Posts tagged quotes
confidence adults & tweens
May 22nd
So.
Sometimes I write about something because I was thinking about it … but them sometimes a picture makes me write. This picture reminded me that a lot of teens & tweens feel this way <in fact … one posted this picture she made>.
This picture also reminded made me think about kids & confidence & resilience and the role us adults play in their success with all.
“Someone was hurt before you, wronged before you, hungry before you, frightened before you, beaten before you, humiliated before you, raped before you…yet, someone survived…You can do anything you choose to do.” – Maya Angelou
Growing up is tough (stating the obvious).
I began with Maya’s quote because I often believe that a tween/teen’s world is very small. What I mean by that is that it often seems like the entire world is against you (as an individual) and that everything seems to revolve around you & only you in terms of issues, parents, the bully in the hallway and the mean chemistry teacher.
It is difficult as a tween to remember that others have been there (this little space in hell you seem to exist in) before you … and the others before you made it … yep … they all pretty much survived.
And, as a teen, you are still in the development stage with regard to the self confidence (and resilience) that will carry you through this seeming hell.
Self confidence is important in almost every aspect of our life but it is especially fragile in the tween years.
Think about this next thought (to compound that last thought).
At the same time the tween is struggling finding their own self confidence … there are many adults who are also struggling to find it.
Ok. That last thought is an important point. Because this self confidence struggle thing can be a vicious path. People who lack self-confidence can find it difficult to become successful – kids and adults. Therefore if we don’t invest the energy to get someone on the right path as a tween the likelihood of success (self confidence-wise) as an adult diminishes accordingly.
Low self-confidence is self-destructive. It often rears its head as negativity. And that is a slippery slope difficult to get off of when on it … therefore it begets itself all over … and over … and, well, you get it.
So imagine the importance when you think about over and over (and how many times that cycles) if you permit it to begin at 12. Or 10. Or 15. Or … well … you get it.
Ok. So.
It seems like good ole Maslow suggested several things contribute to self-confidence — self-actualization (what I do) and self-esteem (what I feel/believe).
We gain a sense of self actualization when we see ourselves mastering something, gaining some skill and attaining some tangibleness (a result?) to hold on to as actualization. This gives someone a tangible proof that they really don’t suck. That if you learn and work hard you can succeed. Self actualization actually leads to accepting bigger and more difficult challenges and teaches resilience and persistence (and managing mistakes/failure).
And then there is self-esteem. This is more a general sense that we can cope with what’s going on in our lives. And we feel good, or at least ‘good enough,’ about ourselves. Partially this comes from a feeling that the people around us approve of us. But it also comes from the sense that we’re competent at something and that we can compete successfully in the world by being who we are.
Some people believe that self-confidence can be built with affirmations and positive thinking.
Yikes.
There may be some truth in that, but I just cannot accept that self confidence can be all ‘fluff.’ You have to be good at something … have some competence at something. To me, without this underlying competence, you just have ‘empty’ (or maybe better said … ‘hollow’) self-confidence.
If you believe that, then self confidence in a tween is part mental and part doing.
And that means the truly difficult part is it is easy (or easier) to build self confidence if you focus on what you have achieved … but young people just don’t have the body of accomplishments to draw upon.
Oh. The issue is exacerbated by the fact lack of self confidence typically leads to inaction.
Therefore this is an evil doom loop.
If true confidence (as you get older) shifts from a mental aspect to one drawing from a ‘deed’ (what you have done) aspect and yet, as a kid, your lack of confidence begets continuous non action (no deeds) … well … you are screwed (from a confidence standpoint).
Sure.
Someone could argue that you can build a portfolio of accomplishments to draw upon even at a young age … but it is different.
Frankly … a tween/teen needs to be less reliant on what they have done but rather start by managing their mind. Learn to defeat the negative self-talk which can destroy confidence.
And this is where us old folk play a HUGE role.
“Mind” stuff is fragile. And we tend to be ‘realistic’ or “manage the mind” differently because … well … of our perspective. Because we are supposed to be ‘practical’ adults. We aren’t really wrong in how we look at it … but we are maybe wrong for who and what is going on.
Let me remind you of a Lao Tzu quote: “Kindness in words creates confidence”.
Now.
I am not suggesting we need to pamper kids … maybe just pamper their dreams & hopes?
Maybe it is not even pamper … maybe it is just caring.
I saw some findings from the Tween Confidence Index and the results were clear: tween confidence is short-lived, yet can be safe-guarded by maintaining strong communication between tweens and their parents. In fact, the majority of tweens surveyed found talks with their parents to be “very helpful,” and there was a measurable relationship between tweens’ confidence levels and the value they placed on these talks.
