Posts tagged alignment
what is management?
May 21st
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
“Responsibility for one’s impacts is the oldest principle of the law” – Peter Drucker (New Realities, 1989, p. 87)
To me, in today’s business, manager management training is woefully lacking. Training simply equals “results” <with an additional emphasis on doing it while being politically correct and appropriately sensitive – to avoid litigation>.
And, no, I don’t believe this is a generational ‘thing.’
In other words I hear a lot of people suggest this upcoming generation of managers always needs to be told exactly what to do and what expectations are …well … in general I don’t agree. But even if I did those people are being told “results.”
It is the easiest (laziest) way to outline expectations.
To be fair to the lazy guidance organizations (or enterprises as Drucker calls them) … the enterprise also focuses on “results.” That ultimately translates into the fact you can be the biggest jerk manager in the world, the most anti social manager, one who exhibits gobs of poor management (team leadership skills) … but if you generate the enterprise holy grail <results> … well…then you are an “effective manager.”
And the fallback statement is almost always “not everyone is going to like you” as justification to answer the question of whether that person is ‘good manager material’ as everyone immediately points to ‘results achieved.’
Ok.
It’s bullshit.
And I know its bullshit.
And when your television and internet is lost for 4 days, and even though you may not be a heavy tv viewer, you end up having time to think and do things. So I ended up pulling a book off the shelf I haven’t read in a while. Peter Drucker’s “the new realities” from 1989. I have another post coming up inspired from the rereading but Drucker does a great job of simply outlining “what is management.”. And I have to tell you that a lot of us managers would do well to reread this book. And reread all early Drucker while you are at it. Oh. And company owners should too (by the way …they are also Management in case they have forgotten).
As P. Druddy <as Drucker was called by his closest friends> said:
Management has to be accountable for performance. But how is performance defined? How is it to be measured? How should it be enforced? And to whom should management be accountable? Management needs to face the fact they represent power and power has to be accountable … and it has to be legitimate <he means to a greater social good>. Management has to face up to the fact that they matter <in a societal responsibility way>.
What is management?
Is it a bag of techniques and tricks? A bundle of analytical tools like those taught n business schools? There are important as a thermometer and anatomy is important to a physician. But the evolution and history of management, its successes as well as its problems, teach that management is above all else a very few essential principles:
- Management is about human beings. The task is to make people capable of join performance, to make their strengths effective and their weaknesses irrelevant. We depend upon management for our livelihoods. And our ability to contribute to society also depends on management of the organizations in which we work as it does on our own skills, dedication and effort.
- Because management deals with the integration of people in a common venture it is deeply embedded in culture. What managers do in Germany, United Kingdom, United states, Japan or Brazil is exactly the same. How they do it may be quite different. This one of the basic challenges managers face is to find and identify those parts of their own tradition, history and culture that can be used as management building blocks. Every enterprise requires commitment to common goals and shared values. Without such commitment there is no enterprise, there is only a mob. The enterprise must have simple clear and unifying objectives. The mission of the organization has to be clear enough and big enough to provide common vision. The goals that embody it have to be clear, public and constantly reaffirmed. Management’s first job is to think through, set, and exemplify those objectives, values and goals.
- Management must enable the enterprise and each of its members to grow and develop as needs and opportunities change. Every enterprise is a learning and teaching institution. Training and development must be built into it on all levels – training and development that never stop. 
- Every enterprise is composed of people with different skills and knowledge doing many different toes of work. It must be built on communication and on individual responsibility All members need to think through what they aim to accomplish and make sure their associates know and understand that aim. All have to think through what they owe others and make sure that others understand. All have to think through what they need from others and make sure that others know what is expected of them.
- Neither the quantity of output not the ‘bottom line’ is by itself an adequate measure of the performance of management and enterprise. Market standing (brand & reputation), innovation, production, development of people, quality, financial results are all crucial to an organizations performance and to its survival. Just as a human being needs a diversity of measures to assess his or her health and performance an organization needs a diversity of measures to assess its health and performance.
- Finally, the single most important thing to remember about any enterprise is that results exist only on the outside. The result f a business is a satisfied customer. The result of a healthy organization is a contribution to society. The result of a hospital is a healthy patient. The result of a school is a student who has learned something and puts it into practice at some later date. Inside an enterprise there are only costs.
Some thoughts <from me>.
While there are some gems I may come back to at some point … like “without such a commitment you only have a mob” and “make their strengths effective and their weaknesses irrelevant” … here are my rant-like thoughts:
• “individual responsibility.” Hmmmmmmmmmmmm it seems like we abuse this in today’s business world. We want to “empower employees” and expect them to assume “proactive individual responsibility” and yet we are not fulfilling some of Drucker’s other principles. Where is our responsibility to them? Where is the training? Where is the development? It seems to me that responsibility goes both ways <and, no, it is not just a paycheck from management side> and to ask one without offering the other is a medieval serf mentality.
• Organization ‘health’ …. When is the last time you heard this discussed in in anything other than financials (or some derivative of financials)? I cannot remember the last time anyone discussed culture and/or people’s true happiness as a measure of organization health … well … at least until maybe ‘we have hit the numbers.’
That said. “Management is about human beings.” Ok. Nowhere in that sentence do I see “numbers,” “results” or “profitability”. Am I foolish enough to believe that those three things aren’t important? Nope <I am foolish in other ways>. But his point is subtle. Maybe too subtle. If you manage the human beings well, effectively and they are happy, those three little words he excluded from that sentence will happen. THAT is why the sentence reads “management is about human beings.”
And.
I love the last thought.
The truly important problems managers face do not come from technology or politics; they do not originate outside of management and enterprise. Think about that …
“They are problems caused by the very success of the management itself.”
