IBJNews

SURF THIS: Shoe story inspires at South by Southwest Conference

Jim Cota
April 2, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
Jim Cota

A couple of weeks ago, I had the opportunity to spend some time with more than 100 other people involved in the Indianapolis technology community. As a group, we were joining thousands of people from around the world who converged on Austin, Texas, for the annual South by Southwest (SXSW) Interactive Conference.

SXSW is really three conferences in one: film, interactive and music. The entire event runs for 10 days, opening with the interactive portion and closing with music, while the film portion overlaps each.

For first-timers and veterans alike, understanding the scope of the event can be daunting. For example, the Interactive Conference schedule showed, on the first day, 11 different things happening that started with ‘A.’ There were 37 events to choose from at 2 p.m. on Thursday afternoon. There were more than 70 venues for events, and that list excludes the multitude of local bars where companies of all sorts and sizes hosted parties throughout the week.

Speakers ranged from industry heavyweights to up-and-comers to total unknowns. Miller Lite, AOL and Chevrolet shared the spotlight with startups that had nothing more than an idea. Just deciding where to go, what to do and what to see is challenging.

At the convention center, the Hilton, and the Radisson, I watched panels discuss topics such as “Should Agencies Think Like Software Companies?” and individuals present their ideas about “Designing for Silence: Using E-mail for Good.”

I listened to Internet pioneers Tim O’Reilly, Jon Gruber and Jeffrey Zeldman. I had a fascinating conversation with producer-actress Ramona Pringle, who wondered why her intelligent, beautiful and successful female friends couldn’t find love, while people playing online games seemed to be doing just fine.

In a word, the scope of information was dizzying.

But the story that stands out above the rest belongs to Blake Mycoskey of Toms Shoes (www.toms.com).

Blake took a leave of absence from his software company a few years ago to travel to Argentina to deliver shoes to kids who didn’t have any. He and a few friends delivered 500 pairs on that trip, and he was moved by the reaction he received. Later that night, he lay awake bothered by one question: “What happens when these kids grow out of the shoes we’ve just given them?”

To Blake, the answer was obvious: They needed to bring back more shoes, but he had no idea how to do that, at first.

The result was Toms Shoes, a company founded on the idea that, for every pair of shoes they sell, they give a pair away. With nothing more than an idea, a few pairs of shoes, and a passion for helping in any small way he could, Blake set his sights on returning to Argentina within a year to deliver 250 pairs of shoes.

He was back inside of eight months with 10,000 to give away.

There were certainly several examples of serendipitous good fortune that aided him along the way, but his message is simple: Doing good is good for business. He challenged everyone in attendance to incorporate giving into their work, to find ways to infuse this sense of charity into our daily business practices. He’s living proof that all of us can make a difference—and, if we do, we’ll all be better for it.

He certainly had an impact on me, and I’m sure mine isn’t the only company now trying to find the best way to build this into what we do.

I encourage you to do the same and, if nothing else, at least consider buying from Toms the next time you’re looking for a new pair of shoes.

Incidentally, Blake announced Toms, the “one for one shoe company,” is evolving into the “one for one company.” The company will announce its new product line in June. It will be interesting to see where it goes from here.

Having experienced this lollapalooza of information overload, I now realize the real draw of SXSW is the convergence of the people. I found myself having meaningful, valuable conversations on a daily (hourly?) basis that have altered how I think about the industry, my business and the future.

Interestingly, most of these conversations were with other people from Indianapolis. Seems I had to travel 1,000 miles to set aside the time to talk with people from down the block. By the time I made my way to the airport to head back home, I was exhausted, but energized. I was ready to get back to Indy and back to work, but found I was also beginning to think about next year, and what I was looking forward to most about SXSW. For more on the event—or, rather, the events—visit sxsw.com.•

__________

Cota is creative director of Rare Bird Inc., a full-service advertising agency specializing in the use of new technologies. His column appears monthly. He can be reached at jim@rarebirdinc.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT