Posts tagged follow the truth
black white and gray
Jan 15th
“In the course of your education you’ve always been taught to look for the right answer but you must also know that in life sometimes the right answer is that there isn’t one.”
- Mr. Feeny, Boy Meets World.
So.
I do know for sure, having been in the business world for too many years to count, that rarely is there one answer to the question … or challenge … or whatever.
There are multiple “right” answers to just about everything.
And I guess, if I want to get philosophical, that makes me wonder if anything is certain or concrete anymore.
Maybe I really am getting old … but black & white seemed clearer to me years ago.
In fact, some of my past team members may remember the “McTague good – bad scale.”
I would often simply sum up something by saying “well, on the McTague good – bad scale, well, that would be good.”
(or bad when appropriate)
These days I almost feel like I would have to shift the scale to a rating instead of an unequivocal good or bad.
Is there truly an unequivocal non debatable good and bad?
Or a right and wrong?
How about truth or lies? (where omission can be deemed a ‘lie’)
Or is it just mixed together and upon us to decide for ourselves?
Oh.
And say we decide for ourselves … judge our own actions … but the other person has a different judging scale. What happens then? Who is right or wrong?
(hey. maybe there is a new business idea here where everyone carries a little card they can hand someone before speaking which outlines the boundaries of their ‘persona right & wrong’ scale.)
Anyway.
Does the end really justify the means when it comes to good or bad or right or wrong?
And is it your end or ‘their end’ that really matters in your own black or white judgment?
It kind of makes you question the whole concept of ‘Is everything either black and white’ or even worse is anything black or white?
Or is everything somewhere in the middle, in the gray?
Wow.
Sadly this make you start believing the world is built in shades of gray. Everything becomes negotiable, flexible or left to interpretation.
Maybe that is life.
Because the reality in day to day life is sometimes we are forced to bend the truth or sometimes transform it because we’re faced with things that we did not choose to happen but are demanded to deal with it.
And sometimes ‘bending the truth’ simply catches up to us.
And it makes me wonder if this is right.
So.
If there is anything that is ethical in our day, where is the line drawn?
Is it simply if what we feel is right … well … then it really is.
And if we are forced to do what we think is wrong, should we do it anyway or reap the consequences that come with refusal to go along with the way life pushes us?
Ok.
All of that makes my head hurt.
I know one thing for sure … I would like to be certain of one thing.
That somewhere there really is an absolute truth.
Somewhere.
Tricky to find but there.
Maybe that is the truth.
That it is a journey for truth.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … I like that (although that is a gray answer isn’t it?).
Maybe the best way to think about black, white and gray is this way:
“Dawn and sunset are the times when Nature herself is unstable and in flux. The nocturnal world and the daytime world are meeting, and for a brief time coexisting. It’s not a neat hard cut, but a blurred, irregular dissolve. These moments are the seams in existence through which we can get a glimpse of the deeper, fundamentally random, chance workings of a system in which we are only a small, insignificant player.” Bill Viola
Is it possible we can find solace in this question through some poetic thought like this?
Shit. I don’t know. Most of us would seek to find some more clarity then this.
But maybe he is right. Maybe truth coexists in day and night.
Blurred by the edges of right and wrong.
I do know no one will ever get “black & white” right all the time.
But I imagine that is not a reason I shouldn’t try for the absolute at all times by constantly seeking ‘truth’ whatever that may be.
Make the attempt to find the black or the white.
Avoid the grey.
And maybe this is the best reason of all:
“There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.” - Ayn Rand
Avoid gray because it is evil.
when truth is not the truth
Dec 1st
Rodrigo, an enlightened reader, inspired this one.
I have “seek truth” in my office.
I believe in speaking the truth.
I believe the truth is the only path to a clear conscience.
I believe truth has consequences … just as non-truth can have consequences.
And then a reader on enlightened conflict reminded me that even the truth can be twisted.
Rodrigo commented the following on my site:
While reading this part: “And to some extent he is saying all the correct things. But he is not correct.” I remembered one of the best ads I have ever seen.
It is from a major brazillian news paper (Folha de São Paulo). I found one with english subtitles… it gives me goosebumps everytime I see. I am sure you will like it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDqA6HcxgcY
First.
