Level 1 presentation thoughts

I’m a 58 yr old geophysicist, and just now finished watching the level 1 “meeting”. As Mr. Hamilton mentioned in his intro,
I actually enjoyed and benefited from the typed responses format; I found that the pace was slow enough to take notes and
actually “think between the lines” while he was typing (although the *sound* of his typing wasn’t really necessary). When I
finish this note, I’m going back to read more thoroughly the passages in the 2nd package that he refers to.

Mr. Hamilton’s emphasis on the contrast between value *creation* and value *production* (as play vs work) touched a nerve in me.
I was led to think back over my career to 3 1/2 times (I’m currently designing #4…hence the 1/2) when I took a process that was
either tedious drudgery or prone to error and created an alternative that was faster, easier, and/or more accurate. As I think
back over how I felt as I developed these processes, I find that I was “driven” (internally) to do what was necessary to implement
my solutions, in spite of the difficulty involved. So, inventing and implementing solutions to “problems” that exist inside the
work flow of myself or my coworkers is what really “gets me going” (Friday Night Essence, anyone?).

That said, there has always existed a disconnect between these instances of “value creation” and getting paid for “creation” rather
than (or at least in addition to) the “production” of value. Indeed, my bosses recently *specifically* told me that my duties were
only “production”, and I was not to modify the approach I and the other minions have been given (they’ve known me >20 years). How then
does Neothink suggest turning an “atta-boy” into pocket change when the value I create becomes obvious?