was new, computers
> were these esoteric "thingys" that
> somebody surely knew about - your report
> showed up magically every month - and
> somebody realized that things were changing
> faster than the company was keeping up with
> them, ok?)

> So here comes me. Long Range Planning. Find
> out what "they" are going to need,
> in time to give "us" a chance to
> be ready to provide it.

> [Comes now, the major flaw in the premise
> that nobody cared about.]

> "We (latter half of the sentence)
> didn't really give a rat's behind about what
> they (former part) needed. But more than
> that, we all knew what "they"
> needed, and "they'd" know it too,
> if they weren't so dumb!

> Five years. I learned a lot. I'm dumb enough
> to understand that no matter what I know,
> there's more to BE known. So I checked out
> books, bought books, talked with people on
> the internet (actually, in newsgroups) and
> anybody else I could find to try to grasp
> what was required in my position.

Marye,

Interesting info there and thanks for the kind words.

Pretty important point about "no matter what you know there is always more to know". That type of thinking is very-much honored in the corporate but as I get older and spend more time as a self-employed person I've grown weary of learning. Why? I (like many visiting this board) seem to spend nearly every waking hour accumulating information. We accumulate more information in a week than what people in 1900 did over a course of many months...yet we are far less satisfied with our lives...we are far more prone to unhappiness. We seem to accomplish much less than we think we should. The reason for all this is because we spend most of our time accumulating information and very little of it putting that information to work. We 'do' so much (or so we tell our family...our friends...and even ourselves (pure b.s.)) yet we accomplish so little. There are exceptions to this rule as there are every rule but for the most part I feel it is true. And to make it worse most of the information we accumulate is useless...it is useless now, it will be useless five years from now and it will be useless 50 years from now. The 80/20 principle works quite nicely here but it is more like 90-something percent of the info we collect will not benefit us or our friends or family or anyone else for that matter. Sure we may be able to answer some questions that show up on Jeopardy once in a while but how is that really benefitting us?

I feel a more important skill is the ability to 'see' patterns. Especially from an entrepreneurial slant. If I can spot repeating patterns of opportunity that will benefit me far more than accumulating knowledge...especially if I know where and whom to ask to get information if by chance I need it.

Think of it as a child's teeter-totter, with the accumulation of knowledge on one end and the actual application of that knowledge on the other. Guess what happens? The 'knowledge' end becomes so heavy that no amount of application in the world will balance things out. Not that we spend much time applying our knowledge anyway. It is far easier and less painful to accumlate knowledge than it is to apply it.

Peole do not fail in business because of a 'lack of knowledge'...they fail (again there are exceptions) because they fail to implement what they have learned or have failed to spot 'patterns' relevent to their business. Remember, accumulating knowledge and 'thinking' are not the same thing. You can spend all day learning but not one second of that day really thinking about what you have learned. "Learning" is an action...and action drives out thought. We can much more readiliy spot trends and patterns if we spend time thinking about previous trends and patterns. And yes I'll admit it right here:

I'm Mike Winicki and I'm a...

Infoholic.

Hopefully I can find the strength to quit learning so much and apply more of what I have learned.

Take care,

Mike Winicki

Hi Bob,

> One way to plan a strategy is to define your
> long term objectives and plan backwards to
> actions that should be taken today.

Yes, that's a good technique.... Thanks. :)

Without a final goal, strategy and tactics are essentially useless....

This is true not only in business, but in military strategy too.

One of the pre-eminent military strategists of the 20th century, B. H. Liddell Hart, defined "strategy" as"the art of distributing and applying military means to fulfill the ends of policy".(From Liddell Hart's book, "Strategy".)

In other words, strategy is applied to attain some goal, but you have to have the goal (or "policy" as he put it) first before you can develop the strategy.... Which I think is also embedded in what you said, Bob.

(Maybe a definition of "business strategy" could be "the art of distributing and applying business assets and means to fulfill a pre-defined goal" - from adapting Liddell Hart's definition....)

> A great example of this is given by Michael
> Gerber (author of the E-Myth series). He
> says the purpose of starting a business is
> to eventually sell it so you can get on with
> enjoying your life. Given that, you would
> develop an overall strategy to create a
> business that will be valued at some large
> figure at some designated future date, and
> one that will stand alone without your
> day-to-day involvement.

Yes, this is good too! :)

If you don't want to be eternally "tied" to your business, you better have an "exit strategy" prepared - such as a way to sell the business....

> It worked, as we made several hundred
> million in revenues in under two years,
> despite corporate pressure from above to cut
> corners for quicker cashflow, and severe
> political lobbying efforts from the
> competition.

> Anyway, just my take on how to employ
> strategic planning in a meaningful way in
> any size business.

Thanks Bob... It's good to know that strategic planning really does work.... :)

- Dien

Hi Mike,

> A business plan needs things
> that can be measured so you know if you're
> on the right track or not. Many people don't
> know how to do that or they don't want to
> look like they've made incorrect
> assumptions.

This reminds me of the way many look at advertising... Many people DON'T want measurable advertising responses, because they sometimes prefer NOT to know if the ad is doing anything or not....

It's usually better though to make results as measureable as you can, so you know exactly what's working, and what isn't....