It is a fabulous ad. But maybe more important is the lesson that lies within.
He is saying all the correct things …. But he is not correct.
Second.
Truth is sometimes not the whole truth.
Context and perspective is needed to share “real & absolute truth.”
Truth is the sum of accurate information … not just some of the accurate information:
“I was brought up to believe that the only thing worth doing was to add to the sum of accurate information in the world.” ~ Margaret Mead
It is a tricky world we live in.
And Rodrigo’s ad reminds us it has ALWAYS been a tricky world.
Discerning the real truth among the seeming truth takes work.
A lot of work.
And I sometimes believe we people are lazy when it comes to truth.
Because we are just too lazy to attach facts to the soundbite truth we latch on to.
And, once again, I do not believe it is simply a present issue (albeit that is the one we should be most concerned with) it is a lifelong human issue.
Truth and facts.
“The national argument right now is, one, who’s got the truth and, two, who’s got the facts… Until we can manage to get the two of them back together again, we’re not going to make much progress.”
- Michael Adams, lexicology professor at North Carolina State University, discussing the neologism “truthiness”, defined as “the quality of stating concepts one wishes or believes to be true, rather than the facts” in “Linguists Vote ‘Truthiness’ Word of 2005″, AP via Yahoo! News, (6 January 2006)]
Here is a fact. A truth I may add.
We all need truth goggles.
Because we all want to hear what we all want to hear.
And it is easy to take the ‘easy truth.’
But truth takes a discerning ear.
And it takes some work … by using a filter.
From Buffy the Vampire Slayer (who thought I would ever use a quote from there, huh?)
What do you want me to say?
Buffy: Lie to me.
The good guys are always stalwart and true, the bad guys are easily distinguished by their pointy horns or black hats, and, uh, we always defeat them and save the day. No one ever dies, and everybody lives happily ever after.
Buffy: Liar.
Simplistic but a good lesson for all of us.
The good guys are difficult to discern from the bad guys.
Therefore truth is difficult to discern.
And if we cannot discern the difference between the good guys truth and the bad guys truth how the hell can we discern the difference between 2 good guys truth.
What do I mean?
Well. Think about the current American politics. Shit. Or Brazilian politics. Or European politics.
Are these “bad guys”? Certainly not. They mean well. They want good things (mostly). So how the hell do we discern the truth as they give us soundbite after soundbite.
There is even a website called politifacts.com which is all about “sorting out the truth.”
Ok.
In some warped way this bothers me. We need someone to “sort out the truth” for us? Is it supposed to be this complicated? Isn’t ‘truth’ supposed to be simple?
Sorry Bruce, but it isn’t.
And maybe that just bothered me … but here is what scares me.
The majority doesn’t care to learn the real truth.
I just heard this today … 47% of US population could not name a Republican candidate.
If we don’t care, if we are this apathetic … how the hell can we ever discern the truth?
So … let me tell you what scares me the most when I think about this factoid (among others).
Rodrigo’s ad.
And where truth and ignorance collide.
If we cannot discern good guys from bad guys.
If we don’t even put the effort forth to learn who the good guys are from the bad guys.
If we cannot discern real truth.
If we don’t even put forth the effort to discern the real truth.
If we allow ignorance to overcome truth.
And if we allow someone who says all the correct things but is not correct to become a leader?
Well. Shame on us. All of us. We have permitted ignorance & indolence to win over truth.
I say all this because truth is important.
Not just in terms of self. But in terms of the world all of our ‘selves’ reside in. it impacts how we live and where we live and what kind of world we live in.
Take the time to attach real facts to spoken ‘truth.’
Become invested in truth.
For ‘not being invested in truth’ has consequences.
Yeah.
I will say it again.
Truth takes work … but seek truth … it leads to goodness & better things.
Truth. As Taoism will remind you … you have a choice. Which will you choose?
” … choosing to be one who just wants to live to be old or instead being true.” – Lao Tze
lie and truth
Mar 27th
This is the natural partner to my optimistically cynical of truth post.
Or.
Maybe let’s think of this as the adult version follow up to the wonderful teen version of Beauty is Truth I posted.
I won’t do that teen’s thought justice. But I may take a more serious note.
Maybe this is the ‘ugly is truth’ version.
