===============

“The most destructive thing I’ve ever done was believe someone else’s opinion of me.”

Teal Blue Jay

==============

  “I think it’s intoxicating when somebody is so unapologetically who they are.”

Don Cheadle

============

“I have sometimes sat alone here of an evening, listening, until I have made the echoes out to be the echoes of all the footsteps that are coming by and by into our lives.”

A Tale of Two Cities

====================

The game of “self” may be the most difficult, challenging, game one ever plays.

And, yeah, it is an “I” sport.

Yeah.

Your “I” wanders around the “we” world and interacts with “them” and gets a humongous amount of feedback from “everyone”, but, ultimately, this particular game really is an “I” sport.

That said.

Sifting thru what matters and what is said outside your own head is a tough, full time job. You cannot completely ignore what is being said & thought about you, but you also cannot live solely by what is being said & thought about you.

Well. I am very much a be yourself, be true to thineself, maintain your individuality, look inside rather than without type of guy.

Possibly to a fault.

I am this way probably because most of my youth I was told over and over again who I was supposed to be and how to act and what I was supposed to do <and I did not like it>.

Regardless.

Every once in a while you need to make sure you haven’t become a joke. Because often no one actually tells you that you are a joke, or even tell you the joke, or let you in on the joke.

Ok. That was harsh.

Maybe every once in a while you just need to check in with the rest of the world and see what life looks like through someone else’s eyes just to be sure you are playing your “I” game well.

Now.

“Sure you are playing well.”

This implies there are some nice neat rules & standards & milestones you can judge your Life game-playing.

There are not.

And because there aren’t … well … then inevitably you start scanning around for some external feedback.

Here is where it gets real tricky.

Life is playing its game <even if a business or other people are trying to ‘game the system’> and you have to figure out which player you are truly playing against. I am not suggesting you should avoid considering anyone who is actually in the game. Just who is more important than another.

Why?

Because you need to ask what is at stake in the real game.

Because the one and only answer is … you.

Yeah.

It is an “I” sport.

========== 

“Oh, don’t mind me.

I’m just silently outperforming all of you on my own terms.”

INTP Musings

===========

You are the one dodging, bobbing & weaving as you make your way forward. And you are doing all that because the world is a minefield of inconsistency and uncertainty which means you better fucking be able to adapt … or you are screwed.

You have to be able to adapt to and take advantage of changing circumstances.

Ok.

If I am trying to stay consistent to me <my sense of self> & yet adapt to an ever changing inconsistent world and there really are no established set of measurements to judge oneself against … well … I can 100% guarantee you will end up have to talk to your yourself about yourself a lot.

And, yeah, this means we all have a talk with our self when bad shit happens.

Unfortunately most times we have a talk with ourselves when bad shit has happened, we tend to have a shitty talk with ourself. The shittiness can occur in a variety of creatively destructive ways:

You can blame external ‘forces’ <”not my fault”>.

You can blame yourself <spanning lack of confidence to lack of skills>.

What I will tell you is that when the shit hits the fan you can get a startlingly clear picture of who & what you are. And sometimes it ain’t pretty.

====

“Some conversations are not about what they’re about.”

Anne Carson

==

And, even worse, sometimes the conversation you have with yourself aren’t the conversations you think they are. What I mean by that is when bad shit happens most of us, in the moment or near the moment, are thinking causally – stimulus response stuff.

At worst our conversation with yourself sounds something like “you stupid shit” <suffice it to say … poor self-esteem is an equal opportunity employer>.

These conversations are sometimes call ‘soul searching.’ I, instead, refer to them as ‘soul wrenching.’ Doubt, fears of being good enough, self-uncertainty … these are the assholes you sometimes have a conversation with when bad shit happens. And, unfortunately, they all went to a debate school and unfortunately they all lie to talk a lot when given the opportunity.

Here is what I have to offer <as someone who has certainly had his share of both bad shit happening and shitty conversation with myself>.

We spend far far <far> too much time in these conversations on comparison.

Yeah.

It is natural … I mean … well … how else can you decide whether you are worth a shit unless you compare yourself to someone who IS worth a shit?

But, frankly, most of our sins are borrowed — just echoes of what is around us. So when bad shit happens the conversation really should be about you and with you.

note: I do believe having good sounding boards, preferably not family, who are fairly good at seeing the forest through the trees is invaluable.

Look. We always think about what we deserve. I imagine I could just suggest here that bad shit happens, you have shitty conversations with yourself and that you should have these conversations with the non shitty aspects within you when it happens, but I kind of think what gets you through shit sometimes needs a little more ‘oomph’ to get you through it.

So I suggest something simple. It’s kind of a mindset. Not any ‘happy hippie shit Secret stuff’ just an attitude that can kind of get you through when bad shit happens as well as when you scan about for answers with regard to how you are doing:

========= 

“I didn’t come this far, to only come this far.”

Unknown

==============

The truth is that distance is relative and progress is almost always assessed by perspective when assessing one’s Life.

Within that perspective you can be guaranteed that bad shit happens in work and in Life.

But … you know what?

It isn’t really about shitty things versus non shitty things.

It isn’t really about judging yourself either through your own eyes or someone else’s eyes.

It is really about the fact “you didn’t get that far just to get that far.”

None of us do.

And sometimes you just have to remember that.

And maybe that is the point of why I used the opening quote “most destructive thing I have ever done was believe someone’s opinion of me.”

External opinions have a nasty habit of destroying destinations. Destinations as in “where I am going.” And the opinions are cleverly destructive in that they not only destroy destinations seen but also those yet to be seen. Opinions actually can destroy roads, highways & paths as to getting father than the ‘far’ you have gotten.

Anyway. Be aware of what people say & think but always, always, keep in mind that all that matters is, well, I did not come this far only to come this far.

note: corollary to “I did not come this far only to come this far” is “just because i have nor reached my destination (objective) doesn’t mean i am nowhere.”

If you do that, everyone else’s opinions just seem to matter a little less.

================

“If you dig deep enough, you’re going to find that everyone’s a sinner.”

Logan Echolls

================

This about the fact people are imperfect, rarely 100% good, and the fact we all may be a sinner but still good.

** note: I am not using sinner in a religious framed way.

I agree with Logan (who was a character on Veronica Mars) that if you work hard enough you will find something bad, dubious, possibly unethical, in everyone’s past or even present. But you know what? It doesn’t really have to do with ‘sinning’ or being a sinner.  It is just that we all have flaws. Just to be clear. It is most likely if you dig deep enough you will also find everyone is basically the same and we all have hopes & dreams & insecurities. That said. If we accept the fact everyone is a sinner, our past is flawed in some way in which the standard human being would judge it is ‘guilty of something’ then you have to accept the fact no one is innocent.

“No one is innocent … Life is more about how you bear the guilt.”

Jacques Silette

Uhm.

No one is innocent.

Ponder that.

That means every one of us sinners carry some burden of ‘not innocent’. This seems relevant as:

• more and more people in today’s world are meticulously rummaging through other people’s pasts to find moments in which they were ‘guilty’ of something
• more and more people in today’s society appear to investing a lot of energy suggesting they are guilty of little, if not anything

Well. That is kind of bullshit. No one is innocent. We are all guilty of small, medium and even some large things. Therefore. It within that last sentence of the quote in which resides the larger Life thought.

Your life can be defined by how you bear that guilt.

