Posts tagged learning
what is management?
May 21st
“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 on a new scale
May 20th
I have always recognized that sometimes advertising is tough to evaluate because of cultural differences. and possibly because I just finished an international project I am even more aware than usual.
Local culture, or even regional culture, has a variety of visual and non visual cues & quirks that if you are not from that area take a little while to shift your attitude from “wtf?” to “oh … the people here like this.”
Oh.
Note to USA folk. Unfortunately the world of culture <and anything else for that matter> does not revolve around us and what we do and say and wear. Our antics & quirks are … well … often our antics & quirks. Fortunately other regions have their own antics & quirks that they need to deal with.
Ok. All that said. When you go to the international communications level you have to pay attention to the nuances <because anyone going global will obviously be smart enough to avoid the real quirks>.
Korean Air is the reason I decided to write about this today. Korean Air has a global advertising campaign <supposedly to elevate the brand to a whole new level> called “For life on a whole new scale.”
I have seen the magazine advertising in The Economist and the television ads on CNNinternational <and BBC>.
Every time I see it I stop and pay attention because in some ways I like the imagery and in other ways it seems like something someone <in US or Britain> would have done maybe 20 or 30 years ago. But, beyond that, there is something that nags at me.
I am sure it is appropriate for and/or logical to Koreans, but it seems slightly dated <in imagery as well as how it depicts women> to me.
Korean Air (for asia): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Zn_WE-VJgg&feature=relmfu
Korean Air: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAOVSaldLiA
By the way … I don’t think it’s bad (note: their last campaign was bad … really bad).
Old campaign
The idea behind this campaign is really really good.
And I absolutely love the final image of someone sitting in an airplane window (the image at beginning of post). Yet. It is a nuance … but I am not sure the woman they put in the window was right.
Anyway.
I just feel like it could have been done in a slightly different way and still depicted Korean culturally <which is important to the airlines> and yet been a little more global in its feel (outside of Asia).
But.
That’s me.
Regardless. It is a great airlines. And the idea behind the campaign is a really really good idea. But even great ideas need some subtle nuances incorporated into the execution to insure it is seen as equally good wherever it is shown. Something is slightly off in the execution of this idea.
homeless
May 19th
“People descend into this world by different paths. To live on the streets is akin to standing in the rain: some are better equipped for this than others … but rain falls equally on all.” – Andrew Vachss (author of Haiku a novel about homeless)
Well.
On my way to work there is a place where there is always a homeless person with a sign looking for money. I try and give something to someone every time I have an opportunity. Even with that … well … I feel uncomfortable. Uncomfortable for me <I am not proud of this … but I would prefer avoiding them> and for them <I cannot envision it is easy to stand with a sign and ask for m oney>.
I will get to the ‘me’ portion but I also see a trend in how each homeless person asks for money.
The single people, who get money, leave as soon as they get something. It is almost like they just need something so they don’t have to be there anymore.
And then there are the couples … or the man standing there with a sign saying he has a family and needs help. Whew. These guys stick it out. Whatever you may personally feel about the homeless they look very much anguished … and extremely uncomfortable … but they will do whatever it takes to fulfill whatever obligation and responsibility they may have.
Regardless. I gave one young man a 20 dollar bill and he cried.
And, maybe because of him, I started writing this.
Because I know many people feel that all homeless people are entirely to blame for their situation. And they believe that “in their shoes they would do whatever it takes to get out of that situation.” Oh. And by “whatever” I don’t mean anything illegal … but rather McDonalds, sweeping floors or whatever.
I tend to believe that it is those same people who believe that under no circumstance could they find themselves homeless.
I say that because I would imagine at some point I felt that way. And … well … I don’t like that.
Because now? I don’t know. Homeless seems attainable to me. Will it happen? I doubt it. COULD it happen? Absolutely not out of the realm of possibility.
The truth?
Almost no one <outside of the infamous 1%> is honestly out of the realm of possibility.
All I ask here is that you take a minute and think about it.
Maybe not whether you could end up there … but the guy who cried. The person who you gave something to and they apologized, or made some excuse, for asking & taking. Those people are on such the edge of their pride that you KNOW that if they could be doing anything else, rather than being there, they would.
And in those few who show contrition … they give voice to the many who just stand there and are silent.
Ah. The silent ones.