“A lie can fly halfway around the world before the truth can get its pants on.” Winston Churchill.
I am sure we have all heard versions of this quote before.
And chuckle.
But have you ever wondered why we actually take this kind of sad and sobering thought at face value – kind of as a … well … truth? A teen wrote this on their site:
Sobering.
Sad.
And true?
Even we adults looking at this take a moment and a part of us, maybe even a large part of us, agrees.
We believe somewhere inside us that all people lie.
And what may be worse?
Even when we hear ‘the truth’? We doubt.
And even more worse?
The more emphatic on their belief in the truth (as they state it)?
The more we disbelieve.
It’s kind of crazy if you think about it.
It seems often the “absolute truth” leads to some confusion on our part.
Confused on ‘how can they be so sure’?
And the conclusion of confusion is “someone has lied.”
What a downward spiral we have encountered in discussing truth.
I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you. “
— ~ Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
Truth is tricky.
The beauty in truth is that it creates boundaries. Or maybe more playfully … fences within you can find comfort to play with others and be free to say and do without thought.
And discuss ‘truth.’
But within those boundaries are shades of gray.
Truth is complex.
And there is an ugly enemy to truth.
The ugly enemy is doubt.
It is because of doubt in truth that a lie can sweep its way around the world while good ole truth is stuck behind dealing with doubt.
A lie is unhindered by the burden of proof. It flies free of such weight.
While truth carries the burden of debate, discussion and understanding.
Now. Let’s be clear. Debate is good. It clarifies. It communicates. It clears the mind of clutter.
But, oddly, nowadays truth’s slowness (in debate and discussion) only enhances an implication of ‘non-true’ and slows down even more with the weight of added burden.
Do we ever wonder why truth takes eons to get around the world while a lie circles endlessly?
Not when you think about it this way.
Sadly, if I am actually right about something for once, I guess the way you can tell a lie from a truth now is that the first is always the lie and the last is always the truth.
In the end the turtle wins I guess.
optimistically cynical of truth
Feb 6th
“Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.”
André Gide
(warning: I get to talk about conflict & truth in one post … something I love)
I am always wary of those who come out blazing by claiming to speak “the truth.”
Mostly because I believe rarely are things black & white.
In fact I have been called optimistically cynical.
I imagine I am a contrarian (up to a point).
I would also imagine it’s because in today’s world I see too much lazy thinking (or possibly lazy sloppy communication) … or maybe it’s just people are quick to select the facts they want to use and ignore others and then pontificate on “the truth.”
Anyway.
I question everything upfront (or maybe one would hope as I have become older I can judge what to question and what to accept upfront) but always believe great things can come of it (rather than use the cynicism to drag things down).
In old times (like really really old) this questioning would be a version of Socratic questioning (because I am not as smart as good ole Socrates).
Socratic questioning focuses on the importance of questioning in learning (Socrates actually thought that questioning was the only real form of teaching). Simplistically Socratic questioning highlights the difference between systematic and fragmented thinking. It teaches us to dig beneath the surface of ideas. It teaches us the value of developing questioning minds in cultivating deep learning.
(now. In my global generation 9 ‘about critical thinking’ I will actually use this in discussing elements of teaching in the global education initiative)
So.
I guess the point is that questioning (a version of conflict) actually helps us get closer to the truth.
The art of Socratic questioning is tightly aligned to the idea of critical thinking. Mostly because it ties the art of questioning to excellence of thought. To summarize this thought … “Socratic” means a systematic approach in the interest in assessing truth or plausibility of things.
Both critical thinking and Socratic questioning share a common end.
Seeking meaning and truth.
Critical thinking provides the conceptual tools for understanding how the mind functions in its pursuit of meaning and truth.
Socratic questioning employs those tools in framing questions essential to the pursuit of meaning and truth.
The beauty of critical thinking skills is that it establishes an additional level of thinking to our thinking, an inner voice of reason, that monitors, assesses, and reforms our idea/opinions/thoughts (in a more rational direction) and affects our feelings and actions. Socratic discussion cultivates that inner voice through an explicit focus on using the “outer voice” with directed, disciplined questioning.
So.