“The Unilever Tween Confidence Index reveals just how critical parent communication is to help tweens transition into competent, confident teenagers. By keeping the lines of communication open, parents can minimize the decline in self-esteem that we know begins around age 12 or 13.” – Rosalind Wiseman, internationally recognized educator.
Some facts for my parent/adult readers from The Unilever Tween Confidence Index, conducted by KRC Research:
- A majority of tweens (69 percent) find talks with their parents to be “very helpful” in dealing with the pressures and challenges they face.
- Tweens are most stressed about hearing rumors about themselves or friends (68 percent), getting good grades (61 percent), dealing with hard teachers (68 percent) and their first kiss (51 percent).
So <this is a fairly big thought coming at you next>.
We may not feel like we are saying the rights things but more often than not we are doing the right thing by trying to say the right things.
While you can’t stop a child from harshly judging how their abilities and bodies match up to others, there are a number of ways we can make a positive impact.
Because confidence to a kid doesn’t happen overnight. It is built little by little … thought by thought.
And each positive thought ultimately creates the resiliency which is at the foundation of anyone’s confidence.
And a tween can never start building the resiliency characteristic early enough.
Because life is relentless at that age. Frickin’ relentless. Here is the definition of ‘resilience’:
Resilience: Resilience is the ability to work with adversity in such a way that one comes through it unharmed or even better for the experience.
That means having the ability to face whatever Life decide to throw at you … and refuse to give up 9keep on moving). Resilience is what allows a kid to move beyond whatever misfortune, hardship, mistake or …. at its worst … an emotional or psychological trauma (an extremely stressful or life-threatening situation or abuse) a child may face.
Resilience is, in some ways, about tenacity and fortitude and character. Having the character to find the determination to embrace all that makes life worth living … even in the face of dire events.
An aspect of resiliency has to be a belief for ‘something better’ which can be embodied in a vision or purpose.
I tell kids – everyone faces adversity. Everyone. Adversity is an equal opportunity employer.
Resilience is especially important during the tween years when children face new academic challenges, pressure and rejection from peers, and increasing awareness of their own limitations. Resilient children bounce back well after they face these issues. They are less likely to develop depression, anxiety or unhealthy coping mechanisms like aggression, eating issues and substance problems. Some characteristics that encourage resilience are innate – such as intellectual ability.
“If you voluntarily quit in the face of adversity, you’ll wonder about it for the rest of your life.” – Bill Clinton
Truer words have probably never been spoken.
And every tween should be told this (by an adult). Even if the adult is struggling with their own self confidence. We owe it to them to at least show them the way.
It is our responsibility, yes, our responsibility … to create opportunities for tweens (young people) to develop a positive self-concept. Praise. Listen. Take interest. Show respect.
Allow them the opportunity to develop their own sense of self and self confidence.
For we don’t want them to follow in our footsteps … we want them to go beyond our footsteps.
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.
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.
no secret to life
May 7th
“There are no secrets in life just truths that lie beneath the surface” – Dexter
I love this quote.
To me it seems to put a highlight on the inner struggle we seem to have with trying to make life so‘mysterious’ (or some invisible hand) and a lack of desire to control, or assume responsibility for, our own life.
Yup. At it’s harshest it is simply ‘shirking responsibility.’
So. Some people call it destiny. Sometimes they suggest is “god’s will.’ Some call it fate.
All of which imply there is some secret to life that unless we are Sherlock Holmes we will never know or understand.
The fact is that life is just truths ‘that lie beneath the surface.’
And if you are willing to hold your breath a little while and dip down under the surface you can see truth.
But truth is a scary thing <particularly when it comes to Life from a personal perspective>.
It means recognizing strengths and weaknesses <real ones … not societal ones>.
It means recognizing past failures and lies.
It means recognizing what is real hope and what is false hope <being truly realistic>.
It means recognizing that we have some limits to what will be <and limits vary at what point in Life you assess the boundaries>.
Look.
I imagine we all hide from some of the harsh truths and inevitably retreat into some layer of ‘self lie.’
And while it may not be out & out lying … the fact is we adapt socially to maintain some façade of what we “wish we could be.”
Freud suggests that we have a “hidden self” lying in our subconscious that is often too much of a struggle for our conscious minds to handle. Because of that we do some cognitive gymnastics creating defense mechanisms twisting reality just enough to create justification to ourselves for our behavior.
