I realise (after speaking with a few in the office today) that my explanation was not clear.

What I mean to say is that, at each stage of someone’s “learning journey” (institutional and/or experiential) they progressively improve their capability for analysis:
1) Perhaps, at the end of high school you are 3/10
2) Perhaps, at the end of undergrad, you are 5/10
3) Then, with the Guru Plan, you should be focused on improving this capability to 8/10

The value for us, as a company, in having everyone at 8/10 is that everyone will more easily/quickly/consistently see connections in separate data sets - for instance:
1) in terms of NEM data from different providers; and/or
2) to “read between the lines” when listening to clients talk about their business (to identify new product opportunities).

In simple terms, following through with a Guru Plan should drive your thinking deeper.

In this sense, what you focus on is almost secondary to the fact that you focus on your Guru Plan in the first place.

Just like a trading company will value a trader much more highly if they can more easily/quickly/consistently make these kinds of connections, so will we (as it will lead to business growth opportunities that we otherwise would have missed).

In terms of “making things understandable”, I obviously I come out with an “F” in this instance!

Not really.

It’s not that what you’ve said doesn’t make sense, only that what your post was about seems to have no real relevance to the Guru plans. The second point you made ties it back to the guru plans a little bit, but did not really explain why it is “absolute necessity for everyone to be committed to their Guru Plans.”

It seems to me that if anything a guru plan will create a number of specialists who will not have the broad knowledge required to have “a flexible, analytical mind”. Thinking critically is a prerequisite for being a programmer really. It is, for example, impossible to understand when to use a balanced binary tree and a linked list without being able to think critically.

1) In whatever areas people choose as the focus of their plan, the simple act of establishing and following through on the plan will stimulate a lot of analytical thought that will put us all in better positions to see new opportunities for us in the market (i.e. your “practical PhD” will continue from university in teaching you to think - and hence lead to more insight). This will increase everyone’s ability to be in a position where they:

have the soul of an investigator and a flexible, analytical mind. You must be able to think critically

2) It may be that someone actually chooses to focus their plan on topics such as the analysis of the electricity market (or on the clear display of quantitative/qualitative information), in which case there would be both direct or indirect benefit.

Make sense?