Drucker is actually suggesting that success breeds problems. How about that? What a great point. A point I am relatively sure that today’s managers do not think of. Today it seems like success breeds “process everyone should follow.”
Anyway.
Ignore my comments if you would like.
But don’t ignore Drucker’s comments.
life formulas
May 9th
Posted by Bruce in Personal & Nonsensical
Life is not as simple as it seems. Or maybe it isn’t as complicated as it seems.
Shit.
Maybe its both … at exactly the same time.
I cannot remember where I found all these awesome “life formulas” but I love the way they take complex life things and simplify them into basic equations (note: I apologize to the creator for not being able to source).
And in their incredibly obvious simplicity there is a nuanced complexity that makes you think about the truth they contain.
The first one I ever saw was the truth equation.
Truth. What I think happened divided by what really happened.
Brilliant.
It got to the core truth behind … well … truth. And it makes you wonder a little why there isn’t a class somewhere in maybe high school where they teach you stuff like this. Or at least make you think like this. It may seem silly at first glance but it is a really interesting exercise.
And back to truth?
What you think divided by what really happened.
By dividing it can equal, diminish what you think or actually be bigger by such a margin it actually marginalizes what you originally thought.
Awesome.
And when I see Life defined by formulas like this I begin to think about what makes 100%.
Well.
It actually made me begin by thinking about “giving 110%.” Which is actually kind of silly when you think about it. Is it really possible to actually give more than 100%? <no>
And what the hell is more than 100%? (unless you are bionic you cannot answer that)
I do know as I think about this 110% thing it makes some want to bring one of these formulas along with me to a meeting and if someone suggests you to give over 100% (that infamous 110%) maybe I would force them to show us how to do just that mathematically.
When someone does say that … aren’t they really saying “give me 100% <because I know you are juggling things and I need you to focus on this>.”
So why can’t we just tell the truth and say “c’mon … its not extra effort … its just focus. Focus 100% on this.” <albeit it doesn’t sound as inspiring or leader like or gung ho-ish … yeah … I just typed ‘ho-ish’>.
Anyway.
From there I actually began thinking about the whole 100% we are supposed to give in life.
100% is tricky. Is it defined by effort, focus, the best of our abilities or the best we can do <at that time>?
Whew. Now THERE are some choices for ya.
Life is a constant juggling game <or a balancing act>. There’s always balancing that needs to be done. And there are always tradeoffs.
Ah.
But.
I think there is a difference between juggling and balancing.
Juggling is all about keeping track of a bunch of things … all up in the air.
Balancing is all about … well … balancing … evening things out.
It seems to me that is one is more controlled chaos-like <juggling> … and the other is a more prioritizing of actions <balancing>.
Wow. Makes me think of whether I am a juggler or a balancer. And that makes my head hurt.
Regardless.
Aw. Anyway <quit babbling Bruce>.
There is a simplicity that these formulas give us in thinking about life.
Disappointment being expectation divided by reality.
- Which suggests it is our own inability to manage our expectations that create a sense of disappointment. Makes you think a little, huh?
Shock being expectation minus expectation.
- The unequivocalness <that isn’t really a word> of this is brilliant.
Modern art being the belief you could do it plus the fact you didn’t.
- The formula nicely builds, instead of divides or subtracts, to heighten the value
The slight cynicism built into diamonds being forever … balanced by whether you are a jewel thief (awesome)
Oh.
And obligation.
This one is fabulous.
Starts with do. Just the action itself. Add on “the right thing” so value increases by doing the right thing … and then plus or minus the amount of guilt.
Very very nice.
I actually see a great class session for young people somewhere in this life formula idea. The ability to simplify the challenges, the decisions, the actions in life into equations. It is a nice way to be able to point out some complex critical thinking in life.
In the end, while it may seem silly, I think it is a good and interesting exercise.
Particularly if you are juggling, or balancing, a bunch of crap and making so many judgment calls your head seem like it is going to explode … these simple formulas, in a really weird way, provide perspective.
Maybe you have an obligation to give this a shot if you feel overwhelmed with life.
Because maybe, in their simplicity, maybe you find more balance.
And that … I am pretty sure in my pea like brain … is a good thing.
finagle’s Law
Apr 30th
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
Well. I imagine I am way behind the rest of the cool people <who already know what finagle’s law is> but I just discovered it. Maybe because I had always known it as Murphy’s Law.
The generalized or `folk’ version of Murphy’s Law, fully named “Finagle’s Law of Dynamic Negatives” and usually rendered “Anything that can go wrong, will” (source: Urban Dictionary)
Finagle’s Law comes from science fiction author Larry Niven who, in several stories, depicted a frontier culture which celebrated a religion <or a running joke> which involved the worship of the dread god Finagle … and his mad prophet Murphy <hence the source of ‘murphy’s law’>.
Ok. About Finagles ´Law <before I get to the point of this little writeup>. It is an amazingly cool extraordinary mixture of cruel logic … as well as somewhat scarily indicative of everyday life. Just in case you didn’t know here is Finagle’s logic:
- What we have is not what we need.
- What we want is not what we need.
- What we need is impossible to get.
- You can get hold of this information for a much higher price then you are prepared to pay.
Ok. Here is the coolest thought. One of my favorite blogs, 50topmodels, actually wondered if Finagle´s Law got it all wrong and reexamined it as … Yhprum´s Law (Yhprum is Murphy backwards).
They actually analyzed it under the theory that ‘everything that can work, will work’ quoting Richard Zeckhauser <Harvard> “sometimes systems that should not work, work nevertheless.“
Ok. It is that last thought that made me sit up and think and decide to write.
Why?
Well. “Systems that should not work …do.” How often do people design perfect systems in the workplace, under the guise of ‘this is the way its done’ and, ultimately, it is just another inefficient process & system? Or maybe it is easy to do so everyone just does things going through the motions? Or the perfect system is <gasp> measured on its efficiency and therefore everyone simply tries to ‘hit the measurement numbers”?