Freud <no matter what I may think about some of the wacky things he said> is correct.
We all have either a hidden self or aspects of our self we would rather ‘hide from’ just because we would rather not face them.
Part of our defense mechanism is this mysterious “secrets of life.’
Sorry, my friends, there is no real secret to Life.
Just truths hidden below the surface if you are willing to look … and face them.
“I’m fine”
May 3rd
“I’m fine.”
How many times have we heard those two words?
How many times have we accepted the response and moved on?
Oh.
And how many times should we not have moved on?
So.
I have had this post in my draft folder since mid March. It just didnt seem done enough to post. Like it was missing something. And then the news about Junior Seau’s suicide came out yesterday. Not everyone will know Junior <a great USC football player and NFL linebacker> and that is okay … the point is he was 43. And successful. And his friends and family had no idea he had thoughts of suicide.
I am sure they all heard “I’m fine” numerous times.
Two things hit me hard when the story came out. First. His mother <and please don’t get me started on who the idiot was who thought it would be a good idea to put a grieving mother in front of a microphone only hours after learning her son had died> saying “who would do this to my son?” It was not even in the realm of possibility in her grief stricken state to consider he was suicidal. Second. An ex-teammate holding back tears onscreen describing how Junior would get injury treatment in private so his teammates never saw him ‘less than.’ And how that same teammate broke down admitting he never thought that would translate the same way into personal life … and the pain in his voice when he said “if only he had told us … any of us would have been there for him.” (note: I am not sure anything is a stronger reminder of how suicide impacts anyone and everyone than watching a massive man who has singlehandedly destroyed other very large strong men on the football field sob over the helplessness of not being able to do anything … or being given the chance to do something)
We should not be fooled into thinking this is just about sports concussions or athletes who strugle with life after sports. Yes. These men are well oiled competitive sports machines who are ‘wired’ to be that way. But. We would be foolish to not believe that there are also well oiled competitive life machines.
People who go through life … well … just fine <thank you very much>. They look smooth and seamless in life. They take bumps and bruises from life in stride and inevitably shrug them off and keep on playing the game of life at a highly competitive level.
Ah.
But. (Yeah there is a but).
Behind closed doors.
I go back to the two things that struck me the most in the Junior Seau aftermath.
Mother. Disbelief “who would do this to my son” (never crossing her mind it could be suicide). Athlete friend. He always took treatment in private so that in front of us he was always the best he could be.
And that same friend saying that no one would have hesitated to be there … if he had let them in.
Well oiled Life machine people are always “fine.”
“I’m fine” is one of those evasive phrases we use when we have no intention of elaborating.
Ok.
Maybe think about it this way.
“I’m fine” may be the single most common lie.
You know what I mean.
Someone asks “how are you?” and you say “I’m fine.”
And you aren’t. It sucks at that moment. And maybe not normal sucking … maybe some big time sucking at the moment.
It happens. Just as Life happens. And because you are a ‘well oiled life machine’ you know people see you as ‘fine’ so … you use the words to confirm it.
Some thoughts. What do we do when “I’m fine” is simply camouflage for some private and intensely personal material that because we never <or very rarely share> is next to impossible to say out loud?
First. Think about the material that is really ‘not fine.’ And maybe redefine it in your head so that you can actually get to ‘second.’
Second. This is the easy answer <for me to say> … talk. Speak. Say something.
Simply say “well … not fine.”
I say that and I purposefully put <for me to say> because I could just as easily have put ‘this is the hard part <for me to do>.’ And I honestly believe I am not that different with regard to this as others.
The simple act of talking can be incredibly important … and incredibly difficult. Talking openly about emotions and feelings is a good thing … and incredibly difficult. Issues should not go unnoticed … and is incredibly difficult to be noticed for something like this.
Hmmmmm …. incredibly difficult. So what do we do? <the truth> … we would rather lie.
This ordinary lie is in everyday life.
And just as lying, in general, is not a good thing in this case if you are not paying attention … really paying attention … this lie … unattended … will keep the individual from changing for the better … and actually will keep the person from being fine at some point … and, at its worst, will reach a Junior Seau level.
Ok.
“I am fine.” This may not be a lie for you … but <this I guarantee … unequivocally guarantee> someone within the next week who says “I’m fine” is not.
Because I don’t think that most people are “fine” most of the time.
Most of us have problems. And many of us have serious problems … physical illnesses, addictions, emotional struggles, marriage stuff, real financial difficulties, inordinate job stress, and parenting challenges … or any number of real Life issues that can keep us up at night.