Because I can absolutely see how someone’s pride has been eroded so far, simply out of survival, that they find a little corner in their mind to store away their pride just so they don’t go mad as they survive.
I would guess it is the same corner in a mind that a prostitute puts their self-esteem when they do what they do to survive.
Regardless. I did some research.
Most people are homeless due to circumstances that have overwhelmed them combined with the lack of a family support structure.
Others, particularly teens, often become homeless due to an actively hostile, perhaps even hazardous, abusive, or non-supportive family environment.
So what this means is that most of these people are in this situation because they don’t have a support system.
Yeah. Think about that (going back to a ‘realm of possibility’ for each and every one of us).
I imagine most of us have a support system.
But if we didn’t?
Would you change your ‘realm of possibility’ odds?
I tend to believe even the average person without a good friend and family support structure can be overwhelmed by domestic abuse, divorce, unemployment, illness etc.
And once overwhelmed it doesn’t seem like that far a road to being homeless.
I would imagine every one of the homeless has their own story. I imagine someone cares of the common threads that lead them to the place that got them there … I just care that they have a story.
Because once you believe they have a story then they are no longer invisible. Let me spend a minute on ‘invisible’ because there is a site discussing homelessness called “invisible people.” And the site actually shares stories. The stories you see on this site are the real people, telling their own, very real stories… unedited, uncensored and raw.
Here is the preface to the invisiblepeople site & videos before you watch one:
“The purpose of this vlog is to make the invisible visible. I hope these people and their stories connect with you and don’t let go. Some content may be offensive. Our hope is you’ll get mad enough to do something.”
Invisible people: http://invisiblepeople.tv/blog/?gclid=CMHz7KXslq8CFQS0nQodtgHALw
But think about it. We <who are not homeless> treat homeless people as invisible <whenever possible>.
Here is one of the best videos:
Homeless Jason on Homeless: http://invisiblepeople.tv/blog/2012/03/jason-homeless-youth-st-johns-newfoundland-canada/
Anyway.
I believe homeless become invisible for a variety of reasons.
And, once you think about it, I don’t think it is that difficult to get to the concept of invisibility.
Here is how one writes it:
Once on the street, people started to walk past him, ignoring him as if he didn’t exist… much like they do a piece of trash on the sidewalk. It’s not that people are bad, but if we make eye contact, or engage in conversation, then we have to admit they exist and that we might have a basic human need to care. But it’s so much easier to simply close our eyes and shield our hearts to their existence.
Yup.
That pretty much sums it up.
And maybe we should care they exist … because more people are going to be entering in the realm of possibility.
Poverty is a common thread among nearly everyone who experiences homelessness.
Whether the reason is situational <medical expenses> or familial <an existing poor family situation> as soon as a household, or individual, falls below or nears the poverty line you become vulnerable.
In my words? Poverty, or extreme financial issues, means you enter the realm of possibility.
Still wonder if it couldn’t be you?
Here are some factoids.
- Many people who experience homelessness are employed. In 2007 the Mayors’ Conference (representing the major cities in the US) found that 17.4% of homeless adults in families were working.
- Up to half of homeless women and children are victims of domestic violence (nationalhomeless.org). Robbed of their own financial and emotional resources, women with violent partners sometimes must choose between being abused at home and becoming homeless.
- About 26% of people who experience homelessness nationwide are mentally ill (Department of Housing and Urban Development).
- As many as 40% of homeless teenagers are lgbt (lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered). An expert says they’ve come from families that refused to accept them or that began to actively abuse them after their orientation became known.
Some other thoughts to think about.
Homeless people are dirty and in worn clothing not because it’s a fashionable choice, but because they lack access to showers and laundry.
Oh.
And before you say “just go get a job.” Legitimate employers may be picky about a potential employee’s dirty appearance, but they’re even more picky about there being an actual address and phone number on that application for employment.
Oh.
As well as where do you believe they would fall in the hiring hierarchy with the laid off middle class workers? It is tough for them to get out of the hole they are in.
In the end … I think it comes down to a simple respect for another human being.
This also reminded me that in a season 1 episode of West Wing, In Excelsis Deo, one of the vignettes is about a homeless person.