On the other hand.
Someone else builds a system and has everyone working within this system that has those ‘people who designed perfect systems’ scratching their heads and saying that will never work … and, uh oh, it does work.
Yhprum´s Law. Huh? Well. Organizations are living organisms.
And just as placebos can work (lets call that the power of the mind) … a system that should not work … well … does. Why?
Because whether things work or not is often up to the people. And people are inconsistent in that they consistently do unexpectedly great things. In addition sometimes mistakes become stepping stones to blinding success. Oh. And the systems that shouldn’t work gain significant improvements thru some trial & error while the perfect systems remain … well … stagnant – never improving. Maybe it is that last thought that is so controversial in my thinking.
Perfection is often a thief. It steals fresh thinking.
Business, in general, like life, is messy. Sure. We seek perfection. It is kind of like the holy grail of ‘job well done.’
Here is the funny thing about attaining perfection.
Realistically we should be seeking to immediately change, rather than replicate, if we actually stumble upon it. ‘Doing it right’ is simply a level. And attaining levels of ‘perfection’ is good but also breeds an aspect of complacency or rote. And unless you are putting together a car, or a bomb <as an example>, in my mind we should always be aware the process is a means to an end.
Another sad thing about perfection. Nothing is ever really perfect. So when we put the label on something we are already in a bad place. As noted in alternative phrases for Finagle’s Law … let’s maybe call it “not quite the right thing.” It seems to me that systems & process reside most often closest to that phrase. And to a perfectionist that is bad and to others it is just not quite the right thing.
Ok. As for systems that shouldn’t work? the imperfect systems? The power of the mind suggest that everything that can work will work … sometimes better than others.
Oh.
And if you have that attitude .. an attitude to, rather than finding the flaws, instead focusing on the mistakes made … in my mind you end up seeking to better the system.
Ok. Moving on.
There is another aspect to Murphy’s Law … “If there are two or more ways to do something, and one of those ways can result in a catastrophe, then someone will do it.”
Now. If you think about that from a logic perspective … this suggests <for example> that if someone plugs in a toaster backwards and it fries itself, the problem isn’t just that some idiot plugged it in backward, but that it was able to be plugged in backwards in the first place.
In other words … the flaw isn’t in the person … but rather the design. And people just make mistakes <and are not flawed>.
If you believe that … then maybe when mistakes are made we shouldn’t be blaming people but rather seeking to design a better system. Not ‘perfect’ systems but systems with the minimum opportunity for flaws. Call it constant improvement.
If you don’t believe that then you end up simply assuming people will make mistakes, some big … some small … some stupid <or some derivative of stupid> … some smart <yeah … you can still do something really smart and make a mistake>. As I stated earlier … systems are a means to an end therefore using Finagle’s Law everyone should be focusing more on the people aspect. And not in a “you suck” perspective but rather a deeper understanding for why and how mistakes are made.
Mistakes are part of life.
I actually believe more managers should have the chart above in their offices and when mistakes are made identify which aspect the mistake characterizes. It may make us better managers and it may make for better systems (and certainly better managers of people).
Anyway.
The true Finagle’s Law is much more twisted than “anything that can go wrong will go wrong.” The Law also allows for things going well. It’s like as if the universe is merely lulling you into a false sense of security before proceeding to screw you. It also allows for things that can’t go wrong … going wrong <and within Finagle’s Law this counts as Gone Horribly Right.>
Regardless.To end this I wanted to share some last thoughts on Finagle’s Law. The law owes its existence more or less entirely to the Rule of Drama, and is especially common in Crapsack Worlds where things that do go wrong tend to go wrong in the worst possible way.
Finagle’s Law also suggests that Life has a pretty warped sense of humor in that it is obsessed with making your life as difficult and humiliating as possible.
On a slightly serious note … I imagine the potential for danger in everyday Life, within the Law, can do one of two things:
- make you scared to do anything
- make you assume that you cannot ever do anything right
I could write gobs about both of those but instead I am hoping that what I have written about Finagle’s Law suggests that successfully navigating Life takes some flexibility. If perfection is your thing … well … Finagle will be your constant companion and friend.
Take Life with a grain of salt. Things go wrong. Even when they aren’t supposed to. And things go right. Even when they aren’t supposed to.
Last. And just so you are fully aware of ‘the Law’ here are optional expressions of Finagle’s Law <so you recognize them>:
- A Simple Plan
- Butterfly of Doom
- Consolation Backfire
- Cosmic Plaything
- Disaster Dominoes
- Destructive Saviour
- Deus Angst Machina when taken Up to Eleven
- Everything Trying to Kill You in videogames
- Failsafe Failure
- Failure Is the Only Option
- The Fun in Funeral
- Gave Up Too Soon
- Law of Disproportionate Response
- Inverse Law of Utility and Lethality
- It Got Worse
- Magnum Opus Dissonance
- Mistimed Revival
- Murphy’s Bed
- Murphy’s Bullet
- My Car Hates Me
- Not Quite The Right Thing
- Out with a Bang
- Phlebotinum Breakdown
- Ashes to Crashes
- Doomed New Clothes
- Watch the Paint Job
- The Precious, Precious Car
- Random Number God
- Retirony
- Springtime for Hitler
- Tempting Fate
- Unspoken Plan Guarantee
- Useless Superpowers
- What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
- You Can’t Thwart Stage One
- Your Princess is in Another Castle
Anyway.