As for those who adamantly state ‘the truth’ (and we seem to hear a lot of these people on radio shows and talk shows and “advocates” of some special interest) I would suggest they are lying.
(ouch. big claim there).
Ok. that lying thought.
Maybe better said is that they aren’t stating truth but rather opinion under the guise of truth (and duping a significant amount of people along the way).
Some of the people we have to listen to (claiming to say the truth) have made a choice … a choice to state truth when it is simply opinion (and shame on them for that … particularly if they do it under the ‘freedom of speech’ heading as well as if they have some ability to impact people).
The truth behind the truth is that it does come with choice.
Try this on for size.
With awareness of some truths comes choice, and with choice freedom or chaos or crisis.
This comes from a 19th Century philosopher – a guy called G. W. F. Hegel.
Discarding an absolute notion of truth, he saw today’s “truth” merely as a passing “bloom” in an evolving process of new “blooms”.
(let’s just call these stupid blooms ‘ideas’)
Ideas and truth advance, he believed, only as ideas come into conflict.
This occurs when a counter idea (the antithesis) arises to challenge the status quo (the thesis). It was this “conflict” or “crisis” which brought about the “higher idea” (the synthesis).
Now.
Be clear. The Hegelian Dialectic is more of an observation of the way thought systems evolve than it is a call to direct action in creating such an evolution (so crisis is not an action but part of thought … think of it as maybe a Plato would … someone states a belief or ‘perceived truth’ and the debate is the ‘crisis’ – or when an antithesis point of view is articulated- of which synthesis occurs and, hopefully, truth emerges).
I make that point so we don’t start running around being crazy trying to drive “crisis” into every frickin’ conversation we have.
But. Marx and Darwin applied this notion to the social and biological realm.
Marx and Communism stood on a pillar of crisis (just called revolution). The higher social order could only arise from the “crisis” of conflict—the proletariat arising to battle the bourgeoisie.
Darwin and Neo-Darwinian theory see the higher biological order arising only from a life and death struggle—survival of the fittest.
So.
What this suggests is that truth can only arise from crisis (or in a dialectic world) through debate and discussion. And I don’t know that I dislike this thought.
As long as we don’t start thinking there is something “magical” in the crisis. While theoretically it is a critical piece to achieve the “synthesis” hat shouldn’t mean we should begin to create a crisis if it doesn’t exist. Or even misjudge “crisis” when it really is just a natural down slope of the curve.
Anyway.
Crisis is a big word. And easily misunderstood (at least by someone with a pea like brain like me)
I don’t believe we need crisis to create change.
Simply some conflict. Simply some debate for god’s sake.
Maybe some questioning of people who state “the truth.”
(then that debate within conflicting point of views could be construed as a ‘crisis’ and Hegel can sleep at night)
Anyway.
I guess the other fear in this questioning construct is the concept of never ending debate.
Or how about “unresolved conflict” because diametrically opposed opinions are locked in “absolute truths” and are unwilling to accept anything otherwise.
In other words … we never leave “crisis” mode.
That is bad.
And useless.
And dangerous.
But.
The entire idea of “thought” to ‘crisis in debate’ to ‘clearer truth’ is a viable thought.
So when someone states “absolute truth’ without debate or discussion I think its kinda nuts.
Oh.
And one last important thought ( a REALLY important one in this entire discussion).
We are as much at fault as the “liar” if we remain silent.
Silence is the death of debate. The death of the search for truth. No questioning = no truth.
Think about that the next time you hear something that’s sounds … well … wrong. And you remain silent.
Anyway.
I would like to believe I am one of those people who are constantly seeking truth.
I may not be but it is certainly a good objective to try to attain. I do know that I believe as long as you are ‘seeking’ you are being persistently curious and there are worse things to be.
But, yes, I am cynical of those espousing truth all the time.
But maybe Dill said it best:
“I ain’t cynical, Miss Alexandra. Tellin’ the truth’s not cynical, is it?” ~Dill, To Kill a Mockingbird
So.
I will not remain silent in my search as an optimistically cynical view of truth
All Dollop-ed up with No Place to Go
Sep 27th
Well.