> Competitors and the target market are
> two-legs of the stool...what about the third
> (which rarely gets accounted for in any
> business plan)...YOURSELF. This is where (in
> my opinion) many fall down on and causes
> their plan to fail. What steps are you going
> to take to put your plan into motion. How do
> you know if you are making good progress
> everyday or just wasting time? How are you
> going to ensure you own success?

Thanks Mike, that's a great point! YOU are one component of your business, and you're right, it's just like another leg of the stool! (Without it, the stool will fall over....)

It's always so much easier to pin any blame on "the market" or on a terrible competitor, than to take responsibility yourself.... Of course, in some cases the market or the competition is to blame, but with good planning you should hopefully be able to avoid such situations.... :)

- Dien Rice

Mike, You said:

******
Pretty important point about "no matter what you know there is always more to know". That type of thinking is very-much honored in the corporate
******

No it's not (honored, that is). It just gets you labeled as a trouble maker. Those folks are very satisfied with themselves. In fact, if they catch on that you think that way, you scare the hell out of them. Especially if they've got a pigeonhole that you refuse to fit . . .

*********
(learn more) than what people in 1900 did over a course of many months...yet we are far less satisfied with our lives...
*********

I don't think you can really know that. I agree that we are less satisfied. We're bombarded with information(?) everyday, promulgated by people whose intent it is to get our attention. Nothing works like tragedy.

No tragedy today? Well, just look at how you've failed compared to [fill in the blank with anything from money to weight loss.]

They're in the discontent business.

Change the channel.

********
And to make it worse most of the information we accumulate is useless...it is useless now, it will be useless five years from now and it will be useless 50 years from now.
********

Hmmm. Who'da thunk my Mama, who never even had an attic, much less insulation in it, would be able to tell me exactly what to do to get the stuff off my skin (and soothe the crazy-making itch, instantly) when I fell into it . . .

Sigh.

You need to pour a nice, tall glass of something definitely mind altering, and declare to God "Yaaaassss Lawd! It's me, and Ah'm thinkin' and learnin' again!"

You can then either drink the stuff or pour it out. Validation is the immediate goal of that exercise.

Self-validation.

Ok. Here comes the rant.

You DID know I'd write, didn't you?

Of COURSE you did!

I think that the "useless knowledge" feeling comes from the fact that we simply haven't found the vehicle through which we can express that knowledge, in a manner that benefits both us and humankind. And please know that when knowledge is expressed (not facts, necessarily) it may be in a form that is something different than the thing (or things) originally learned.

I believe that the dichotomy is not in "constantly learning" versus "applying what we learn."

Rather, it is that we have not yet discovered what our spirits *want* us to be doing with what we've learned to contribute to ourselves and to humanity, to justify "our takin' up space and wastin' good air."

Put differently, we haven't realized (or maybe haven't accepted) that we each contribute something remarkable! That we each, in fact, have the power to change the entire %$##$@ universe TODAY!

Think about that.

You're a part of the universe. If you disappear from the face of the earth, the ENTIRE PICTURE IS CHANGED!

Talk about a mind-blowing thought! And it matters very little how far the ripples you make go.

Whether or not Joe Blow in east Hell-is-burg knows about you is of no consequence.

You did ripple.

You ARE rippling.

(One result of yo' ripplin' behind is that I'm sittin' here writin' this stuff, when I need to be . . . )

And when you quit ripplin,' the universe - MY universe is changed.

Now then.

Satisfaction will come when we know ourselves enough, trust ourselves enough, and believe in ourselves enough to express who and what we are. (It doesn't hurt anything to want to make money in the process, BTW. But that is but one measure . . .)

[A Story about the value of learning]
I took a leave of absence to take care of my mother while she was about the business of dying. Her brother, Uncle Waverly, loved her dearly, and came to be with her (at my house, complete with ailing wife, prescriptions that were written in another state) until we buried Mama.

Mama was 72. Uncle Waverly had to be at least 85 at the time.

One day I came downstairs and found him sitting motionless at the dining room table, pencil poised in mid-air, and a pensive-vacant-gone! expression on his face. (With old folks, you always think they mighta died on you, and I sho' nuff didn't need a dead one at the dining room table while a dying one was upstairs!)

"Whatcha doin' Unk?" I asked. (Please God! Let him answer!)

He "came back in the world" and said "Oh, Ah'm jes workin' out a problem or two here."

'Bout that time I noticed the mathematics textbook open on the table in front of him, and a notebook full of math symbols, in which he'd been writing.

"You takin' a class, Unk?"

"Naw, Chile" he said. Ah jes' works dese out when Ah gits too sad. It kinda relaxes mah mind."

He had absolutely no interest in "applying" his learning, and even less chance of getting a job based on what he was teaching himself. Dude got to 6th grade, as far as I can tell.

Yet he was solving first year college mathematics problems while his favorite sister was on the floor above dying, because, as he said "It kinda relaxes mah mind."

There is no useless knowledge.

NONE!

That we haven't discovered a way to apply what we know to achieve what we want, or that nobody celebrates the fact that we know stuff is entirely irrelevant.

Eternal learning is not a futile pursuit, and there is no useless knowledge.

'Sides, nobody c'n really stop learning. (I ain't sure 'bout dead people, having not had the experience, yet.)

Pick something that satisfies your soul. Five will get you ten that all the "useless" stuff you know will infuse that something with an appeal so special, that you'll smile everytime you remember that you created it.

And you just might make some money.

Marye