Finagle’s Law. Murphy’s Law. Or. My favorite? “Not quite the right thing.” Life is perfectly imperfect. You can either accept it or end up in a loony bin some day.
that I have not been
Apr 25th
Posted by Bruce in Favorite Quotes
“’pray for nothing, say every night in bed, I have been a king, I have been a slave, nor is there anything, fool, rascal, knave, that I have not been, yet upon my breast a myriad of hearts have lain.” Mohini Chatterjee by Yeats
If I had not known that Yeats was enamored with mysticism and reincarnation I … well … would have ended up writing what I am going to write.
My first thought?
It has to do with living life however the cards are dealt … and regardless of whether you are a fool or an intellect … you will find someone ‘upon your breast will lay’ <that means you will have love & loves>.
I like that.
Doesn’t matter who you are and what you do … there will always be someone for you.
Oh.
And beyond having someone love you <assuming you allow it and you stop worrying about whether you are good enough> … there is a really big thought in there that there are lives within lives … and I imagine another way of saying that is … you can live several lives within one lifetime.
That’s what I think when I read this.
That’s a lot but I think it is a lot of good stuff.
Yeats wrote a lot about his belief that the soul of man is eternal. And that existence is cycles within cycles. I may not buy that whole “eternal” thing but I do believe that Life is cycles within cycles. It really only has one true beginning and end … but multiple starts and stops … and detours and exits … and … well … you get it. Cycles within cycles.
With that in mind I wanted to end this post with the conclusion of the poem used in the beginning … “men dance on deathless feet.”
Birth-hour and death-hour meet,
Or, as great sages say,
Men dance on deathless feet.
Now that is awesome.
You are either living or dying.
But your footsteps on Life will never die.
Oh.
One last thought <regarding this quote>.
If you truly believe that you live many lives within one life … well … then isn’t it worth setting aside desire and ambition as secondary to whatever type of life you want to lead?
Let me leave you with that thought.
turn your back on what you know
Apr 20th
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
“To truly learn turn your back on what you know … leave it all behind.
To truly know the world you must immerse yourself in what is not your knowledge.” – Tibetan thought
Oh my.
Immerse yourself in what is not your knowledge.
That may be one of the most difficult things in the world to do.
It is natural to gravitate to what is most comfortable … that which you know and that which is the easiest for you to do.
I imagine many of us do this just as part of every day life and tell ourselves we are still learning as we bump into others who do something different and watch from afar.
But that is having one foot in what you know and maybe dipping a toe into what you don’t.
That isn’t truly ‘learning.’
At some point in order to truly learn you must … well … leave it all behind.
And that is difficult. Really difficult.
I know I cheat. How? I use young people. I try and place the situation in their hands, step back and listen. And I don’t judge <or eliminate possibilities>. It is my way of ‘immersing in what is not your knowledge.’ In their inexperience <within my own experience> they share a world of experiences in which I have no knowledge.
Oh.
I may think I do. But I don’t. It is a difficult thing for most of us to do … turn your back on what you know.
But I find it easier as long as I keep this other Tibetan thought in mind:
“Is being an investigator the opposite of being an artist? Maybe it is just that some mysteries require an artist not an investigator. That an artist has different ways to get to the truth.” – Tibetan thought
The path to truth is not just one path. Sure. I may know one ‘truth.’ But in knowing that I know … well … one thing. And I am sure many people are fine with the knowledge of one truth. And I do not begrudge them of that. For one truth is, at its core, a truth. And I believe everyone needs some truth in their life.
Does knowing more than one truth make someone better? Yikes. I don’t believe I could be a good judge of that. Because knowing multiple truths can be confusing … and in confusion someone just may not end up in a better place. I guess I would suggest that if multiple truths put you on more solid ground than go for it.
But the real point to this is that someone without YOUR knowledge is more likely to teach you something completely new than someone who shares your knowledge.
And, ultimately, if you are trying to understand the world, or simply solve a problem, to truly learn the answer … you may have to turn your back on everything you know.
what will become of us?
Apr 13th
Posted by Bruce in Favorite Quotes
“because of you the days to come will be better than the days before this one.”
So.
I have been participating in another TED discussion with regard to the youth and education and a distressingly pessimistic view of who they will be and what they will become <a post/rant/observation is forthcoming on that soon>. That discussion has certainly made me sit back and think. And much of it has also clearly brought to the forefront why the project global generation web based education initiative has not gained traction.
Anyway. All the pessimism reminded me of something I had read.
Because sometimes you read something that is almost so perfect that you want to store it away and use yourself at some later date.
Thankfully I have a blog where I can write them down and post them so when I want to use it I can just send someone a link.
This is about telling a child what they can expect from life.
What will become of us? (asked the children to her mother) …
—-
“What I imagine is that you will live magnificent lives.
And that you will live lives of quiet disappointment.
You won’t be able to explain why. But there will always be some failure. You will strive for greatness and justice and you will help to make our nation wondrous.
You will be great but you will also fail at many of the things dearest to you.
And people – even ones you love – will disappoint you.
You will know great loves and you will have dear friends and you will be part of something bigger than you.
You will never be alone. And yet some of those you hold dearest will betray you, envy you over things they perceive you have that they do not. At times – even within a crowd and noise – you will feel strangely lost.
You will find gifts that are special to you but you will never understand why such things were thrust upon you.
You may curse the world for always spinning never pausing and yet this motion will be the music to which you dance.
In the end, I hope, you will come to feel that none of the life you lead could have been any different, any better or worse. You will find meaning in accepting many things you cannot understand or change. And if you live a long life you will grow tired and that will be alright because you will have done the best you can do during your lives.
You will take into the future all that has ever been for us. Because of you the days to come will be better than the days before this one.” – Mena Akaran
Can you ever imagine telling a child anything better?
“because of you the days to come will be better than the days before this one.”
Every child should hear this.
And, frankly, I wish more people would feel this way about our youth rather than bitching about what they are not or what they cannot do.
judgment
Mar 28th
Posted by Bruce in Favorite Quotes
“Statistics are no substitute for judgment.” - Henry Clay
I was tempted to call this “when statistics get in the way of a good decision.”