(this is how Bruce starts a lot of his posts, and I didn’t want to startle anyone since I’m just “guest-ing”)
Is it just me, or are women’s magazines really just ONE magazine with different covers? Granted, there are a few exceptions out there (Oprah readers, just stand down…), but after a week cooped up with the world’s worst sinus infection and every magazine I could find, I can confirm that many, many, MANY women’s magazines are indeed little clones of each other.
Let’s run down the list. Health news: same. Beauty news: same. Fashion highlights: same. Diet news: same. Pick up any June issue and I bet you find a “summer beach read” list. With the same books! Try November’s “stay on your diet for the holidays and gift giving guide” or January’s “get your life organized for pete’s sake” double jumbo issue. And don’t get me started on the “get ready for your summer bikini” madness.
Another weird thing: They use the same pep-talk-y happy/upbeat vibe, the same choppy sentence structure, the same weird words — seriously, when was the last time you used “dollop” in a sentence?
It’s bugging me. Are these insanely narrow topics truly the only things women are interested in hearing about (month after month after month)? Is my brain degenerating, insisting I consume magazine “junk food” to keep up with my cheddar cheese Goldfish habit?
So.
(another Bruce-ism to keep you comfy…)
In the true spirit of American protest, let’s send a letter:
Dear Clueless Editor People,
As loyal readers who (for reasons unknown to herself or others) continues to plunk down $5 every month to read the EXACT SAME THING in every women’s magazine (seriously, how do you DO that?), and who are slightly ashamed to admit they read enough of your publications to make this request, we nevertheless hereby request an immediate BAN on the following:
ALL WEIRD WORDS
Slather, dollop, scrunch, quench, toss, slick, slake, frazzle, tresses (also “mane”), pop-of-color, sparkle, glide, frizz, spritz, dust, glam, smooth, sprinkle, glow, silky, drench, stress-busting, sun-kissed, (clearly this is a partial list…)
SNOOZER TOPICS
- Lose weight (in a second, a minute, whatever)
- Dress slimmer (in case the previous topic doesn’t work?)
- Just 5 minutes a day for “instant” results (for smooth skin, brighter eyes, better health, blah blah)
- Best beauty products (strange how the list CHANGES every month)
- Have better sex (well…maybe this one is ok…)
- How to attract a boyfriend/spouse
- How to relate to your boyfriend/spouse
- How to break up with your boyfriend/spouse
- How to relate to your ex-boyfriend/ex-spouse
- Look younger now (!)
- Be happy now (!)
- Be friends with the mom/dad/family/in-law/children/best friend you hate
- Buy these crazy clothes in non-matching combinations no one would ever, ever wear out of the house.
- Pair the crazy clothes with shoes no sane, life-loving person would put on her feet
- Identify with all the 16 year old, size 0 models who do NOT look like any version of you who ever lived outside some alcohol-induced delusion.
- Etc. (you KNOW what we’re talking about!)
We realize this involves re-thinking 90% of your content, but zillions of women will thank you for not considering them lemmings headed toward the cliff whose happiness and self-confidence depends on losing 10 pounds in a day, looking 10 years younger right now, or having their thirst “slaked”, their moisturizer “slathered”, and their lip gloss “slicked”.
Sincerely,
The Women of America
And there you have it people.
You know, I really could be a modern day crusader — fighting for the right of smart women everywhere to choose and enjoy well-written, intelligent content. I’m thinking I’m that one sheep in the Far Side cartoon, shouting out to the flock, “Wait! Wait! Listen to me!… We don’t HAVE to be just sheep…”
On the other hand, I gotta go finish reading “Walk off your Jiggle” now. Plus the Fall apple pie recipes are out and my cheddar cheese Goldfish just might make a nice crust.
doing what you say you will
Sep 13th
Whew.
Doing what you said you would do.
I guess I could have called this keeping your word.
This is all about tying intentions to actions. Words to actually ‘doing.’
And this is an important discussion because it affects outcomes …. NOT just perceptions.
And it gets tricky.
Of course you can never give your word unless you are sure you can keep it. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm …. Didn’t I just write about perfection? Geez.
Or you can have an attitude that says give your word, but that “life happens” and sometimes you can’t keep it, and this is fine.
Ok.
Here is my opinion.
Timing and situation matters.
And your track record matters.
So.
Upfront?
Perfection, baby, perfection.