It is the larger Life thought because “defined by” is actually “choices”. All the choices we make everyday in the little and the small as well as in how we judge ourselves, and our actions, and other’s actions. So we make all of these choices, one by one, dozens & hundreds over time, all the while accumulating some aspects of non-innocence.’ From that point on it becomes how we define it:

Do you ignore it?

Do you make excuses?

Do you deny it?

Do you worry about it?

Do you keep it secret?

Do you use it to motivate?

These are questions that reside within each of us <whether we elect to admit that they exist or not>. These are the questions that define how people bear the guilt.

Oh.

The one that is probably most important?

Do you even recognize you are not innocent?

I think in today’s world where we seem to rush to blame people and judge them guilty of something <often justly> we tend to push our own lack of innocence, in whatever degree it may exist, into some dusty corner of our mind. But I also believe there is an even more dangerous thing many people do and that is justifying their own past behavior & actions as ‘not so bad’ which is basically assuming, well, innocence.

What that means is, I imagine, there are many more people who don’t even know they are ‘not innocent’ of something than there are those who bear the guilt. I imagine this because bearing some guilt is a burden. A burden not just as a weight, but it also can bear some emotional erosion aspects if you are not careful.

While those who bear the guilt can sometimes be eaten away from the inside as they think about it, I would suggest there are many more minds being eroded by the unseen, unrecognized & unaccepted shadow of guilt which dogs each step one takes.

This comes to Life in a variety of ways.

It erodes in a way that when shit happens to them <because the guilt actually affects their behavior in some seemingly small ways> they scratch their head and wonder why.

Some of these people think fate is against them.

Many of these people think Life isn’t fair.

Many of these people never look at themselves, or to themselves, as the issue … just everything else.

Many of these people just look at others as ones who should be guilty <“I never did anything that bad”>.

All of that is sad to me. Mostly because people’s burden of guilt is most likely something manageable if the person would only take the time to face it — face the guilt and eliminate that weightless, but diminishing, shadow following them and choose to carry it instead. I honestly do not know if people ignore their ‘lack of innocence’ or place their sin in a third person way <region does this> because they don’t like the thought of it or they don’t know how to explain it or maybe its simple embarrassment or it could even be they DO see the burden and do not want to accept it.

Look.

We all have guilt for something. None of us are innocent. The something could be big or it could be very small. But that is the funny thing about ‘not innocent’ — its size doesn’t matter.

Normal laws of space & weight do not apply to ‘not innocent’. A sliver of ‘not innocent’ can bear the same weight as a mountain of ‘not innocent’.

We should all take a moment, every day in fact, and remind ourselves, especially before we jump to judging others, that if you ignore the degrees & dimensions of the guilty — none of us are innocent.

But, most importantly, once you accept no one is innocent <self included> what truly matters is how one chooses to bear that weight.

“Learn to be what you are, and learn to resign with good grace all that you are not.”

Henry Frederick Emile

In the end. One of the hardest things in the world for anyone is to embrace their flaws, their sin. Each of us ‘are not’ a lot of things. Recognizing those things is actually pretty easy. We notice them all the time. I guess the difficult part is accepting them. and resigning yourself to ‘not being something’ with grace. Being able to do that is a full measure of one’s character. And maybe that is what ‘being a sinner’ or ‘no one is innocent’ is all about – character. To accept our flaws means to accept some burden possibly demands character. I do wish more people would accept we are all not innocent and begin judging people more on how they carry they bear the guilt of their sin.

============

“If you pay attention to the present, you can improve upon it. And, if you improve on the present, what comes later will also be better …”

–

Paulo Coelho

=====================

“Where religious values might be relative, intellectual values fleeting, moral values ambiguous, and aesthetic values dependent upon an observer, the existence of any thing is infinite.”

Grendel, John Gardner

=========================
“Yet knowing how way leads on to way,

I doubted if I should ever come back.”

–

Robert Frost

==========

Well. I believe most ‘live in the present’ advice is absurd. I also believe Eckhardt Tolle, author of The Power of Now, is a nutjob with an unrealistic view of how to practically live life. All that said. I believe we, in business, have a wacky relationship with the present. While we espouse getting shit done each day is the step by step way to create the future you desire, we have an uncanny ability to not actually value the present until it has become part of the past. That doesn’t mean we don’t value what we do in the present it just seems to have a higher value when we look backwards and assess it. Maybe this abstract relationship with the present is driven by the fact businesses cannot make up their minds to live with the decisions they have made .. or crucify the decisions that have been made.

** note: there is a direct relationship between improving on your present and Robert Frost’s “The Road Not Taken” https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44272/the-road-not-taken

Suffice it to say the present takes on some fairly absurd dimensions in our minds. Oddly it can expand and contract depending on what we want to do and how we want to view it (ranging from a ‘for now’ caveat to ‘this is it’ declarations).

That said. While it seems like ‘looking backwards’ is almost a disease for most people, oddly, far less often do people actually view ‘the present’, in the present, as something we will ever come back to (that is one of those crazy time paradoxes which, if unraveled, could most likely resolve a lot of our perspective issues). Regardless. That seems kind of crazy to me. Crazy? Well. If you know you can’t go back, or doubt you will, maybe you would view it a little more closely and maybe (if you know you cannot go back) you may actually value the present as, well, valuable.

It is quite possible our problem with valuing the present for the value it deserves resides in the fact each present is actually fragmented by vector choices. What do I mean? In general, any business leader can do multiple things at the same time <as long as they are aiming in the same general direction> and, yet, time after time a business leader is faced with two roads and want to travel … well … both.

And sorry I could not travel both

And be one traveler, long I stood …

<Frost>

A lot of other business people smarter than I expound on grand visions and organizational charts with milestones and specific initiatives <an important aspect of vector choice decisionmaking>. I just think of each business treading a road with roads traveled or less traveled to choose from. Maybe its because of that each present can be overwhelming so, well, we diminish the choice importance and in conjunction diminish the present value of each moment.

Look (part 1). There is a lot to be said for “keeping your head down and focusing on what needs to be done and do it well.”  That is a version of living in the ‘now’ and, in fact, I would guess, having been a manager and watching other managers, 90% of management advice to employees is saying exactly that.

Maybe the most famous quote for this advice is:

“If you did not look after today’s business, then you might as well forget about tomorrow.”

Isaac Mophatlane

And you know what? That’s not bad advice.

It may not be the best advice nor is it the type of advice that guarantees ‘what comes later will also be better’, but in the scheme of things getting workers to focus on what they need to do now and do it well now at least keeps you out of the proverbial ditch.

Okay. Let me take that back. It doesn’t keep you out of the ditch.

Huh? Try walking in an open field one day just by looking down. If you walk for 5 minutes, I can almost guarantee you will <a> not have walked in a straight line and <b> walked directly toward what you may have sighted on before you put your head down.

Keeping your head down and focusing does have some merit, but it is not the end all be all nor does it guarantee you actually end up in a place you want to be or should be.

SONY DSC

My point? Doing well in the present is significantly different than improving on the present. The former tends to provide value in the moment while the latter tends to increase value in moments. I do believe we consistently undervalue the present in the present, but overvalue the ‘past’ present in reflection. That seems out of whack to me, but, that’s me.