Let me get this out of the way upfront. I like numbers. I have an Economics undergraduate and accounting accounted for several of my good grades in college. And I like that if you weave your way through numbers they can tell you things that can inspire the ‘real’ thought. And I like the fact that numbers can sway an “I think” based opinion to a “here is what I know” based opinion.
Anyway. I purposefully used Henry Clay (so think maybe 1800 as to date of the quote) so that some contemporary statistical gwonk doesn’t come out of the woodwork saying something along the lines of “statistics have only evolved in the last 20 years” or something crazy like that. “We have never had better data to make decisions from than today!” is a statement that was as true in 1800 as it is in 2012 and as it was in 100 BC.
This is an eternal issue.
People have looked at statistics since the time good ole Adam started calculating how many apples fell out of the tree to figure out how often he was gonna get laid.
Henry Clay just had the luck to be quoted on it.
So before I begin my rant let me say, yes, I get decision-making is a cognitive process … where the outcome is a choice between alternatives. And that numbers can play a role.
I also get that people have different preferences as to how to approach decision making and that there will always be a varying degree between thinking and feeling and numbers and experiential.
And I do believe all decisions, at least the worthwhile ones, have to incorporate some sense of logical decision-making. Logic in that we seek to exclude <or marginalize> emotions <as well as personal biases> and try to use only rational methods <perhaps even mathematical/statistical tools> with the intent to isolate what is typically called the decision utility.
I get all that.
Oh.
And by the way … I hope no one tries to dump the whole “left brain/right brain” mumbo jumbo on me because science has already proven that is an urban myth (yeah … I will write something on that). There is no right brain left brain.
There is no “numbers are facts” crap.
Yeah. On that last one ….
“Torture numbers, and they’ll confess to anything.” – Gregg Easterbrook
Numbers don’t lie.
But they also don’t tell you what to do. In saying that let me suggest why I believe this statistical ‘torturing numbers’ issue has been an issue for eternity.
The thought.
Many people who don’t want to make decision … okay … maybe they just get nervous with accountability … use statistics to make the decision … not inform a decision.
Why?
Well. There are boatloads of reasons but suffice it to say that without using numbers … you are getting paid (or at least judged) not just on decision-making skills but on your judgment skills. That means accountability is solely on you (the person).
Think about that. But also think about this (as you get judged). The following is an explanation on decision making using statistics:
Decision Making Under Uncertainty: Statistical Decision Theory
I’d like to start today’s lecture with a reminder about something I said a long time ago when we finished our survey of population viability analysis. Population viability analysis is best seen not as a way of garnering precise predictions about the fate of a population but as a way of ensuring that all relevant life-history variables have been considered, that they have been considered efficiently, and that we have a reasonable sense of the trajectory that the population is likely to follow if current trends continue. It provides a way of structuring our thinking about the problem. That’s precisely the way I think we should regard the approach to decision making that I’m about to describe. One of the most difficult tasks facing conservation biologists, as I have emphasized repeatedly, is that decisions must often, perhaps usually, be made in the face of woefully inadequate data.
(ba bla blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa)
So.
From that incredibly dry mind numbing analysis of statistical decision theory they dropped this little bombshell in toward the end of the ‘how to use statistics’:
There is the recognition from statistics that there are two types of errors we can make in evaluating an hypothesis:
- We may say that something is happening when it isn’t (Type I), or
- We may say that something isn’t happening when it is (Type II).
Say what?
The capacity of the human mind for swallowing nonsense and spewing it forth in violent and repressive action has never yet been plumbed. – Robert Heinlein
(I wish I had written this in response to the statistical theory thingamajig)
Ok. What that means (to those of you solely dependent upon statistics). You may use the statistics to prove something is or isn’t happening … and it may not be happening or it is happening <anyone now wonder why statisticians are avoided?>.
Anyway. I will back off the ‘accountability through numbers folk’ for a second.
Trying to give statistical-using people the benefit of the doubt … let’s think that maybe when you are stressed out, frankly, any option seems pretty good … especially one which seems factual (numbers seem more factual to people … despite the fact that one you start combining them they become less factual).
I imagine it is like someone dying of thirst and drinking from whatever looks like the safest pool.
Uh oh. But some pools are poisoned.
And, unfortunately bout this stress theory of mine, when the adrenaline from the stress wears out, you realized that the statistics you leaned on for the decision YOU made were all bullshit (or someone points out they were bullshit when you actually invest some energy trying to explain them later).
And you are screwed.
Because of statistics (although people will inevitably try the “but the numbers told us what to do”).
Ok.
Here is the good news (relatively speaking). You can do something about the stress decision making leaning on numbers thing.
Most people, given enough experience, become aware that stress can do a number on your decision-making skills. How do I know? Well. Of course someone has done a study on it.
Scientists have some statistical based thinking about exactly how stress screws up your ability to make decisions.
According to ScienceDaily, psychologists Mara Mather and Nichole R. Lighthall (who completed a review of the literature on stress and decisions) they found that, even though you’d think being stressed would turn people into pessimists and therefore more careful … stress actually makes us focus too much on the upside of our decisions.
Says Mather, “Stress seems to help people learn from positive feedback and impairs their learning from negative feedback.”
Uh oh.
That sucks (maybe you cannot do something about the bad stress decision making thing). Nuts.
I guess my point in bringing up the study is that maybe under stress it is easier to grab on to statistics to make a decision <all the while thinking positive thoughts> and therefore avoided the judgment call on your own.
Uh oh (again).
Look.
I was wrong. You can do something about this judgment thing.
Judgment isn’t easy … but at some point you are accountable … or you should be … and hiding behind statistics just won’t hack it.