The story: Toby goes to meet the police at the National Mall Korean War Memorial, and learns from the on-scene detective that a homeless man was found dead there on a park bench. The man was wearing a coat that Toby donated to the Goodwill that he had left a business card in. Toby wonders why the coroner’s office is taking so long to remove the body, and the detective informs him that since it was not foul play, it’s not a high priority. Toby asks the detective if he will be contacting the V.A., having recognized the man’s tattoo as being that of a Korean War veteran’s. The detective is not compelled to do anything.
In the end of the West Wing episode?
The President tells Toby that he has discovered that he (The President) has arranged for a military funeral for a homeless veteran, the President asks him if he isn’t afraid that it might bring every homeless veteran out of the woodwork … Toby replies …”I can only hope.”
Here is the clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqLIH2UiPXg
(I would have to say that this is one of the most thoughtful, touching … finest moments in West Wing history)
Look.
Many people believe homelessness is always the result of poor choices.
I believe that homelessness is rarely a choice.
Homelessness results from a set of circumstances in which people are required to choose between food, shelter, and other basic needs … and they get stuck with no alternative. And once in? Tough to get out.
This invisible person certainly didn’t begin intending to become homeless. Everyone on the streets has their own story, some made bad decisions, others were victims, but none of them deserves to be left there or ignored.
We should remember.
The homeless people we ignore weren’t always there. And many of them may have looked very much like us <working & in a home & with a family> at one point.
On occasion I find myself looking away … ignoring them … avoiding their eyes. And, you know, I am not proud of that. In fact … I’m ashamed when I realize I’m doing it.
As Toby said on West Wing … “I can only hope that I do better.”
You guys? Make your own choice. I can only share thoughts.
catching culture
May 18th
Ok.
The holy grail of advertising and marketing is to capture culture and performance at the exact right moment.
Just catch culture and you are cool <but no one buys your shit>.
Just catch performance and you aren’t cool enough <or “badge worthy” enough> to hit sales critical mass.
Performance is easy … although many companies seem to forget that they have something functionally important to offer people.
Culture is not easy. Catching it, at the appropriate time, is part luck <because we consumers are not only often illogical we are also inconsistent and incredibly fickle with short interest in fad> and is part smart planning & assessment.
And while capturing culture & performance, while smart, is difficult and elusive it is even more challenging to execute (in a relevant non-stupid way).
All that said.
Adidas is actually doing a great job at the moment catching culture without sacrificing performance.
Nike used to … but have lost their way (different post).
But Adidas.
Doing a great job. Captured almost perfectly in the new Adidas tv spot using Katy Perry’s song (and a good choice of a song) … and the running shoe ad is featuring Katy Perry.
Huh? Didn’t I say they hadn’t sacrificed performance? Yup.
In general Katy is wacky … but in a good way (and I will write another post just about her & her music because she needs to be taken more seriously in my eyes).
Anyway.
While she is wacky … and brings her wackiness to an Adidas commercial … she does it in tandem with superior global athletes. Therefore Adidas becomes culturally relevant without losing its performance delivery.
The television execution is called “Everybody Runs.” Watching the longer one minute version you see a variety of running … Beckham killing it, Derrick Rose warming up, Messi being Messi and Katy the casual runner who looks like she’s having a good time … oh … and the costumed San Francisco Marathon (where there is someone dressed as a robot).
Adidas Global Brands guy Erich Stamminger says the campaign “brings together the diversity of the brand under one strong roof. From the court to the catwalk, the stadium to the street, we are giving an authentic statement with credibility that only Adidas has.”
I actually believe they pulled it off. They are authentic ‘fashion’ and yet authentic ‘performance’.
Adidas “all in” 2012 Commercial with Derrick Rose, Messi, Beckham and Katy Perry
- :30 second version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3XwVMs-rmA
- :60 second version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjMgUanz6h0
I thought I would also add in a very well done culturally relevant Adidas women’s advertisement which also has Katy in it but she isn’t really featured.
Personally … I wish more larger companies would do marketing that showcases women only.
All adidas (women): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIsvor0ID_U&feature=relmfu
Bonus.
I have a folder with ideas for companies if I ever meet them.
And, of course, I have quotes and music selections waiting to be used (when appropriate).
While a marketing idea is … well … a marketing idea … words or music can bring an idea to life in ways that actually breakthrough enough in the morass of messaging we absorb everyday …
Anyway. Adidas.
