Q. What's brown and sticky?

A. A stick. Ho ho ho ho ho ho.

A good reason to believe in God is miracles, and I've seen plenty. For example, I think that was the first (and possibly last) joke I told on the radio, and fourteen years later I'm still working.

I also had something to say here about getting stuck, which I'm worried might sound a bit cheesy, but I figure after that introduction the only way is up, right?

So here goes. Writing here at the rate of one (epic) post per month has reminded me how easy it is to get bogged down waiting for ideas to crystallise to perfection before putting anything in writing, and ending up not getting much done. Well, "nothing" isn't strictly true - there's plenty that our brains get on with in the background which helps when we finally commit to writing, but we also get a lot out of the flow and discipline of writing little and often.

Stephen King's book "On Writing" gives marvellous insight into the habits of some of the best writers. Some make themselves write for a fixed time per day. Others write a fixed amount then stop, sometimes in the middle of a sentence. The important thing is giving yourself permission to start (it'll be fine!), then making yourself start (what's the worst that could happen?), then taking a healthy attitude to revising and improving what you've done (OK, it was pretty bad, but it's a good place to start the next draft!).

Many successful creative people compare creativity to a muscle - it has to be exercised to get stronger, and the most useful kind of exercise is little and often. I've found that the enforced stretch of a daily target isn't just productive at the time, it builds the ability to be creative on demand later. I used to run the "5 Times A Day Club" (motto "5 Times A Day Club members do it 5 times a day") for radio producers to come up with 5 new ideas for a radio show every day, 5 days a week for 5 weeks. It's quite easy to get going, but pretty hard to complete the course.

Not everybody does, but those that do find themselves transformed. They have gone through the trial of forcing their brains to perform, and often come up with their best ideas in their worst moments. If you can get used to that, you are forever more able to perform miracles on demand.

The foundations

The best manager I've ever known recommended a book to me called "First, Break All The Rules." Not being the best managee, it took me years to get around to reading it. I should have done it ages ago.

It's not just another book of theories about how to do stuff. I enjoy theories and ideas, but it's wise to be sceptical about these things, especially as it's so easy to be misled by ideas that sound promising and just so happen to fit with what we already think we need. Writing to please an audience isn't easy, but it can be very rewarding, especially if that audience's appreciation comes back in praise, affirmation, applause and maybe even a good living. In a culture that rewards popularity, attractive sounding theories with no basis in reality can thrive.

The writers of "First, Break All The Rules" took a radically different approach. Its basis is a 30 year long study by Gallup of thousands of workers and managers whose effectiveness could be measured by their achievements. Further study of the "great" managers revealed that their working methods frequently broke conventional wisdom. In summary, there are things which work and things which don't, in spite of a mass of theories and fine sounding ideas which have embedded into our culture, sometimes supporting what works and sometimes - as it turns out - contradicting or undermining it.

For example, for anyone who believes there is no "I" in team, read this book. Efforts to build effective businesses by compromising individuality and attempting to squeeze people into boxes bounded by standard competencies are, according to the study, doomed to failure. Instead, people have unique talents which can either be put to use or ignored, but are very hard to teach. If we don't respect this principle, we'll end up frustrating the people we work with. So I've been trying to think of a witty riposte to the "no 'I' in team" line. The pithiest is "but there is a 'u' in f*ck off", but it might be more helpful to explain briefly about the need for strong and complementary individuals to make an effective team, and perhaps add that there are two "I"s in "winning", and several more in "inimitable" and "invincible".

The account in "First, Break All The Rules" of how and why certain things have worked in practice is a revelation of the action of principles which underpin how people work - some would call these design principles - and the gap between these unchanging principles and the changing fashions of the world that looks to a new "next big idea" to sell new books and create new business.

Now I'm not against new ideas - far from it. But I prefer to build new things on a firm foundation, so they'll stand up longer, work better and serve more effectively. I find that foundation in God, the Creator and hence the Ultimate Creative Type, and in the Bible, God's revelation of principle and practice which has proved enduring in truth over thousands of years. As well as covering principles, the Bible tells the story of God's people and their struggles to follow principle, God's son Jesus and his leadership combining principle and practice, and God's new body of people we call the church, newly able to follow God by following Jesus with practical help. It may now be an old story, but it's still the world's bestselling book.

I'm not against change either - on a personal level I have to admit that following Jesus is a huge challenge which requires me to change over a long period of time. This is because I'm called to be like Jesus, like God, but I'm not yet. God doesn't change, so I have to. Campaigns founded in conservative moral values have earned some of the church has a reputation for disliking change, and I believe moral conservatism to be misguided. God's principles and the foundations of our sense of right and wrong don't change, and we don't need to defend what cannot be changed. Instead the church and its members have enough to work on with the challenge to personal transformation, and changing ideals into working faith through difficult practice. The church's message to the world has been given to it by its head, Jesus - go out and make changes by showing what love means, and in this way God will be recognised. This is a work in progress, a building not finished, or as early church teacher Paul put it, a race not yet won.

So if personal change is necessary, why are unchanging principles important? They are simply how things are. Furthermore, they are as necessary as a foundation is to a builder, or firm ground is to a runner - without them, it is very difficult to progress. Popular theories can come to nothing if, in practice, they conflict with how people really work. The world may not always be how we think it should be, but it is always how it is. Even the Neuro Linguistic Programmers with the most fervent belief in the personal and subjective nature of meaning and truth have a saying - "the map is not the territory". By this they mean that our perceptions only approximate reality. Many doubt, therefore, that people can know a firm foundation of absolute truth and stability, and if people can't know it then by all useful definition it may not exist. However, there is, outside of ourselves, an authoritative map of the world drawn by its maker, and we call it the Bible.

Controversial? Yes. Difficult? Certainly. Logically provable to be true? Not really (and I don't know what is). Capable of being proved in practice through application? I think so, at least that's my experience. I certainly recognise the difficulty, though - and so did Jesus. He described himself as both a keystone for a building and also a "stumbling block" - something which actually doesn't change even when someone has opted to join the church. If anything, growing awareness of God's principles has made me more likely to feel the pain of stumbling when I go ahead and rush into something stupid which trips me up. But I've come to believe that this is a useful thing which has produced some decent results I wouldn't have seen by going my own way.

Incidentally, at church this morning we were looking at how people are called with varying talents and gifts to complement each other, put these talents to work, and form a vibrant church full of life, transformation, love and God's blessing. This isn't organisation for the sake of religion - it's simply life the way were made for, as full as the God who loves us wants us to enjoy. In the Gospel according to Matthew, chapter 25 verses 14 to 30, there's a famous story Jesus told about people given different gifts and abilities. Each was expected to use them, and the sign that they had done so successfully would be that they would have more talents when they finished than when they started. I trust this account more than "First, Break All The Rules", so I'm still trying to figure out if there are conclusions in that book I disagree with, but I am sure of this - whatever measure of creative talent we have (and we all have some), we need to put it to use.

Exploring, using, investing and growing individuals' creative talent is where I want to be.

What about you? If you have high ambitions, how firm are your foundations? Do you recognise the difficulty of trying to get somewhere new without a clear map of where you are and where you need to be? Here endeth "the lesson"... but I wonder, what do you consider your foundations to be?