As Yoda would say “the answers are within you.”
The key to making a smart decision is giving yourself the time to gather all the information you need <and, yes, that can include statistics> and move forward with whatever proactive thinking method approach you have some confidence in … and make a decision.
A daunting decision doesn’t have to put you in an analysis paralysis death grip.
Use a logical decision-making method to help you evaluate your choices and pull the trigger.
And make a decision.
And not let statistics make the decision for you.
Here is the net on statistics: It helps us formalize and categorize our thinking to make sure that we have considered all relevant possibilities.
Quantitative analysis should be viewed as explorations of possibilities … not hard predictions.
I believe being able to use numbers, and statistics, to explore possibilities is truly a skill <or an art>.
Not everyone can do it. Ok. Well. That’s not true. Anyone can do it … it’s just that not everyone can do it well.
Knowing what to do with the numbers is an art.
In fact, just to circle back to the main topic of this post, let’s call it … well … judgment.
Yeah. Judging numbers. Weighing the importance of one number versus another as well as learning which numbers are unimportant.
And there are even fewer people who have mastered that art.
But. That doesn’t mean everyone should get bogged down in statistics and numbers because if you do, yup, you can torture any decision you want out of numbers.
And, frankly, you are lying to yourself if you believe that is a decision. That is simply being a coward (in the decision making world).
You have deferred decision to ‘numbers.’ And inevitably you are deferring accountability.
Sound harsh?
As harsh as this?
“I notice increasing reluctance on the part of marketing executives to use judgment; they are coming to rely too much on research, and they use it as a drunkard uses a lamp post for support, rather than for illumination.” - David Ogilvy
Harsh.
Sound like truth?
Yup.
dirty windows
Mar 5th
Posted by Bruce in Favorite Quotes
“And I do not assume that my experience is universal. It is simply mine, and I offer it to you as a window, dirty though that window may be.” – opticalnoise (a blogger)
Sometimes young people say things with the type of panache you only expect from older people.
This young blogger wrote the quote and I liked it enough to use it.
Experiences are personal (unless there is enough similar critical mass to make it quasi-universal).
And in the business world I often find myself debating with people when they offer their experience as …. well … not dirty but rather … well … universal (and that is an issue).
Two thoughts.
- Research of one is not research.
- The odds that the person relating the experience (in business management) actually reflects mainstream American (or any mainstream consumer) is so low that even Las Vegas wouldn’t take them odds.
Bottom line? Realize that your experience is most likely not universal (particularly when discussing business … but beware on personal advice also).
This may seem like a no brainer, but I can’t tell you how often this basic rule is ignored. I think a large part of it is that is because people personalize their experience (or their wife/husband’s) that they cannot fathom that no one else feels exactly the same way.
Anyway.
All that said I am now going to share my dirty window experience list (although I actually stole the thought from a blogger named arina and put my own dirt on some different windows).
I created the list because I almost have it all figured out (yeah … not so much). Thinking back from my personal experiences I believe there are a few universal experiences (let’s call them windows we all peer through on occasion just for the sake of this post) that seemingly work without fail throughout life:
- The Karma window
Karma is this random thing floating out there in the ether that somehow impacts cause & effect on all of us. Simplistically … for every action there is a reaction. Yeah. Every action <and thought just in case you have forgotten>. It is amazing to me how often we forget that our actions always, yes, always, have repercussions.
Whatever force we exert … things we send into the ether around us in the form of our thoughts, feelings and actions … comes back to us in kind (if not sometimes multiplied). There are no exceptions and you get no free passes. Oh. Please note I included thoughts & feelings in the “cause” column. That is truly the Karma aspect. Somehow … someway … thoughts & feelings enter into the ether as some type of tangible force (or ’cause’) that often creates a nuclear-sized effect. Never forget that.
- The Life window
This may actually be a different pane of glass in the Karma window. We are all connected by invisible glass in one window … called the Life window. When we hurt someone or when we pass judgment on someone … we are affected as well. Sorry. Life, for some reason, just likes to keep everything balanced.
What that means is you are probably better off (or more likely to be happy) if you attach what you care about (and Life objectives) with good intentions for other people. If you look at it selfishly, when your objectives benefit other people there is less difficulty in achieving them. Oh. And others will assist you. If you don’t look at it selfishly … well … just assume more good shit will happen in your life if you do good shit (and think good shit about other people).
- The Creation window
Everyone is creative and every one has unlimited creative potential. It is just how you define creation. Create art. Create financial success. Create the most awesome balance sheet your company has ever had. Create a kid that will be the next president. Everyone one of us has the potential to create some type of greatness. You just have to make sure the window is open and the blinds are open. Oh. And make sure you know that you actually have that window.
- The Neutrality window
Life is neutral. It does not play favorites. This is probably a derivative of the balance thing. In the absence of good & evil Life probably wouldn’t choose sides but rather stay in bed taking a nap. Life does not decide someone is more important or less significant. Life never randomly punishes. Life never randomly rewards. Nothing is random but pretty much (with some notable exceptions) everything is earned. Everyone is given an opportunity to learn something (which ultimately is the key opportunity for personal success). Everyone pretty much has a chance in Life (albeit it is tougher for some people than others).
- The Action window
This is the window right next to the neutrality window. In the absence of individual action Life will do its own things in its own time. Life does not just happen to us. It requires our active participation. Remember. Life is neutral. If you are inactive … Life is inactive <with you>. It will not take interest in you until you take interest in it. It is too busy paying attention to people paying attention to it.
- The You cannot Ignore ‘What is’ window
“What is” will evolve into “what will be” when ignored. That I guarantee. In other words … you will continue to receive what Life gives you even if you refuse to accept it. If we ignore our problems, they will only get bigger and more urgent. If we ignore opportunities, they will cease to exist. If we refuse to learn lessons from the past, larger, more serious, lessons will be given to us. If we obsessively pursue a goal or idea that is not right for us, it will elude us until we accept that we can live without it.