If you give my word you are beholden to keep it. You have put an intention out there and must hold up your end of the bargain. Tough shit if life gets in the way.
No excuses. You either follow through on promises or you:
1. Don’t earn trust from others
2. Give permission to others to not follow through (or give permission for excuses)
First time through the chute (and by first time I am suggesting “enough time to establish a behavior pattern and belief system) you are setting expectations.
Anything “less than” erodes both faith and integrity.
Done once you have made it exponentially tougher to prove otherwise.
Done more (or enough) and no credibility is earned and, at its worst, you appear dishonest.
This is a simple equation. Words = Intent. Intent = Actions. Therefore … Words = Actions.
I guess I am writing about this because I perceive (I don’t have any huge research study to back me up on this) that we in the business world are struggling with this concept. And I cannot figure out why.
Yes.
I do understand that an issue is often “here is what I think I said (the leader) and here is what I heard (the people).” And, yes, that is a huge issue.
But in general I find people are becoming quite flippant with promises or “words associated with doing” and just not following through.
And it seems that it really shouldn’t take a lot of thought.
And to me (who writes a lot about leadership and guiding and aligning organizations) this whole idea is a massive building block for creating unity behind leadership, really strong partnerships and great affinity in relationships of all types.
So.
Why do I have this perception?
Well. Maybe if we all note how often that the exception (someone who actually always does what they say they will) actually draws attention that is certainly an indication.
Yup. It’s true.
When someone says “I’ll get it done” and they do, people notice, especially if they deliver consistently. For some reason people seem to be trying to gain respect or perceptions of commitment in other ways when it seems (at least to me) that putting action behind your words is the simplest way to show commitment.
“Commitment is what transforms a promise into reality. It is the words that speak boldly of your intentions. And the actions which speak louder than the words. It is making the time when there is none. Coming through time after time after time, year after year after year. Commitment is the stuff character is made of; the power to change the face of things. It is the daily triumph of integrity over skepticism.”
commonly attributed to Abraham Lincoln or Shearson Lehman
And I wonder why is doing what you say you would do slipping away from us?
Simplistically the excuse is time. Sure it’s tougher right now to ‘match words and actions’ with fewer people doing more.
But (and this is a HUGE but).
This concept needs to be addressed (or assume higher priority) maybe because of these thoughts:
1. Because organizations today cannot afford to be ‘not aligned’ behind leadership. Streamlined organizational actions are essential to maximize organizational energy.
2. Because executing well is essential when resources are low. There is no time or money for do-over’s or extended schedules.
3. Because partners are being thinned and stretched themselves and this value stands out as the type of person/partner you want to keep on your team.
So.
All that said let me say something pretty simple (and probably sounds stupidly silly). This whole issue needs to be thought of from the top down. Because the organization starts with its leader.
“I have always thought the actions of men the best interpreters of their thoughts.”
John Locke
Yup. That sounds basic but I believe we are investing so much energy (at the top) on insuring that those at the bottom are ‘doing what they say they will do’ that the top is forgetting that they need to meet the same (if not higher) stands.
And this whole top down thing benefits all. It helps create a culture of ‘evidence’ (proof we say what we do) without slowing the organization down. And that means people are empowered to “do” within an outlined system. But doing starts at the top. There has to be a commitment to doing. Delivering on what words are used (which means that of course you should be careful what words you use but that is a different article).
This whole ‘words-to-action’ concept extends to outside partners (vendors) also.
Anyway.
Let me take a minute to look beyond the business application aspect of this and focus on organizational leadership and alignment.
This whole thing is really about trust.
What is a person if you cannot trust what they say? Words unfulfilled with some action become empty promises to people. “I will call the client” (and never does). “I will share a plan of action by next week (and doesn’t).” “I will be at that meeting (and misses it).”
Yeah.
Many leaders often have great intentions and also often fall into the trap of “I have too many things to do” philosophy (“and people will understand I am a busy person and just couldn’t get to it”).
We judge ourselves by our intentions, but others judge us by our actions.
Lee J. Colan
Actions are where intentions hit the road. Actions behind words show integrity.
And, ultimately, leadership is about integrity. The integrity to stand by your word. If you elect to not do what you said you would do people start questioning your integrity. While intentions express a desire to do, actions express commitment. People don’t follow intentions (over time).