Look (part 2). The present provides choices and the future provides opportunities to reflect upon those choices. If you set aside regret, I tend to believe all of us often want to go down both roads at once, but since it’s impossible to walk down two roads at once, we have to choose one road. But the reason I added in this part of the poem is the narrator is actually showing regret and rationalizing BEFORE even taking one step down either path. So the present actually diminishes in value through choice regret (the one not chosen has an abstract future embedded value).

“doubted I should ever come back”

<Frost>

Anyway. Sticking with the road metaphor, each present, each ‘one road’ can lead to another, and then another, until you end up very far from where you started. You cannot go back so you may as well value the present decision at the value it deserves – at that time, in that place, you are where you are and go where you will go and never return to that particular present.  If you can figure out how to properly value the present, i.e., you don’t lose sight of the value of that moment (the moment in the present), you will most likely have to go back and reassess the decision value (or as I call it “the return on choice’ – ROC ) for any more value than that moment actually deserves.

In the end.

Improving on the present is difficult because you actually have to value the present properly to insure you actually improve it. In addition, we seem to fail to understand you cannot improve the present from a future place – looking back.

==================
“To be hopeful in bad times is not just foolishly romantic.  It is based on the fact that human history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness.

What we choose to emphasize in this complex history will determine our lives.

If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity to do something. If we remember those times and places — and there are so many — where people have behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act, and at least the possibility of sending this spinning top of a world in a different direction.

And if we do act, in however small a way, we don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future.  The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.”

–

Howard Zinn

====

“Choice, not chance, determines human destiny.”

–

Robert W. Ellis

==============

“Living in defiance of all that is bad.”

These days I sometimes worry we focus, and dwell, upon the things that could be construed as ‘bad’ in life. Let’s combine that worry with a general belief that things are worse than they are.

The former are things like not liking your job or maybe getting caught up in the grind of life <and feeling like there could be “more” then what you are experiencing>. The latter are things like there are wars everywhere or even that there is some mass murder somewhere in your country everyday. But both seem to be rooted in some form or fashion of, well, a desire for some grand utopian future. A world in which nothing bad would ever happen.

That may sound too grandiose for what we everyday schmucks actually think about and desire, but it isn’t really. It isn’t because while we always want things to better our version of better — those things are most typically not viewed in increments, but rather substantial change. Therein lies the ever unreachable grand uptopian future.

Let’s be clear. “Better”, all by itself, is a slippery little fellow. Better always seems somewhere other than where we are — physically as well as in time. At least it can feel that way sometimes.

I sometimes think this uncomfortable feeling is a reflection of a natural desire for wanting to know what the end looks like and yet the end hasn’t even been written.

=====

“I’m afraid we’ll always be a book with the end pages ripped out.”

Madisen Kuhn

===

I do believe many people feel uncomfortable being a book with the end pages ripped out. Not only can they not read the ending, but they also feel the inherent incompleteness in their own story as well as Life <because they cannot see the end — this is exactly like doing things at work with no strategy or vision>. Unfortunately for us, within that incompleteness Life, requires us, no, demands us to make choices … day in and day out through an infinite amount of ‘present moments’. And sometimes you will need to make decisions that direct the course of your life and that decision will not be associated with a smiley face or some positive quote you can find on instagram or facebook.

Yikes. It all sounds so frickin’ overwhelming. All these ‘presents’ and ‘choices’ and no smiley faces, well, not just overwhelming but possibly just bad <as in not how I would prefer to live my life>.

Well. This is where defiance comes in. Unless you can live defiant of bad and see the happiness which is not only inherent within life itself, but intertwined in the infinite succession of presents, you are certainly doomed to thinking everything is bad. And if you are defiant I can almost guarantee you will see quite a bit of happiness intertwined throughout your Life and the world’s life. Because if you are defiant you will not overlook the little events.

====

“For most of life, nothing wonderful happens.

If you don’t enjoy getting up and working and finishing your work and sitting down to a meal with family or friends, then the chances are that you’re not going to be very happy. If someone bases his happiness or unhappiness on major events like a great new job, huge amounts of money, a flawlessly happy marriage or a trip to Paris, that person isn’t going to be happy much of the time.

If, on the other hand, happiness depends on a good breakfast, flowers in the yard, a drink or a nap, then we are more likely to live with quite a bit of happiness. “

Andy Rooney

==============

Look. While I have written about the fallacy behind “manufacturing happiness’ or the whole idea of ‘purposefully creating happiness’ I do tend to believe you can affect your happiness. It helps if your happiness is more likely dependent upon some realistic expectations, or maybe, viewing the little moments within the larger grind that is known as Life instead of seeking some larger more grand utopian vision of happiness and big events to define happiness.

Let’s say that happiness is built on discrete moments of now.

Uh oh. This means that happiness is driven not only by awareness but some common sense and clarity and there is no secret code. Darn. No secret code. Unfortunately, without a code to offer, I have to offer the unfortunate truth about happiness — you have to do something to gain happiness. Make choices. Choose to go somewhere. Choose to do something. Choose to explore something or somethings < including ideas and opinions>.

Defiantly choose to choose. And choose to live in defiance of all that is bad.

Anyway. I remember reading that JFK once said: “I look forward to an America which will not be afraid of grace and beauty.” Replace America with people … and I agree. Grace & beauty.

Well. Seems awful hard to think about those things if all you see is a bad world in turmoil. Philosophically the way to beat bad is, well, in that infinite succession of moments idea. The world can look pretty frickin’ bad when looking at the larger picture <which is a little weird because while bad things do happen in the larger scheme of things there is less violence in today’s world than almost any time over the past 200+ years>.

The only way to make things NOT look as bad is to manage life in that infinite moments way … that awareness in the present permits you to have some clarity with regard to the good that exists in the here & now.

I mean, well, if you always have your eye on the future or the larger picture you are either living in something unreal <an unwritten but hoped for future> or viewing all things around you assessing threats <the bad stuff> to maintaining your existence and reaching your desires.

Simplistically … if you avoid the succession of moments you have no chance of seeing what exists in that moment.

Defiance is not easy.

It is much much easier to not push back but go along for the ride … wishing it were better than it seems to be.

Defiance is a choice. And that is why I opened with the quote that choice defines destiny not chance.

If you are defiant, and push back, you are more likely to control the destiny of … well … your happiness let alone anything I imagine. The person and life you want to be DOES exist you just have to be defiant in the pursuit of it.

====

One Tree Hill Quote:

“There are moments in our lives when we find ourselves at a crossroads. The choices we make in those moments can define the rest of our days.””

And, of course when faced with the unknown, most of us prefer to turn around and go back.

But, once in a while, people push onto something better.  Something found just beyond the pain of going it alone. And just beyond the bravery and courage it takes to let someone in. Or to give someone a second chance.

Something beyond the quiet persistence of a dream. Because, it’s only when you’re tested that you truly discover who you are. And, it’s only when you’re tested that you discover who you can be. The person you want to be does exist; somewhere on the other side of hard work and faith and belief. And, beyond the heartache and fear of what lies ahead.

There are moments in our lives when we find ourselves at a crossroads.

The choices we make in those moments can define the rest of our days.”

=====

Living life in defiance of bad. Or maybe we should say ‘defiantly pursuing good in life.’ For if you are defiant and seek the good … the good can, and will, be seen.

============

note: this thought is also relevant to how one could view business

===

“Not in the clamor of the crowded street, not in the shouts and applause of the many, but in ourselves, are triumph and defeat.”

–

Longfellow

=====

“Because to influence a person is to give him one’s own soul. He does not think his natural thoughts, or burn with his natural passions.

