Peter Thiel is always good for some controversy. Usually, I am a big fan of him, despite his libertarian opinions. But this time I have to disagree. Because it seems that he hates business suits, to a point that he does not want to invest on startup CEO wearing a suit. In Business Insider he says:
“Maybe we still would have avoided these bad investments if we had taken the time to evaluate each company’s technology in detail,” Thiel says in his book. “But the team insight — never invest in a tech CEO that wears a suit — got us to the truth a lot faster.”
But look at what he wears himself in that article!
Maybe it’s just a promotional stunt for Thiel’s new book, “Zero To One,” but even so, I believe it re-enforces polarization and avoids inclusion.
Indeed, what do vestimentairy aspects have to do with content? I even saw a post (hopefully jokingly) suggesting that at next FinTech innovation events no suites would be allowed. What a joke! I don’t think this works.
I am more and more convinced it is our responsibility to build bridges, and create inclusions instead of accentuating the differences.
I have heard similar vestimentairy comments about people within the FinTech innovation community saying things like: “he/she has not enough “streetcred” to be part of our community.”
What a crap, this whole “Streetcred” versus “Suites”!
The beauty is in the diversity and being able and willing to go beyond simplistic categorization of exclusion. Old world is about exclusion. New world is about inclusion. The new world is all about building bridges. About staying away from polarized positions. Because I believe the beauty is in between the extremes.
Somebody reacted to me: “but then you will end up with grey!” and I replied: “No, I don’t think so, I think we will end up with a rainbow of colours”.
At Innotribe Sibos 2014 in Boston (29 Sep – 2 Oct), our tagline is “Building Bridges”. In our facilitated sessions, we will use voting/scoring cards labeled “Ties” and “Tattoos”. But not to accentuate the differences, but to bring people together, help them understand each other’s point of view, and agreeing and documenting our intentions for progress.
The secret is in the inclusion of Ties and Tattoos
Petervan Studios 
I’m with you on this one Peter. Tie or no tie, it shouldn’t matter, it’s all about content, or so it should be. And to find out the content of one another’s ideas you have to listen first.
However, I notice that it is hard to stay away from polarisation, because when you’re building bridges, it means you are fully aware of the differences between each other, because building a bridge still leaves you and the others the choice to make use of it or not.
Also your ‘old world is about exclusion, the new world is about inclusion’ is actually introducing another polarisation between ‘old’ and ‘new’.
Anyway, my point is that this discussion should be irrelevant.
As a former “suit”– I’ve largely ditched the tie, but no tattoos in my future– I’m somewhere in-between. I’m solidly in the camp of inclusiveness and I don’t care what you wear, I care about your ideas, your actions and your results. But I don’t get worked up over Thiel’s comments. I see it is a very natural reaction to the many, many years and countless instances of the reverse.
For too long, people in suits and ties thought that their ideas MUST be superior to the kid’s who’s wearing the hoodie– because, why, look at how they look! I still remember a conversation with a bank CFO who didn’t want to work with “a bunch of guys in their garage” who turned out to have a very successful tech company…
This discussion should be irrelevant, and ideas, knowledge and action should be the primary consideration. However 90% of our decision making is emotionally driven, and because of emotional decision making process they are made instantly. Our rational brain then has to catch up or supplant an idea that is already embedded, often very deeply.
Everyone has their own prejudices and discriminations and it takes a strong will to overcome them and actually listen to logical argument. I often find that any ideas or discussion about innovation in any field tends to be difficult when it is talked about rationally, if we introduce an emotional component first we always have more success. That might mean the way we dress or the way we present information.
The simple answer, for me anyway, is horses for courses. When you are stood in front of a crowd of suits you don’t need to make more work for yourself in convincing them that you have a credible story to tell, and vice-versa. But I wish it wasn’t so.