That’s life.
We have all faced some of these problems in life and when we do … we are not ‘fine’.
We are … well … just ‘dealing.’
But that is not fine.
Not fine is being confused, sad, hurt, scared, lonely, angry, lost. All of which different people deal with differently <and obvisously everyone has a different capacity for ‘not fine’ stuff> but dealing well or not dealing with … it is all in the “I am not fine” category.
This is tough stuff. This is personal stuff. And for most people it’s not easy to be honest and truthful about our troubles. It is part self reflection struggle and part ‘strength of character’ struggle <makes me look weak>.
But I believe more people need to be honest. Because I honestly believe it is the only way to get the help to get better.
But that’s me.
Many people would rather just answer “I’m fine.”
Too embarrassed to share their problems, maybe even to themselves, they lie.
Lying to themselves. Lying to someone else. Doesn’t matter. It’s a lie.
And within the lie they remain trapped.
Trapped in situations that often go from bad to worse.
And worse leads to the worst <which in most minds is ‘unsolvable>.
If you’re anxious and worried all of the time, you’re not fine.
If you’re stressed and angry all the time you’re not fine.
If you’re fighting with your spouse/parents all the time, you’re not fine.
If you’re drifting through life without a purpose, you’re not fine.
But. Here’s the good news.
It’s okay not to be fine.
It’s okay to talk about it.
It’s okay to acknowledge that your mind can have issues just like any part of your body.
Acceptance is half the battle in my opinion.
Everyone has their weak spots.The one thing that despite your best efforts, will always bring you to your knees, regardless of how strong you are otherwise.
-Sarah Dessen
However, in my experience even the smartest strongest people fall short of accepting anything other than “I’m fine” even when confronted with glaring in-the-face facts about illogical and irrational behavior. Those well oiled Life machines cannot envision not being well oiled. To them it is all or nothing with very very little inbetween.
Anyway.
Why did I write this?
Well.
Because I like writing about the truth.
Because Junior Seau, a 43 year old man, who to his friends was “fine.”
Because I was also just reading about some really jarring truth in Amanda Beard’s memoir. A young woman who has, what, 7 Olympic gold medals? Posed for magazines? Yet … Beard kept her physical and emotional turmoil <including cutting, bulimia, depression, massive anxiety> all hidden behind a beautiful smile and an incredible athletic talent. She revealed little, if nothing, to her family, friends and coaches.
I envision they both had mastered the art of “I’m fine” responses.
That kind of truth behind an ‘I’m fine’ is unsettling.
But possibly it is only truth that can finally set you free from the ‘not fine’ category.
Oh.
Because I want to just remind everyone.
Pay attention.
Sometimes “I’m fine” is truly a lie.
And someone needs help.
And sometimes those who need the help the most just do not know how to ask for it. And they really aren’t asking for help … they are simply asking for hope. And anyone one of us is qualified to give that.
finagle’s Law
Apr 30th
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.
the flaw in creativity collaboration
Apr 26th
Ok.
This is not a popular point of view these days.
I am a firm believer, that in the creativity business, collaboration isn’t good.
Well. “isn’t good” is like saying “never” or “it always sucks” or something like that.
Let’s just say creativity isn’t about collaboration.
And I found a quote that says it perfectly:
“Art is I; science is we.” – Claude Bernard
I didn’t know who good ole Claude was until I found this quote … he was a man of science … in fact .. among many other accomplishments, he was one of the first to suggest the use of blind experiments to ensure the objectivity of scientific observations.
Anyway.
He says it best.
Art, and true creativity, is really an ‘I’ business. Ideas generated from an individual. Where creativity is sparked within. Look. Others can stoke the fire but an individual has to provide the spark. There you go … an original idea originates from an individual,
And let me dig myself into a deeper hole … in addition … by including others the original idea is rarely sharpened but rather dulled.
Ok. Science on the other hand is about We.
A confluence of factors & minds each sharpening that type of idea.
Ok.
He also said:
“The living body, though it has need of the surrounding environment, is nevertheless relatively independent of it. This independence which the organism has of its external environment, derives from the fact that in the living being, the tissues are in fact withdrawn from direct external influences and are protected by a veritable internal environment which is constituted.”
Once again.
A science thought … but a good life thought.
And a nice thought to complete the thought on creativity and collaboration.
Original creativity in thinking is relatively independent from the external environment. In the end an individual can absorb, can discuss, can incorporate as much of the ‘external environment’ that is necessary to feed creativity … but the idea resides within the individual.
That’s it.
That’s my thought.