His virtues are not real to him. His sins, if there are such things as sins, are borrowed. He becomes an echo of some one else’s music, an actor of a part that has not been written for him.

The aim of life is self-development. To realize one’s nature perfectly-that is what each of us is here for. People are afraid of themselves nowadays. They have forgotten the highest of all duties, the duty one owes to one’s self. Of course they are charitable. They feed the hungry and clothe the beggar.

But their own souls starve, and are naked. Courage has gone out of our race. Perhaps we never really had it. “

—

Oscar Wilde

====

Well. This is Life: shit happens. And, more importantly, inevitably shit happens to us. When that happens, the shit, suffice it to say … we all have a talk with our self.

Unfortunately, most times we have a shitty talk with ourself. Yeah. We tend to know diddleyshit about talking to ourself. At the root of our shittiness of self conversation is typically a variety of creatively destructive aspects:

You can blame external ‘forces’ <”not my fault”>.

You can blame yourself <blame spans lack of confidence to lack of skills>.

Let me stick with the latter <because only losers consistently think the former>.

To begin. What I will tell you is that when the shit hits the fan you can get a startling clear picture of who & what you are. And sometimes it ain’t pretty. And it ain’t pretty because we do not even begin the conversation right.

====

“Some conversations are not about what they’re about.”

Anne Carson

==

More often than not the conversation you have with yourself aren’t the conversations you think they are. What I mean by that is when bad shit happens most of us, in the moment or near the moment, are thinking causally – stimulus/response stuff.

“Shit happened because this shit was done.”

At worst, this conversation with yourself, sounds something like “you stupid shit.”

Most of us can deal with that. It is really only later that the problems truly arise because that initial conversation continues and you start delving deeper & deeper inside yourself. Yeah. These shitty conversations are sometimes call ‘soul searching.’

I, instead, refer to them as ‘soul wrenching.’

During the deeper conversation you encounter doubt, fears of being good enough, imposter syndrome, self-uncertainty. These are the assholes you sometimes have a conversation with when bad shit happens. And, unfortunately, they all went to a debate school and unfortunately they all like to talk a lot when given the opportunity.

Here is what I have to offer <as someone who has certainly had his share of both bad shit happening and shitty conversations with myself – albeit I tend to believe all of us have>.

We spend far far <far> too much time in these conversations on comparison type shit.

Yeah. It is natural … I mean … well … how else can you decide whether you are worth a shit unless you compare yourself to someone who IS worth a shit? But, frankly, most of our sins are borrowed – just echoes of what is around us.

So when bad shit happens the conversation really should be about you and with you.

And therein lies the next level of a self shitty conversation. It is a little weird because it is a Life paradox.

In general, research shows over and over again that we overestimate our abilities … we think we are better than we really are at things. And, yet, when bad shit happens and we start having this shitty conversation with ourselves … we have a tendency to think of ourselves as flawed … not good  … flawed.

<figure that one out …. Will ya?>

Somehow you gotta find the middle ground in that paradox.

You have to first uncover a realistic perspective of whatever shit that happened and then focus on … well … moving on.

====

“One does not walk into the forest and accuse the trees of being off-center,

Nor do they visit the shore and call the waves imperfect.

So why do we look at ourselves this way? “

Tao Te Ching

=====

I imagine I could just suggest here that bad shit happens, you have shitty conversations with yourself and that you should have these conversations with the non shitty aspects within you when it happens, but I kind of think what gets you through shit sometimes needs a little more ‘oomph’ to get you through it. The ‘oomph’ is rooted in the ‘moving on’ thought I just shared above.

I suggest something simple. It’s kind of a mindset. Not any ‘happy hippie shit Secret stuff’ just an attitude that can kind of get you through when bad shit happens.

I don’t know where I found this quote but I love it:

=========

“I didn’t come this far, to only come this far.”

Unknown

==============

I love it in its simplicity.

Bad shit happens.

In work and in Life.

And inevitably we have those shitty conversation with ourselves when bad shit happens.

But … you know what?

You didn’t get that far just to get that far.

None of us do.

And sometimes you just have to remember that and, possibly, one of the best times to remember that is when you are in the middle of a shitty conversation with yourself.

==========

“I prefer physical exhaustion over mental fatigue any day.”

—-

Clotilde Hesme

============

“There is a construct in computer programming called ‘the infinite loop’ which enables a computer to do what no other physical machine can do – to operate in perpetuity without tiring.

In the same way it doesn’t know exhaustion, it doesn’t know when it’s wrong and it can keep doing the wrong thing over and over without tiring.”

—–

John Maeda

=========

Well. Employee engagement is the key to maximizing productivity potential. Period. We can gussy up engagement with respect, safety, collaboration, etc, but business is about business and engagement has to do with the business of doing business well.

To be clear. I think of engagement on three levels:

• first is vision. Employees engage better, & have more interest to do so, when they not only know where the business is going, but are engaged with the vision
• second is how you go about doing business. Employees engage better, and have more interest in doing so, when they are rested, when they feel ‘psychological safety’, when they believe they are contributing (meaning) and when they get to do what they do with dignity & integrity
• third is energy. Employees engage better, and have more interest to do so, when they aren’t exhausted (mentally or physically) and are fresh.

You will find an infinite number of articles on the first and second. Heck. Even I have written about them. To me, the third is one of the least discussed and most overlooked aspect of engagement.

What do I mean? We talk about business transformation and ‘agile’ and constant innovation and relentless focus on the customer and, well, it all sounds exhausting. Add in when experts suggest leading an organization is like running a race (its actually nothing like it) and, shit, even I start feeling exhausted. Let’s be clear. Exhaustion and business is bad.

So. That said. Leading a business is more like managing the health of a body in which you do want some exercise and you do want some healthy eating and you do want to insure proper amount of sleep. Suggesting you want to run a business like you are in some marathon is silly and misguided. It is just as misguided to think about an organization like a machine with gears and moving parts and keeping it well-oiled and full of gas and shit like that.

So let’s talk about organizational exhaustion.

If you stay away from silly metaphors about what an organization is, or is not, simplistically you are trying to insure your organization is putting forth a proper amount of effort against the efforts you want it, and need it, to be working against. This is a daily, weekly, monthly and annual leadership objective. Different leaders have different styles working against this objective, but, simplistically, that is the objective.

Now. HOW you meet this objective typically takes some experience.

What do I mean? I assume most leaders do not inherently know exactly how to pace an organization. Pacing an organization takes some experience and some practice, some mistakes and some successes and then you zero in on how to do it well <or just keep getting better at it>.

Using me as an example. I liked a hard charging group when I got to a team/group management level. And I, personally, would be ecstatic if I didn’t have to sleep and I could go 24/7. In the beginning, that was my vision for my groups.

By the way, in general, good intentions/bad idea.

But what that meant was that I probably learned this lesson, pacing and applying effort appropriately, too slowly <and I most likely will have a bunch of past team members chuckling painfully in agreement>. Going hard charging all the time is not sustainable — you just have a constantly exhausted group. Effective hard charging doesn’t mean 24/7 it means picking your moments and going hard.

That said, in desiring to have hard charging organizations there are certainly some lessons learned to limit needless organizational exhaustion. Here are a couple I learned along the way:

• I had to be consistent.