In order to be a leader a man must have followers. And to have followers, a man must have their confidence. Hence, the supreme quality for a leader is unquestionably integrity. Without it, no real success is possible, no matter whether it is on a section gang, a football field, in an army, or in an office. If a man’s associates find him guilty of being phony, if they find that he lacks forthright integrity, he will fail. His teachings and actions must square with each other. The first great need therefore is integrity and high purpose.
Dwight D Eisenhower
Without trust leaders cannot meet the largest challenge of any leader – connecting the real to the possible.
Without trust you cannot get people to do what you asking them to do to fulfill this vision you have outlined.
Without trust people will become cynical.
I do find it humorous (in a sad way).
We blame today’s youth for a “what have you done for me lately” attitude but the reality is that attitude has always existed in the establishment of leadership. And their whole attitude is often driven by our (at the top) inability to follow through. Or setting odd expectations in our own heads on what those actions will mean to people.
Never, rarely or inconsistent follow through on words leads to an organization lack of trust in leadership. Only consistent follow through of words with actions symbolizes the great led organizations. And often in those same organizations you find a strong self empowerment to “do” culturally. And even more often you will find that “what have you done for me lately” group not being so vocal and actually assuming some responsibilities of their own.
Anyway.
I babbled a lot but remember this if nothing else:
“Remember, people will judge you by your actions, not your intentions. You may have a heart of gold — but so does a hard-boiled egg.”
Anonymous
Bottom line.
When you have verbalized intentions and aligned them with consistent actions people will follow. The other people in the company, people who report to you, people within the organization and your outside partners will all listen when you have something to say and come to “count on you.”
Yeah. Doing what you say you will do certainly comes with a burden. But. That burden is the price of leadership.
Oh.
One last thing on the whole “words to action” idea.
Let’s call this “the time warp” issue.
Or the “time and space star trek continuum”.
The other side of this equation resides in the doee (the one asking to have something done … oh, ‘sooooooooooo-eeEEEE!’ is what they yell at Arkansas games).
So.
Someone asks for something.
Uh oh.
Sometimes in the mind of the doee there is a star trek episode in their head where time stands still and a shitload of things happen and then the clock starts again and all that shit has been done.
The time continuum hits and the doer didn’t even know it happened.
They asked the question (with the intent of trying to make sure they could actually meet what they promised).
Doer: “Do you need it right away or can we have some time?
Doee: “oh, no rush, I can have it later. Even tomorrow is fine.”
Doer: okay. (the promise to do has been made)
Uh oh (part 2).
The difference between I can have it now and I am okay with having it later translates to hours in their head (if not minutes).
Doee: you didn’t do what you promised.
Doer: you said today (which is now tomorrow) was okay.
Doee: yes. But it almost lunch and I don’t have it.
Doer: uhm. I can have it today.
Doee: but I have to leave for lunch soon.
Doer: (thought bubble) gosh. If you hadn’t called I was half out the door myself.
I say all of this simply to say that Time is tricky in this whole math words = action equation.
The space between those two words is perceived differently by the leader (the person who generates the words) and the receiver of words (the one who heard the intentions).
And someone is gonna come rockin’ into my comments section and say “well, you need to be clear and be specific!” (and say it like there is an exclamation point at the end).
Well.
Yeah.
Sure.
I call bullshit on that.
No matter how specific or articulate you are a certain percentage of listeners will not hear exactly what you said. And that percentage grows exponentially as time slides down the slope.
What that means is the faster you tie an action to a word the more likely you are to earn trust.
That’s it.
Is that always doable? Shit no.
Just be aware.
And always remember the equation.
Words = intent. Intent = actions. Therefore words = actions. And all that = trust.
to do or not to do
Aug 26th
“most agencies are in the same boat — from big ones to two man shops. They’re in it for the money and they’re scared. Scared the client’s going to walk. And because they are afraid they compromise their principles. They are so scared of losing the business they give the customer what they think they want rather than what they know he needs. And sometimes it works — for a while. But in the end it always backfires. You lose the business anyway and you wake up one day to find you’re a prostitute. So, in the end, stick to your principles. ‘to thine ownself be true.’ 0ver 200 years old but still good advice.”