- The Stagnancy window
This one is the opposite side of the Action window pane. And this one is a warning. Stagnancy is addictive. What I mean by this is, if the view from your window is awesome, you can find yourself sitting there doing nothing but enjoying it. So. This I guarantee … it may be a beautiful view today but if you don’t move … and just stay there … it will lose its appeal. Stagnancy is the death of inner growth and happiness (or seeing beauty in life). When you do not use skills you lose them. Similar, without continuing effort in personal growth, you are doomed to fall back as Life continues moving. What happens then? Obsolescence. Life, and people, and thoughts, and whatever …. just pass you by.
- The Impatient window
Impatience is sneaky in life. Sometimes it can disguise itself as ambition or ‘goals’ or things like that. Because the allure, and desire, of success is something we all desire. And we may like the idea of instant gratification or easy success or short cuts … but deep down all of us know that things of value have to be earned. And that is where impatience rears its ugly head. You are peddling as hard as you can toward success … but as look through this window you are impatient, and it is challenging, because you want it NOW … but this window is about patiently waiting for the reward to come in its own time. Ok. This doesn’t mean you should be scared to do things nor shouldn’t be ambitious … this is more about having some common sense. Good things typically don’t come easy. If it were all that easy anyone could do it. Maybe learn to be patiently impatient for success.
- The Reality-based Optimism window
Here is a reality <2 of them actually>. Negativity begets negativity. If you think negatively I can guarantee you will never attain happiness. Uh oh. But. If you always think optimistically I can guarantee you will always be disappointed (sorry about that).
So can you ever be happy? Yup. By being realistic, but being optimistic. A truth in this window? Good things DO happen to good people. Well. Let me be specific … that is ‘good people who exhibit some reality-based goodness’. By the way … for anyone who wants to debate the view from this window …. research (published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) predicted in simulated models that generosity/trust pays. Mathematically they found it pays to be trusting in the long run even though you will sometimes be cheated (so that is how Santa can figure out how to assess naughty or nice).
- The Trade-off window
For everything you gain you have to give up something else. A simple complex one.
And the last.
- The Desire window
This window sometimes has a weird filter over it that makes things not look as they really are. What I mean by that is not everything we go after is what we truly want. Sometimes we only think we know what we want … and sometimes we don’t know what we want until we get it. Maddening? You bet. But everyone has this window. Unfortunately this window is most typically found in the main room so you look through it a lot. This window is also, individually, often the dirtiest. You will be tempted to go to other people’s houses and look thru their “desire window” and hope for some guidance. Sorry. No can do. Your Desire window is your Desire window. I kind of think they are like snowflakes … no 2 the same. You will probably not have a more aggravating window in your home. Too bad. Every home has one.
So.
There you go. I will admit though … while I made my personal experiences universal … I do look through other people’s dirty windows as often as I can. Like the opening quote said … they offer a view … regardless of how dirty the view may be.
Heapsongs
Feb 24th
So.
Imogene Heap continues to convince me she must be an incredibly interesting person in person … as well as a talented musician. And she just released another new song … from China.
Think of this:
Featured on TED (magical gloves <that capture sound through motion>).
Finds musical inspiration in almost absurd ways (newspaper printers).
Innovative thinker (YouGov).
Certainly not mainstream (I envision most people have no clue who she is). But certainly way ahead of what I would consider a global collaborative thinker (not just a musician).
First. The song.
Heap is working on her fourth cd. But she is going about it in a really interesting way … it is almost like sh is releasing each song as a “cd” as she rolls out the entre cd one-by-one. While the cd will be a collection of songs written and released individually two months apart each “Heapsong” is a story in itself. As I just said … each song is almost its own cd. People should be paying attention to is concept … REALLY paying attention. Because this may be the way of the future. Full length cds simply being a means to an end (a compilation of individual songs).
The newest song, the 5th, she made in China and is called Xizi She Knows: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgvAx2Bdt-o&ob=av2e
Ok. About the song (and another reason why I think she is one of the most innovative musicians out there today):
We went into a primary school class, where the children were doing their eye exercises, and the teacher giving them their instructions gave us our tempo. The sound of the newspaper printing presses – that became the beat. And we caught this woman who heads up this huge hill to a temple every day at sunrise and screams at the top of her lungs, so the sound of that is now in the middle section of the song.- Imogene Heap
Next.
She worked with YouGov to conduct a unique piece of research.
Imogen wanted to find out more about her fans by working with YouGov to write a tailored survey. Through it, she hoped to discover how her fans first came into contact with her work, when, how and why they enjoy her music, and what it is about Heap fans as individuals that mean they connect with her sound. It is a fascinating way to stay in touch with not only fan base but a larger base of what I would consider ‘global influencers’ or, at minimum, people who care about issues globally.
YouGov Heap: http://labs.yougov.co.uk/news/2012/02/14/imogen-heap-results/
Oh.
By the way.
Every one of my readers (because I assume they read because they like to explore new ideas and be involved in a worldview) should register with YouGov.
While it is certainly UK based it explores global issues as well as UK issues and is really well done. A very easy way to keep in touch with a variety of global issues (and some are serious and some are not).
Here is the registration site: https://labs.yougov.co.uk/account/register/
Next.
I love the fact she has made new technologies and social media integral to who she is and what she does … WITHOUT losing her individualism.
Heck. in 2010 she accepted her Grammy for the best engineered non-classical album (there are so many frickin’ grammy categories its nuts) wearing an interactive Twitter dress <yeah … interactive> specially-made to enable her to ‘bring’ her fans on stage with her.
And.
She has been featured on TED as assisting in the development of “magical gloves” which capture sounds in motion.