It doesn’t get discussed often enough, but expectations go both ways. As a leader setting clear expectations is certainly expected <and I will mention that in my second learning>, but it really helps an organization if you establish clearly what people can expect of you – behaviorally and attitudinally.

Words surely matter.

Setting expectations surely matter.

Actions surely matter.

But consistency matters above all.

No leader is perfect and no leader will make the perfect decisions, let alone good decisions, all the time. Therefore it becomes incredibly important to just be consistent. Your organization, and specifically people, will become better accustomed to where you will be really really good and where you may be slightly off <and they will naturally accommodate both>. In other words your consistency actually offers your employees some direction for what they should do. Your best people will assess situations and know where you are consistently most likely right on, know the things you consistently overlook and know where you consistently leave some spaces for them to ‘do their thing.’

• Keep some strong threads of consistency.

Threads of consistency permit an organization to not have to think about some things. There were some really simple tactical things that I could control.

• What do you mean <clarity in articulation>
• Where are we going <set a visible North Star>
• What do you want me to do <pragmatic expectations>

If you could keep these three things solid and not have people milling about talking amongst themselves on these three questions, you were staying ahead of the game. It permits your organization to progress and not be stagnant. It permits your organization  to not invest unnecessary energy against those things and apply energy against doing shit.

Of course, a leader doesn’t have to do these things.

Of course, a leader doesn’t do these things at their own peril.

The peril? Exhaustion. frustration. Waste energy. Not doing these things has an expense to an organization and mostly that is defined by two things – time & energy. I would point out that both of those things are not infinite resources to an organization. I point it out because if they are finite than you better have them available to you when you actually need them. And that is why I chose to not use an organization as a race metaphor at the beginning, but rather an organization as a body metaphor.

Look.

As a leader of larger organization you can hide your misjudgments or poor decisions in a variety of creative ways; mostly by shifting resources from one group to another or have another department assume some different responsibilities or by shifting some people into the work gaps or to buttress the best people who are flagging with some support.

But that is also not sustainable.

The organization gets exhausted doing all that maneuvering, in addition, they get exhausted by you doing that.

I will admit that I got better at this as I moved up in responsibility. And, I will admit, I partially got better at it simply because I had more moving parts, departments and groups to manage. That is because I loved working 24/7 and I thrived with the energy of solving problems and, well, just energy. In a larger organization there is always something going on, some project or problem or initiative somewhere within an organization that needs attention or needs a little ‘push.’ This naturally permitted me to let one part of the organization ‘rest’ while another part of the organization ‘ran.’

Oh. Think about that a second or two if you will.

What I just suggested is an organization as a well-rounded circle, or the classical myth of a ‘well rounded person’, is simply a myth. In fact the idea of it creates a false, and sometimes dangerous in terms of expectations, narrative in our heads.  As an organization learns and thinks and gains experience it does not expand smoothly but, rather, raggedly. Day after day, despite the fact it may feel like business is a grind or it may even feel too fast <or too slow>  an organization is constantly running toward some thought and experience, or, leaping from danger or something  disagreeable or some problem or some success and suffice it to say it is anything but balanced. And it is certainly not creating any smooth well rounded growth.

My main point?

There is no such thing as a well-rounded person and there is no such thing as a well rounded organization. A leader may certainly aspire to create a well-rounded organization but, even at your best, the organization at any given point in time is some shape other than a circle.

The good news is that this means organizations also naturally get excited to explore the edged forays into interesting things and, in parallel, get snagged on the ragged edges of unexplored thoughts or even second guesses with regard to the lack of smoothness in what is happening in departments, groups and efforts … as well as thoughts and growth.

Yes.

I will point out that this is why an organization can feel slightly uncomfortable on occasion as employees, departments and groups wrestle with this discomfort, as well as dealing with the ragged edges constantly poking at everyone, but I will also point out that is why the things I mentioned earlier become even more important –the consistency, the clarity and the lack of chaos.

I will also point out that his kind of ‘uncomfortable’ is okay. To a leader it is actually a sign that things are going okay and the organization is not stagnant <and good leaders know how to point out good non-stagnancy to calm uncomfortable>.

All that said. I can unequivocally state that no organization is successful when needlessly exhausted. They can be tired at the end of the day, but exhaustion is a symptom not of ‘a good day’s work’, rather, unnecessary mental stress trying to get things going, understand what to do and what to say and kibitzing over why it is so hard to get what seems like normal shit done.

When an organization is running well, whether the 350 million, 350 or the 35 recognize it, there are many days when the 1, the leader, leaves the office exhausted. And the one is exhausted despite the fact that 349,999,900 people, 341 people or 34 people went to sleep that day feeling pretty good about their day and their needs & wants & hopes took one step forward that day and they are a good tired … not needlessly exhausted.

Oh. Despite the fact the one went to bed exhausted, that one will arise the next day fresh because the organization is ready to go again the next day and not organizationally exhausted (the one – leader – draws energy from a fresh organization).

I will end by pointing out that an exhausted group, an exhausted department or an exhausted organization is the sign of poor leadership. And, most importantly, it is a precursor to signs of inefficiencies and declines in measured productivity.

———-

Why is the word yes so brief?

it should be

the longest,

the hardest,

so that you could not decide in an instant to say it,

so that upon reflection you could stop

in the middle of saying it. “

—

Vera Pavlova

==========

I am a self-admitted lover of “no” in the workplace. I am because I learned at a very early age in business the power of saying a clear cut ‘no.’ In addition I have an inherent distaste for ‘yes people’ and have built a healthy fear (yes, fear) of yeses that create a false sense of positiveness in suggesting the impossible is possible.

No has the power of stopping therefore it can afford to be concise. In fact, in its conciseness it actually can often represent the sharp cleaver which cuts the cord to wasted energy and wasted actions.

And while ‘no’ in and of itself is incredibly powerful, ‘yes’ in its abruptness seems … well … too abrupt.

Too short.

Too simple for a word that does anything but encourage stopping … it more often is the initial push to movement <not necessarily forward but in doing something>.

Yes. <unstated … we should do something.

Yes. <what?>

Yes. <as a statement … as an agreement>

Let’s face it, yes, just like thinking in general, is a quagmire.

It is a quagmire because far too often the majority of yeses are asked without either party <or one of them> truly understanding the problem therefore they have no right to be asking for a solution.

This is important, REALLY important, because business is all about choices – making them or agreeing to them or shutting choices off.

Simplistically every yes is a no to something else. This is a really important point because saying yes as a ‘can do’ person or organization or simply because it is “the mantra” — simply means you will continually fail to recognize limits. I will suggest the limits you fail to recognize are the “truth” ones you blast through as you blindly commit to something believing “you will figure it out as you do it.”

Well.

Sometimes you can figure it out.

But most of the time you do not … or at least not the way it should be done.

Of course, the ‘yes sayers’ hold up completion at the end to justify the ‘yes’ ignoring the clumsy process on the path to completion or even the compromised solution which is represented in the completed action.

I tend to believe at the core of the quagmire is that there is actually more positive thinking & attitude in a ‘no’ then there is in the typical ‘yes’. Yet, on the surface, a ‘no’ appears negative and a ‘yes’ appears positive.

No’s, and I mean ‘non-lazy’ or ‘non irascible contrarian’ no’s, are positive in their ability to sharpen whatever else is about to happen.

Yes’s are more about … well … the energy of obligation. An obligation or a commitment to a larger thing than a simple ‘yes’ often communicates.

