TESTING | personal development ||
a) novelty and
b) attractiveness, but
c) feasibility is low,
the possibility of implementation is high; investors will
be motivated to seek or supply the necessary resources.
The effectiveness of the NAF method of evaluation
comes from the fact that its criteria zero in on the qualities
possessed by genuinely promising ideas. Usually, com-
mercial propositions are evaluated in the abstract: “good,”
“interesting,” or “not very.” Many ideas are winnowed out
for various reasons, including because they are seemingly
difficult to implement. Such errors are easily avoided when
you analyze your situation with the NAF method.
What works out in practice?
It’s understandable that mega-projects in the develop-
ment of which strong countries, transnational corporations,
or billionaire philanthropists have interests should look
about like this:
a) novel
b) appealing
c) hard to accomplish.
Alternative fuels, drones, medicines for fatal illnesses,
51
and artificial intelligence would be examples of such proj-
ects. They take decades to accomplish and eat up unimag-
inable budgets. These are global, big-science ideas.
But what to do if you are far from saving the world, but
only want to build your own little business?
In that case, the results of your NAF test have to be
completely different:
a) relatively novel,
b) relatively attractive, and
c) easily accomplished.
After all, a small or mid-sized business doesn’t have
NATO’s budget at its disposal—it has to survive here and
now, often while still paying off debts.
Do you want to know about the small percentage of
ideas that win the golden moment of glory?
There’s that rare confluence of circumstances, one
chance in a million, when the idea you’ve tested will be
a) novel,
b) beautiful, and
c) actually accomplishable.
Apply the NAF methodology in practice, and you’ll find
that you can always tell t he “firebird” from the “chicken.”
ALPEON.COM