- Stephen Hawley Martin (founder of The Martin Agency)
Anyone in the service industry will read this and understand exactly what Mr. Martin is saying.
When in service business you are always trapped by “doing whatever it takes to make the customer happy” (which seems to be an insane mantra seeping through business these days) versus “what is going to make me happy” (as a business, business person, business owner).
This is not an easy answer.
I am not suggesting ignoring customers (although I do believe the tired “customer is king/queen” mantra is going a little bit too far) but at some point you draw a line.
You need to draw a line or you will go nuts.
Or just become a prostitute.
Look. Sure sometimes lines can fence you in but sometimes lines can neaten life.
Someone who draws a great line yet is focused on the customer?
Ritz Carlton.
“Ladies and gentlemen serving ladies and gentleman.” You see that everywhere in the back rooms and over back-to-front entryways at Ritz Carltons. It is their culture and their attitude and their mantra.
So.
What is the line? The moment a Ritz guest no longer acts like a ‘ladies or gentleman.’ That is their line.
Anyway.
I imagine drawing a line is about making boundaries.
And it is probably one of the hardest things in the world to do. With anything I may add.
In business? Yikes. I have been in those meetings. Especially now with the internet where one ‘declined’ customer (they don’t even have to be mistreated in any way) can reach out and impact hundreds because they weren’t allowed to join the club. How to grow your business? Whew. Of course in a recession passing on a dollar in hand is tough (heck. even in good times it is) but do you really want them as a customer?.
Think about government. Regardless of whether it is government policy on dealing with terrorists or rules of warfare. What is acceptable and what isn’t? Tough tough questions.
Personal? Personal time off in a business. Your kids and their activities. Job searches and type of job you want. Time commitments. Personal behavior.
Anyway.
Where do you draw the line?
I know I struggle with people who want it all spelled out upfront (or maybe people who live only by ‘rules’). Mostly because you invest a lot of energy and time thinking about every possibility (which could be time doing more productive things) and then lo and behold something you couldn’t have foreseen pops up. And you start discussing ‘exceptions’ (which really aren’t exceptions other than the fact someone demanded you draw a line … or a boundary).
And where does it fall on the line you have drawn. Some things are black and white but they seem to be far and few between.
The one thing that remains black & white?
Being true to thineself.
Draw the line somewhere where you can sleep well at night.
That’s the line.
la beauté est la vérité
May 26th

(this is another in the series of ‘tween/teen thought for the day’)
La beauté est la vérité.
(Beauty is the truth)
In honor of the French Open tennis tournament I thought I would post not only a tween thought for the day but one written in French.
“This is the phrase in my header, a personal motto of sorts. Honesty is the thing I value most in myself, my relationships and my life. I find true beauty in the truth, it may hurt but that does not detract from the crucial and utterly spectacular weight it holds. In my opinion, the most beautiful things are the ones that state the truth, holding back nothing. The world can be an ugly place, it is beautiful to acknowledge the truths.”
I am fairly sure I couldn’t have written anything better on this topic.
- courtesy of Gloria the 17 year old blogger in Canada.
thomas jefferson on enlightened conflict
May 2nd
I didn’t know Tom personally or I would have talked to him when I thought of starting this whole random concept called Enlightened Conflict. Ok. I am not that old. I guess I should have been smart enough to look back at some of our country’s forefathers for additional inspiration. Maybe seek some wisdom or more thoughtful logic on how to better explain it.
So. Thomas Jefferson would never be considered a pacifist. And today, well, I am not sure what he would be (Democrat or Republican). A wildly liberal Republican? (I believe they called them Whigs in the good ole days). He was a firm believer that the only time true progress was made was when two things happened:
- People rose up to stand up for what they believed in (I believe he was the forefather driving the Right to Bear arms right so we always had the opportunity to do just that – rise up – should the government ever lose sight of its role)
- Freedom of thought, religion, speech, whatever. He believed a less ignorant population was more likely to be a successful republic.
With that. Two quotes from Tom to support this whole Enlightened Conflict thing I keep talking about:
“Enlighten the people, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.”
Thomas Jefferson in a letter
“We are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead.”
Thomas Jefferson in a letter