And maybe that is where I think Yes fails us the most. It should be longer, more complicated and less brief in its utterance.

It should be reflective of the obligation, the responsibility and the choice of the moment.

It should be larger in its reflection of its overall impact not just on the moment of its utterance but also in the ripples of its effect as it reverberates almost infinitely through a business decision.

That said. I do not have research on this but my guess, based on years of experience, is that more businesses fail and more businesses have lost money, people and wasted energy based on ‘yes’ more than ‘no.’

I am not suggesting we never say yes. For god’s sake … the fundamental bedrock of a business is based on a ‘yes.’

Yes. Let’s go do it.

Yes. We will implement that idea.

Yes. We will hire that person.

But I am suggesting, even as you ponder the flippant three examples I just gave you that yeses echo in eternity.

And while yeses embrace possibilities & opportunities & hope they, uhm, also are wrapped in cloaks of vulnerabilities.

Well. After reading those last two sentences … kind of makes you think that yes “should be the longest, the hardest, so that you could not decide in an instant to say it, so that upon reflection you could stop in the middle of saying it. “

Yes.

I imagine my final thought is to suggest the next time you think of flippantly offering a ‘yes’ to something, you take a moment and ponder the obligation that accompanies a ‘yes.’ For “yes” is not just an agreement to something, it is an obligation OF something.

================

“Blaming others is an act of refusing to take responsibility. When a person can’t accept the fact or the reality, they blamed another person or the situation instead of taking accountability.”

―

Dee Dee Artner

=================

“For every King is right in his own eyes and rests the blame to whoever he wishes to carry it.”

―

Auliq Ice

===================

Delegating. While I could argue delegating is one of the most difficult things you learn to do as you move up in an organization <and one you MUST learn or will inevitably fail>, accepting responsibility, blame or accolades, is a whole different discussion and an entirely different learning challenge.

I know.

I know.

That sounds odd even as I type that. You would think no one actually has to learn to accept responsibility for their, well, responsibility. But all you have to do is look around the hallways of any management floor and some leaders in the public eye and you will see a shitload of people who seem to have actually mastered the skill of placing blame on whoever they wish <other than themselves>.

Regardless. I would say that the difference between delegating and accepting responsibility can be captured in two key words — learn versus accept.

You have to learn how to delegate.

You have to accept responsibility.

Here is a truth. No one, and I mean no one, has to learn how to accept responsibility. You either accept it or you do not.

And to explain the ‘accept’ part let me remind everyone of “double joys and halve the griefs.” What I mean is that you learn to double down when accepting responsibility for ‘blame’ or failure and you only accept half the responsibility, at most, on the successes and accolades. In other words good leaders halve the griefs <if not accept all> to those you delegate to and double the accolades for those you delegate to.

That is the basic “good formula.”

But some people want zero the grief and 100% the joy. These are the quasi- leaders who authorize people to do things not out of good delegation but rather to distance themselves from any decision that may create a less-than-positive outcome.

Shit. No. Double shit.

There may be nothing more heinous in leadership management acumen than the delegation of responsibility with the intent to absolve one from potential negative outcomes. All potential repercussions get sifted first and foremost through the hands of the one who has now been authorized.

In other words that crappy leader handed someone some rope to potentially hang themselves with.

Setting my bitching & disdain aside, I have to ask why some run away from this responsibility.

Well. I will admit that making mistakes was a shitload easier years ago when I was a young whippersnapper attempting to move up in the business world. Bosses were fairly forgiving of mistakes and you learned that accepting responsibility for the bad as well as the good not only didn’t harm you but actually helped you grow as a person.

In today’s business world, shit, in the world itself, forgiveness isn’t that normal. Mistakes become opportunities to fire someone, demote someone or, in general, torture them. While in the good old days your mistakes became hallway whispers and break room gossip, today your mistakes become facebook posts, email chains and twitter memes. What this teaches people is assuming responsibility for a mistake has disproportionate consequences and doesn’t really help you grow as a person.

The way up, or to survive, seems to be somewhat dependent upon disproportionately shirking responsibility for the errors and disproportionately accepting responsibility for the successes.

It’s kind of the worst of both aspects.

In a past post I mentioned … ‘accountability in today’s business world is stuck in the sludge at the bottom of the business moral barrel.’

I believe accountability for decision making in business is either nonexistent or far too random to be considered standard operating procedure.

To be clear <part 1>.

This is not about someone holding you accountable. This is about you holding yourself accountable especially when no one is holding you accountable.

To be clear <part 2>.

Today’s business world is strewn with cowards.

I know that sounds harsh, but not only do people fear being accountable in general they are absolutely scared shitless to be accountable for indirect consequences, i.e., being accountable for anything beyond the obvious cause & effect.

It is cowardly behavior.

And it gets worse in my eyes when I google search ‘integrating accountability in business’ and I find almost everyone discusses in some form or fashion the need to ‘clarify what it means to be accountable.’

WTF.

This is crazy to me.

Accountability for decision making, to me, equates to a some sense of fearlessness bred within an organization <some people call this “psychological safety”>. Fearless in terms of making mistakes <and not being overly chastised for doing so> and fearless in terms of a ‘doing what is right’ mentality.

All that said. Organization culture or not, people don’t need someone to define accountability or honoring commitments or any of that crap, people just need to assume responsibility & accountability as part of who they are and how they act. Holding yourself accountable is nothing more than following through with YOUR commitments and responsibilities whether you have authorized someone or delegated or any other excuse some of these cowardly leaders use to distance themselves from any real consequences.

Look.

We are responsible for our actions – all of them.

We are responsible for our inaction – all of them.

We are responsible for the repercussions of our actions & inactions – even the unintended results.

We are responsible for our thoughts and the behavior attached to them.

We are responsible for our mistakes.

And, yes, we are responsible for the actions & inactions of the people we have authorized shit to or delegated to.

Interestingly, an author Linda Galindo argues that the only true accountability is “personal accountability” and the only way to achieve it is to take responsibility for the outcomes of your choices, behaviors and actions – to the level of 85% of everything you touch or are associated with.

I could debate the 85%, but as far as the intent I couldn’t agree more. This seems like a hard thought for many in business to not only grasp, but accept.

Why? I could provide an excuse by suggesting in a world where it seems like collaboration is the standard operating procedure and tasks are delegated in a fragmented fashion <often under the guise of ‘specialists should work only on their specialty’> the actual outcome has been impacted by so many hands it is difficult to tie it to one hand, let alone the leader decision maker, directly.

This means many business people want to avoid assuming responsibility for others actions, or maybe better said, they don’t want to be accountable for something they didn’t have 100% ownership of.

This is really silly thinking.

No.

This is cowardly thinking.

Here is the good news.

People who have personal accountability are happier, more respected and more successful professionally.

People who have consistent accountability actually increase the likelihood that they WILL get some credit for indirect positive consequences.

So if you can fight your way thru the doubts in being accountable in certain situations and fight your way thru systems which seem to crucify you for mistakes and accept the responsibility, you will end up in a better place – as a person and professionally.

Best? You also get the satisfaction of laughing at all the cowardly assholes you see mumbling excuses, shifting responsibility and ultimately doing whatever they can to avoid any blame for the mistake/missed deadline/project gone wrong. The ones who are quick to point the finger at anyone and anywhere but themselves.

Yeah. I will admit. Some of those ‘blameless assholes’ are really slick when it comes to accountability and personal responsibility.