I love the fact she is recognizing the importance and functionality of social media as a vehicle for, and measure, of not only engagement but also the possibilities created through collaboration by constantly involving people with various projects.
I have written about her before an this 4th cd but it us using an entirely new innovative approach to writing & recording by releasing one song every three months … because each song is basically being created through collaboration in a two-week song-composing flurry.
‘Lifeline’ and ‘Propeller Seeds’ were the first and second tracks created this way.
For ‘Propeller Seeds’, Imogen invited fans to share their moments of ‘clarity’ with her – namely, the times in their lives when “everything seemed to click” – to inspire her interpretation of this moment in her music.
Anyway.
Fascinating young lady.
And, from a bigger picture perspective, I believe her efforts and working style actually does more to encourage arts & music in people’s lives than any “music & arts is good” advertising initiative. She is involving people … and young people to see how music can be part of their lives.
Here is the Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2012/feb/23/30-minutes-with-imogen-heap#1
And if you ever wanted to be part of a song writing process … well … here is your chance. Her cd ain’t done yet.
Enjoy.
fearless & young people & hook in your head
Feb 23rd
Posted by Bruce in Rants and Observations
“Guess I need to unhook these thoughts.”
- Throwing Muses lyric from ‘hook in your head’
Ok.
I began writing this to remind us that young people are smarter and more innovative than we give them credit for as well as we typically have to look to the youth for trends and what the horizon has in store for us (whether we like it or not).
Oh. And this is is also just a reminder to us old folk how short our memories are.
So I began this with lyrics from a Throwing Muses song because it was written by Kristen Hersh (maybe 20 at the time) and Tonya Donnelly (maybe 20 at the time). And I used music as an example because … well … that’s what I do.
Two young 20somethings from Rhode Island creating things that would influence musicians for decades.
That said. I will say that aging, getting older, is consistent.
We begin to doubt that which we believed in when we were younger.
So this is a reminder.
Since I read Rat Girl it has re-instilled my belief that the youth is our future.
And the early 90s provides some good proof. And the Throwing Muses are proof. And Kristen Hersh (and Tanya Donnelly who has made every band she has played in sound awesome … not only did she co-found Throwing Muses with stepsister Kristin Hersh but then went on to work in The Breeders and Belly).
Anyway.
Hook in your Head is proof.
The song isn’t for everyone.
But it is a spectacular piece of song writing. In its 6:30+ length it is kind of 3 different songs.
In my words … it is a “clean messy” song.
(definition: the constant incredibly hooky rolling bass and drum riff is clean allowing Tonya and Kristen to be spectacularly messy).
Hook in Her Head remains one of my favorite Throwing Muses songs of all time (and no it isn’t a real hook it is something that is just stuck, or hooked, in your head).
Certain things I love, Spend my time
I guess I’ll have to unhook those hooks
This woman literally
Felt she had a hook in her head
When I first heard the song I listened to it … and listened to it over and over. Typical of the Muses it was odd … a fusion of alternative sections in one song(within 6:32). It has a brilliant drum steadying it with an awesome rolling bass riff holding it together.
And all the rest is messy.
But it sounds messy great.
The song is “ridiculously intense” as one commenter suggests (this is a live version but an almost perfect rendition of what you would hear on The Real Ramona): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcnDsTpO-CY&feature=related
And, most importantly, it is timeless (you could play this on any current alternative radio station I will guarantee multiple calls will come in asking who the heck the band was).
And they were teen-young 20’s defining a future sound.
Unpopular then? Sure.
Fearless ? Sure.
Young? You bet.
Old people hated it? Absolutely.
Acceptable today? It is what all alternative does and sounds like.
Truth? <as in “what can we learn” truth>
The youth are fearless and therefore, inevitably, they are influencers. Oh. Influencers of not only their own generation but of everyone.
At least everyone who pays attention.
At least to everyone who would quit bitching for “the good old days.”
And we shouldn’t forget it.
And any time us old folk do forget this I encourage you to go back to your youth and take a good hard look, and listen, and remind yourself.
And, frankly, we should remind ourselves more often.
Because too many of us are pretty frickin’ stubborn about today’s youth (and how irresponsible and immature we are so sure they are).
I have one suggestion for the old folk (say 40+).
Get your head out of your ass.
Young people are smart.
And they are innovative.
And, yeah, some of the innovations are aggravating … but we are supposed to be mature enough to delineate between “aggravating because it is simply aggravating” and “aggravating because now I am going to have to change.”
And, frankly, young people think of things we older people not only don’t – but can’t.
And if you ignore it or dismiss it (teen thinking) you are going to miss out on a lot.
Maybe worse?
You will have failed that generation. The young’s innovative thinking should be nurtured and fertilized like young plants that you want to blossom. For like flowers or trees they are the foliage that will line our horizons in the future.
If we kill their ideas our horizons will lie barren. Or worse. Our horizons will be lined in our ideas. And while we may be comforted in the sight of things we have created we are leaving nothing for future generations to look to on the horizon as their own.
(sorry … I felt kind of poetic as I banged away on the keys … ignore that bad imagery but accept the point … please)
Anyway.
Here is a thought for you as you think about today’s young people.
The Throwing Muses weren’t ahead of their time.
They were at their time.
But originality is often unpopular.
Play their music today and they would be a top 10 alternative band.
Does that mean they missed out? Nope.
Because they created. They were influential. They were a voice of the youth innovators of that generation.
Ignore the Throwing Muses music if you want.
But don’t ignore the youth.
Nurture the voices of this generation. Don’t mute them in your non understanding of what they say.
Just because originality is unpopular doesn’t mean we should discourage originality.
No matter what age the originality occurs.
Bottom line?
Unhook those thoughts from your head about young people.