Personally I believe the opening to this very random song would be perfect for where the brand is today and what they are trying to do (which is to create a world view Adidas style):
It would be a hauntingly strong message and ad:
New world in my view king britt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3t0V2XB9DU
Adidas … even if you don’t use my idea <which you can use for free> … well done.
cell phones and 8 year olds
May 14th
“Adults — digital natives or not — can’t imagine what a childhood mediated by mobile, social technology that didn’t exist 10 years ago is actually like.” – Senior editor The Atlantic magazine
I admit.
Technology has created a significant new challenge to parenting. I struggle to think of anything since the printing press that would affect parenting as much as technology <smartphones, cell phones, i-pads, etc.> is doing.
Television was different (it’s not portable).
Cars was different (cannot drive until 16).
Anyway.
3rd grade children are, on average, eight years old.
20% of 3rd grade boys and 18% of 3rd grade girls already have a cell phone <2011 Massachusetts study of elementary, middle, and high school students>.
By the time children reach 5th grade, 39% of the kids have cell phones.
More than 83% of the students have a cellular device by middle school.
I have mixed feelings.
And frankly its not because of kids having access to this technology at too young an age … its more because of the quote I began with … we <older folk> cannot imagine a childhood mediated by technology.
And because we cannot imagine it … we have a propensity to limit it.
We all focus on ‘my kid is attached to their cell phone’ or ‘all they do is text’ or <fill in the blank>.
Is that wrong?
Geez. Parts of it doesn’t sound wrong and yet parts of it does sound wrong … because they are already living in a world I struggle to even imagine.
And <to increase the challenge> I cannot even come close to imagining what their adult world will look like.
Part of me thinks it is silly to restrict their usage of something that is already integral to today’s world.
Another part of me understands that we adults <including teachers and the overall education system> are not set up to manage their usage (unless we use guidelines from our own youth … which seems unbelievably silly).
Regardless.
I have another post where I will note the increasing % of children below the age of 5 using computers <there are even kindergartens that have this now> to learn.
I have had multiple debates with other TED participants with regard to the ultimate effect on cognitive learning <I am on technology’s side and I am in a minority>.
It is a whole new world.
And while we older folk may try and keep up with the technology we run the risk of not keeping up with our children’s’ world.
No. I don’t have an answer.
Yes. I do believe we adults need to come up with an entirely new set of ‘rules’ that will make us feel incredibly uncomfortable in dealing with our children.
Here is what I do know.
It will not be long before that 83% having cellular devices will be at the 3rd grade level.
It will not be long before over 80% of ALL children (any age … including less than 5) will have access to the internet.
We either need to accept it and do something to take advantage of it or we run the risk of creating the largest generational gap <and ensuing friction> since maybe age of the printing press.
Oh.
One day after I published the first version of this post I received the new Economist and had to add the following letter to the editor to my post:
SIR – Your special report <the third industrial revolution> is a warning bell for America’s outdated education system. Digital technology surrounds every facet of our lives. But when children walk into school they are usually told to give up the tools that power this new digital revolution and travel back in time to the days of Henry Ford’s factories. Indeed, classrooms in 2012 would seem normal to students in 1912: a teacher at the front, a board behind her to write on, two dozen children lined in rows who come and go as the proverbial steam whistle lets them know their shift is over.
We left that world a long time ago, and the customised and innovative tools of digital learning are long overdue in our education system. The disruptive nature of the digital revolution may bring more prosperity than either of its predecessors, but if the West cannot change its 19th-century model of education we will cede this wealth to others.
ADAM PESHEK
American Legislative Exchange Council
Washington, DC
True, so true. We need to leave a world behind and need to make the changes that will make us feel uncomfortable … but needed.
augmented reality
May 14th
Augmented reality is … well … a reality.
Augmented Reality: engineers are pulling graphics out of your television screen or computer display and integrating them into real-world environments. This new technology, called augmented reality, blurs the line between what’s real and what’s computer-generated by enhancing what we see, hear, feel and smell.
On the spectrum between virtual reality, which creates immersive, computer-generated environments, and the real world, augmented reality is closer to the real world. Augmented reality adds graphics, sounds, haptic feedback and smell to the natural world as it exists.
Ok.
And I will be the first to admit, as a quasi-marketing person, marketing is already making a hash of it <abusing it, misusing it, etc. it>.