They vocalize responsibility … with caveats.

They accept positive accountability for anything that has any appearance of clear cause & effect wrapping it all up with anything that doesn’t have clear cause & effect and deflect negative accountability results with a flick of an “I authorized them to do it.”

They seek to have 0% griefs and 100% joy.

They are fucking cowards.

== 

“We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker.  It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”

Ronald Reagan

==

In the end.

This is about personal responsibility and personal choice. If you do not dare to do what is right then … well … it is cowardly behavior.

==

“Manliness consists not in bluff, bravado or loneliness. It consists in daring to do the right thing and facing consequences whether it is in matters social, political or other.

It consists in deeds not words.”

Mahatma Gandhi

==

I honestly don’t care about cowardly behavior, daring behavior or heroic behavior. Doing what is right and accepting responsibility & accountability should be required behavior of our leaders and shouldn’t be celebrated, it should just be expected.

Me? I believe no one should have to hold me accountable for my actions & responsibilities. No one but me should set whatever standard I set for myself.

Look.

All jobs carry the burden of some responsibility. I don’t care if you are the most junior maintenance person or the most senior person in the world. And if you have some responsibility you will also have the burden of accepting responsibility for what you do, what you may have asked someone to do and even some shit that wasn’t done <but would have been within your purview if it had been done>.

Shirking that responsibility is the refuge of cowards.

Period. End of story.

==

“Do not choose a coward’s explanation

That hides behind the cause and the effect.”

—

Leonard Cohen

=====

“I was only following orders,”

the Mayor mocks.

 

“The refuge of scoundrels since the dawn of time.”

―

Patrick Ness

==

I just wrote about personal accountability and in that post I mentioned … ‘accountability in today’s business world is stuck in the sludge at the bottom of the business moral barrel.’

I believe accountability in business is either nonexistent or far too random to be considered standard operating procedure.

To be clear <part 1>.

Despite this being about working and the business world this is not about someone holding you accountable. This is about you holding yourself accountable especially when no one is holding you accountable <even though there is always someone holding you accountable in business>.

To be clear <part 2>.

Today’s business world is strewn with cowards. I know that sounds harsh but not only do people fear being accountable in general … they are absolutely scared shitless to be accountable for indirect consequences … being accountable for anything beyond the obvious cause & effect. It is cowardly behavior. It is the ‘refuge of scoundrels.’

Speaking of scoundrels.

Yes. I know there are good responsible people willing to assume responsibility & be accountable throughout business. They just seem harder & harder to find. And it becomes even harder because the scoundrels use two main tactics to throw you off:

– passive aggressive accountability.

Maybe we call this false humility.  Under the guise of humility they appear to be accepting accountability in the beginning only to aggressively take a stance of pride or indignant with regard to ‘uncovering the errors or mistakes to resolve the issue for the future.’  This is the “I assume responsibility … BUT’ behavior.

This is simply out and out fucking passive aggressive behavior simply playing the game to avoid the stickiness of accountability.

– selective accountability.

Whew. These scoundrels really know how to play the game and play people.

Suffice it to say, not all accountability is created equal. These scoundrels seem to have a sixth sense on when to assume accountability  and when to side step and let someone else take the blame. They have a knack for invariably selecting the situations which gain them ‘they are accountability type people’ status and selecting the situations to avoid which would taint them with some ‘they seem to make a lot of mistakes.’

While businesses claim they embrace ‘mistakes with good intentions’ they aren’t really. The reality is they abhor and are relentlessly critical of those who dare to make mistakes – well intended mistakes or lazy mistakes. These selective type scoundrels are incredibly good at easing the mistake label over to someone else.

And beyond recognizing the scoundrel tactics … it gets worse in my eyes when I google search ‘integrating accountability in business.’ Almost everyone discusses, in some form or fashion, the need to ‘clarify what it means to be accountable.’

WTF. This is crazy to me.

Clarify what it is? Please.

Accountability, to me, equates to a fearlessness bred within an organization — fearless in terms of making mistakes <and not being overly chastised for doing so> and fearless in terms of a ‘doing what is right’ mentality. This is organizational culture stuff <and some call this a version of ‘psychological safety’>.

If the organization doesn’t encourage accountable behavior than all it does is encourage employees to figure out a way of avoiding accountability.

All that said. Organization culture or not, people don’t need someone to define accountability or honoring commitments or any of that crap. People just need to assume accountability as part of who they are and how they act.

Why do I believe this? To me this conversation is like thinking that someone needs to teach people what integrity is.

You cannot teach. You either know, or understand, what integrity is or you don’t.

Holding yourself accountable is nothing more than following through with your own commitments and responsibilities. It’s doing what you know you should do when you should do it.

Look. Simplistic cause and effect explanations are for cowards. Business is rarely simple cause & effect and organizations are much more complex than simple cause & effect.

If you want a linear life … well … you are screwed.

We are responsible for our actions – all of them.

We are responsible for our inaction – all of them.

We are responsible for the repercussions of our actions & inactions – even the unintended results.

We are responsible for our thoughts and the behavior attached to them.

We are responsible for our mistakes.

Interestingly, an author, Linda Galindo, argues that the only true accountability is “personal accountability” and the only way to achieve it is to take responsibility for the outcomes of your choices, behaviors and actions – to the level of 85% of everything you touch or are associated with. I could debate the 85%, but as far as the intent – accountability beyond direct cause & effect activity – I couldn’t agree more.

This is a hard thought for many in business to not only grasp … but accept.

Why? In a world where it seems like collaboration is the standard operating procedure and tasks are delegated in a fragmented fashion <often under the guise of ‘specialists should work only on their specialty’> the actual outcome has been impacted by so many hands it is difficult to tie a result to one hand directly.

This means many business people want to avoid assuming responsibility for others actions or, maybe better said, they don’t want to be accountable for something they didn’t have 100% ownership of.

This is really silly thinking.

Uhm. But here is the really really hard part about accountability in business.

While you can’t hide behind simple cause and effect with regard to being accountable <you are also accountable for indirect consequences>, conversely, you cannot take credit for indirect successes.

I know … I know … you want to.

But that’s not how it works.

You are accountable for indirect negative consequences and not credited for indirect positive consequences.

Someone can give you the credit, but you cannot claim the credit.

Here is the good news.

People who have personal accountability are happier, more respected and more successful professionally. People who have consistent person accountability actually increase the likelihood that they WILL get some credit for indirect positive consequences. So if you can fight your way thru the doubts in being accountable in certain situations and fight your way thru systems which seem to relentlessly crucify you for mistakes you will end up in a better place – as a person and professionally. And you also get the satisfaction of laughing at all the assholes you see mumbling excuses, shifting responsibility, slyly pointing fingers and ultimately doing whatever they can to avoid any blame for the mistake/missed deadline/project gone wrong.

The ones who are quick to point the finger at anyone and anywhere but themselves.

Oh.

Even then … some of these ‘blameless assholes’ are really slick when it comes to accountability and personal responsibility. They vocalize responsibility … with caveats.

They take accountability for anything that has any appearance of clear cause & effect all the while including anything that doesn’t have clear cause & effect <but will make them look more successful/competent>.

They are cowards.

Here is my true fear on this accountability thing.