Regardless. I see lots of possibilities with augmented reality mostly in that it provides an opportunity to add dimension to whatever story someone is telling.
The story could be a children’s story.
It could be a ‘product’ story. It could be a presentation story. It can enhance ANY story.
With that in mind the following link takes you to an incredibly appropriate use of augmented reality to enhance a story. Please don’t be fooled that it is so good just because it has to do with magic … the idea can add magic to any presentation and/or story.
Imagine any presenter, doesn’t have to be a CEO, presenting with this type of presentation.
Imagine a marketing message being given this way.
Imagine a class being taught this way.
Here you go (this is awesome):
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/marco_tempest_a_magical_tale_with_augmented_reality.html
Hope you enjoyed.
And hope you recognize that augmented reality technology is here … now.
I have loved the stars too fondly
May 12th
“though my soul may set in darkness
it will rise in perfect light.
i have loved the stars too fondly
to be fearful of the night.”
Sarah Williams “the old astronomer to the pupil”
Stars are special things.
I do not know anyone who hasn’t stopped … for a moment on a clear night … to look up and scan the stars and either wonder which constellation it is or point out Orion’s belt or find the North star.
I do not know anyone who hasn’t … even in the most hectic moments … noticed that one star on a cloudy dark night that has made its light force it’s way through the shroud of darkness that has been trying to cover it.
I also don’t know anyone who hasn’t made a wish on a star. No matter how practical or cynical they may be.
Now. I had no idea who Sarah Williams was when I read this poem for the first time. So with some research I was disappointed to find that the poem this stanza (the 4th I believe) is pulled from is a literal tribute to science & astronomy.
Nuts.
Because I have found these words thought provoking far beyond the literal intent.
Why?
Well. First. While stars are special to astronomers … they are special to everyone.
Second. Simply … star gazing is something everyone should do.
Personally I have found looking up at the night sky when I was upset or a had lot was on my mind to be helpful. Kind of calming. And, certainly, hopeful.
On those days when random thoughts … sometimes negative thoughts … sometimes the less than positive thoughts … aw heck … any thoughts … start bouncing around in my head, I admit, I will take some time and look to the night sky searching for a star to distract me or give me some clarity (or maybe better said … some thought decluttering).
And, yeah, even to this day, I still do so <one would think I could have found a more logical sure-fire method by now … huh?>.
There is a simplicity in a star that permeates whatever else you may have rattling around in that pea like brain of ours and kind of gives you some space <I don’t know how else to word it>.
Its like the light of it kind of pushes everything else off to the side for a moment or two.
And that is helpful.
Because as happy as you may be with your life there are always thoughts floating around in your head of “ is there something better” or “have I settled” or any thoughts challenging “what is” in your life versus what could be.
And while it may sound pedantitic, if not silly, this is when looking up to the night sky and the stars and doing some star gazing seems to have it’s highest value.
Why? Not to look for tangible answers … because it would be silly to suggest that there answers in the stars.
Actually. You should do so because … well … there are not answers there (although wishing on a falling star is always a good idea just in case).
Maybe I will only suggest that … well … in their nothingness there is everything.
“I have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night”
Because there are truly the dark moments in life … the nights when it was … well … dark. Completely dark. So dark you almost feel swallowed up in it all.
And those are the nights when you know you need a little light. Maybe just a spark. But some light.
And, yeah, you know where I am going with this … because I have an answer for anyone reading who has some of these nights.
Look up at the stars.
I promise you (with everything I have within me to promise something). The stars can guide you back to some light.
Things that may be chewing away at you somehow ease up a little. Or maybe they don;t ease up … they just lose some of their strength <I call it an infusion of some hope>.
Somehow there light pushes dark thoughts off to the side and in that emptiness whether you have a real wish or not there is some hope.
Hope for something better. And, no, I am not talking about hope for winning the lottery or solving any particular issue. In fact, that is my own fondness of the stars … they are not particular in what they have to offer … they offer the nebulous intangible positiveness of ‘something.’
Anyway.
Enough of that.
So. Here are some thoughts about stars.
There is a funny thing about stars … they come back every night no matter how good or bad your day was.
Whether you can only see a faint glimmer or a full constellation they are there.
They make great companions.
When everyone else is too busy … stars always have time to spare.
You can’t tell a star to go away because they won’t.
And no matter how complicated things get … well … a star remains simple.