People are beginning to blame the organizational culture, or society, for their individual behavior. It reminds me of something Reagan said years ago <which seems relevant today>:

==

“We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”

Ronald Reagan

==

While I could rant and get myself all wound up on business organizational culture … I won’t. I will suggest this is about personal responsibility and personal choice.

If you do not dare to do what is right … well … then … it is cowardly behavior.  

== 

“Manliness consists not in bluff, bravado or loneliness.

It consists in daring to do the right thing and facing consequences whether it is in matters social, political or other. It consists in deeds not words.” 

Mahatma Gandhi

== 

I honestly don’t care about cowardly behavior, daring behavior or heroic behavior.

Doing what is right is just the right behavior and shouldn’t be celebrated — it should just be expected.

I believe no one should have to hold me accountable for my actions & responsibilities. No one but me should set whatever standard I set for myself.

—

“Getting the money is the easy bit; it’s when you try to spend it that the world wakes up.”

=

The Lavender Hill Mob

<4 guys steal gold bullion to turn it into Eiffel Tower paperweights>

—

I believe we talk about “stuff versus experiences”, i.e. “people buy experiences, not stuff”, all wrong. In fact. How we talk about how much people like, and value, money versus ‘other stuff important in Life’ can often become so absurdly theoretical it can become, well, pretty absurdly unreal. The absurdity usually begins with how we discuss money & people.

For example. Simply saying that people want something other than money is, practically speaking for let’s say 99% of people, is silly.

“show me the money”

Theory aside.

99% of the people need more money or want more money in order to buy stuff they want or need.

Sure, if you can offer them the stuff they need or want in lieu of cold hard cash, well, of course they would sacrifice the money because for god’s sake you are giving me what I would have used the money for (that’s a transaction).

Anyway. I say all that to get the practical aspect out of the way (which “people buy experiences” experts seem to forget).

Money, or how we spend money, is changing. More & more we buy less stuff just for the sake of having stuff. Instead we tend seek to spend our hard earned money on ‘experience’ <or let’s say … the value we associate with the money we spend is evaluated more on experience gained than on the tangible aspect>.

This has some odd implications. Like it or not we have always actualized a significant part of our identities with the stuff we buy. A portion of that identity is associated with how we feel about the price we pay <we feel better if we have arrived at a good price in pursuing our own personal interests> and a portion of it is simply the brand & appearance we symbolize.

But, basically, all purchases – experiential or tangibly or monetarily evaluated – are made in the pursuit of our own interest.

Uh. That is also called ‘self-interest.’

Point to ponder:

If self-interest drives our purchase pursuit and increasingly we feel a growing certainty that we will never be happy through the purchase of stuff that kind of suggests that the overall act of consumption is self-defeating <therefore not really in our self-interest>.

Retail certainly understands this, as well as shifting interest in experiences,  & many have responded by, uhm, discounting.

They know, as well as we do, that we have become more and more dissatisfied with the “money we lay out-to-value received” equation <hence our interest in experiences> therefore they use promotions and discounts in store to try and make you feel like you ‘got the edge’ on the price and feel better about the takeaway value <in other words, retailers are banking on their sales and sales marketing to bring the inner spontaneous shopper out of you as a consumer >.

It kind of works and it kind of doesn’t.

It works in that it does drive more purchasing, but it kind of doesn’t work because the farther we get from the actual store & purchase the less better we feel about the price we paid and the value received <this is where I believe most ‘experience experts’ miss the larger value argument>. Let’s call that “the takeaway value.”

All that said, I don’t think many people will argue we are becoming more interested in purchasing with experience in mind (it’s part of the value equation) rather than simply acquiring ‘stuff’.

Why? It is the value equation created in our heads.

Stuff is … well … stuff. It’s value may be amortized over time, but that is a value equation based solely on ‘usefulness’ which, by the way, certainly has value it just lacks ‘added value over time.’

Experiences, on the other hand, are something we enjoy in the moment and in the future <let’s say ‘infinity’>. That’s ‘takeaway value.’

When purchasing shit or doing something a positive experience creates at least a chance we find some value for money as its spent>. Thne there is that infinity thing — the lifetime value of an experience <which is significantly higher than stuff>.

Next. I could suggest <argue> that it has become relatively mainstream accepted wisdom that a life well lived accrues experiences <some may call it ‘memories’> rather than stuff.

Now. That doesn’t mean we will not buy ‘stuff’ to make personal statements <because we will>, but we actually prefer to buy ‘experiences’ to create happiness <a sense of a Life better spent>.

Therefore maybe the culprit in all of our happiness-seeking is how we think about things and how we think about self-interest. Traditionally the standard operating procedure in Life is to constantly think of ‘adding shit’ as the path to happiness … or is it about subtracting things?

====

“Maybe self-improvement isn’t the answer, maybe self-destruction is the answer. “

Chuck Palahniuk

====

Look. We can all get sucked into the materialistic <stuff> world because the people who sell stuff, even experiences by the way, are incredibly good at figuring out ways to monetize it.

===

“We too often let the material things serve as indicators that we’re doing well, even though something inside us tells us that were not doing our best. That we are avoiding that which is hard, but also necessary. That we are shrinking from rather than rising to the challenges of the age.”

Barack Obama

===

The problem is that in our heads, whether we admit it or not, stuff really doesn’t define whether we are doing well or not. Each generation is moving more & more away from ‘keeping up with the Joneses” as a concept for validating success. And even experiences don’t really define success, but at least experiences reflect ‘expanding the mind and everyday Life boundaries’ <whereas stuff sits in the current boundaries resting>.

Doubt me?

I will devolve to a trite question to make an obvious point. If you walk around your house or your office and look at your stuff, then look at your photo gallery or have dinner with family of friends, well, it is kind of obvious which is more fulfilling and which has higher ‘lifetime value’. I don’t know where I read this: you can love your stuff but your stuff will never love you back.

Personally, I think while what I have written about experience versus stuff sounds very individualistic and self-actualization driven I would suggest it is an overall societal ‘push back’ to what feels like ‘too much emphasis on materialism.’ Materialism is actually an easier path for us. it is a nice simple tangible way for everyone to evaluate each other – it almost hearkens back to Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts … I can judge you based off the badges you have.

But I think in our heart of hearts we balk at this simplistic approach to life. That certainly doesn’t mean we aren’t easily sucked into it, just that a little part of us chafes over it.

=====

“How are you going to meet life when you have passed through here and are so-called educated?

Do you want to be swallowed up by the society, the culture in which you live, or are you going to oppose it, revolt against it, which will be a reaction and not a total action? Are you going to step into the easy way of life, conform, imitate, adjust to the pattern, whatever that pattern be, whether it be the establishment, or an establishment of a different kind, and so on?

Or are you going to be a totally different human being, who is aware and knows he has to meet adversity and opposition and that, therefore, there is no easy way to satisfaction?

Because most of us want a life of ease, of comfort, without trouble, which is almost impossible.  And if you do meet opposition, will you run away from it?”

J. Krishnamurti

====

I would argue this whole ‘experience instead of stuff’ idea is almost like a version of revolution. We are revolting against the status quo validation/actualization measurements, yet, we are not strong enough to completely seek inner validation as the sole measurement. Ok. Strong enough was a little harsh.

Let’s just say it is a natural instinct and a healthy instinct to seek validation and if we are to choose some sort of validation I imagine we feel better, and it chafes less, if we seek it thru an experience rather than ‘stuff.’ We will always buy ‘stuff’ its just now we seek some experience as part of the value equation.