With no expectations they patiently wait whatever you want to say to them or ask of them.
And they always carry a light with them … kind of like a glimmer of hope for something ‘better.’
Maybe Van Gogh said it best.
“For my part I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of the stars makes me dream.” – Vincent van Gogh
My thought for the day?
There is always time to look at the stars.
observation of the day: people power
May 10th
“A wave of shareholder activism is shining light on ….” – subhead in The Guardian
“A new kind of outrage: Investors kick out against inflated pay packages” – headline in The Economist
So.
The issues America (and many countries) is having at the moment are complex but I wanted to make an observation of one thing … how everyday people can make a difference.
The topic? Leaders pay is out of whack.
I believe since the 70s the pay discrepancy between the top, middle and bottom has increased exponentially while overall company performance has not matched the shift. In addition. There seems like there has been a mindset shift. It is a little difficult to quantify but leaders in the 70s had a stronger philanthropic attitude as well as “taking care of others with my high earnings” attitude.
All that said … let me begin by defending leaders (a little).
First. The greater good.
While we would all like to believe we have an inner ethics compass we know for sure we all have an inner survival compass. Leaders are no different than the rest of us <albeit they earn exponentially more than us> in that there is such a sense of job insecurity these days it is really difficult to look beyond “self” for the “greater good” when you don’t know if you have a job tomorrow.
Second. CEO (or leaders pay).
Look. I have managed a couple of companies and I have no issue with a leader getting paid gobs of money. Until you have been in the shoes it is difficult to understand the incredible day in and day out pressure (does anyone ever notice a president enters office with no gray hair and leaves with a head of gray hair) and the fact that while no matter how well you delegate responsibilities every day you are making at least one decision every day, yes, every day … that could impact the future of the company (impact being profitability to complete failure).
Oh. And if anyone truly believes that a leader doesn’t realize she/he are managing people and the hard decisions they make impact people’s lives, they are nuts. The truly callous leader is a small minority. The majority are constantly weighing the benefit of the many versus the pain of the few. And the few who get screwed stick with them in sleepless nights.
Okay.
Now that I have defended … the compensation is out of whack.
But people can do somthing.
And, no, I don’t mean strikes or picketing.
The Guardian and The Economist have recently written articles on how shrehlders are stepping up and doing something.
In the past the majority of shareholders didn’t even vote. Didn’t need to. Why would they? They were making money.
Now? It’s a double whammy. Head and wallet.
Wallet they may not be getting the return they had before.
Head in that they realize the compensation is out of wack. So they are using their votes to reject the CEO/leader salary increase.
This is people stepping up and doing something and course correct.
compensation for executives is under scrutiny from shareholders, and investors, globally.
- Aviva, a British insurer with a downwardly mobile share price, announced on April 30th that its chief executive would forgo a planned pay rise because of shareholder criticism. The head of the compensation committee for Barclays was heckled at the bank’s annual meeting in London on April 27th. Big American banks cleverly scheduled their meetings away from the clamouring mobs of Wall Street—Citigroup went as far as Dallas and declined to provide a webcast. But its efforts could not muffle the bang made by a non-binding shareholder vote against a ludicrous compensation scheme for Vikram Pandit, its chief executive.
Citi is not alone. FirstMerit of Ohio also lost a shareholder vote in April, having granted its chief executive a steep rise despite single-digit returns on equity and a depressed share price. Three other large American financial firms received less than 65% approval on pay-related votes, a symbolic if not actionable threshold, according to Semler Brossy, a consultancy that began last year to collect data on these votes
Shareholder meetings used to be routine now they are becoming events for people to speak out.
When shareholders (a majority) vote then you know they are actually paying attention … and they actually believe they can do something.
Oh.
Hmmmmmmmmmm … on a separate note …
We have an election coming up. Maybe more than 40percent of all registered voters will actually vote.
Isn’t that why shareholders (citizens) get a vote? To course correct?
comment of the day: elections and governing
May 10th
I saw this comment in The Guardian:
The French elections lasted for what? A month and a half, now they have a new President. Our elections begin 2 years in advance and don’t end until super tuesday which sounds like a sporting event. Our leaders cannot function because they are always fighting for their jobs from every special interest group in the world. – The Guardian: commenter commenting on The US election
I agree.
life formulas
May 9th
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.
