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

Up to a point a man’s life is shaped by environment, heredity, and the movements and changes in the world around him. Then there comes a time when it lies within his grasp to shape the clay of his life into the sort of thing he wishes to be. Only the weak blame parents, their race, their times, lack of good fortune, or the quirks of fate.

Everyone has it within his power to say, ‘This I am today; that I will be tomorrow.’

The wish, however, must be implemented by deeds.”

–

Louis Lamour

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

So. This is about living Life and personal velocity (progress with momentum). I have written about self esteem and self image and living life, but until now I have never found a quote that summarizes a belief I have always had lurking in the back of my head.

“Then there comes a time when it lies within his grasp to shape the clay of his life into the sort of thing he wishes to be.”

How awesome is that? (pretty awesome)

It is absolutely true that a lot of what may hold us back from our dreams, or maybe more importantly, being whatever it is we want to be isn’t our fault <or in our control>. Life throws a shitload of shit at us and a lot of it is completely out of our control. It would be foolish to not recognize that.

But.

The days when nothing seems to go right.

The days where dreams seemed to have vanished.

The days where ‘not drowning’ is the focus instead of ‘swimming.’

All those days are gonna happen – to all of us. And it is on these days where it becomes really really easy to focus on excuses. But. We do have power to shape our tomorrows. Ignore the excuses and recognize that even if circumstances make things difficult, improving things is NOT impossible.

Sure. Sometimes a little ingenuity is required.  Sometimes you almost have to trick circumstances. Sometimes you have to zig when Life zags and sometimes you have to take some risks and get a little lucky.

Which leads me to these words:

“That I am today; that I will be tomorrow.”

Absolutely … most people underestimate what they can do today.

Absolutely … most people over estimate what they can do tomorrow.

Despite that … it still comes down to two things: action and objectives.

Actions.

What I am tomorrow depends on what I do today. My actions today make me who I am tomorrow. You get it.
This is all about first step, baby. Takin’ that first step. You constantly hear “I’ll do it tomorrow”. And when it doesn’t happen tomorrow, it becomes the next tomorrow and the next and …. well … you get it (and I will explain why under objectives).

But. While you hear that … what is actually the truth? What do people really do? (and you just may not always see it)

Here is the truth behind actions and this thought. People who decide mentally to “do something” actually, uhm, do something. No shit. They do take action. They do begin to “shape the clay of their life to become what they want to be.” They do.

Then what is the problem?

Objectives.

Doing is often dependent upon how we view our objectives and this sometimes gets mired down in meeting the sometimes farcical absurd expectations in the mind. That said. Let me take a minute on ‘objectives.’  Scott H Young wrote in May 2006, in a piece called “Balancing Today and Tomorrow“, about a nifty concept called “velocity based thinking (or goal setting)” versus positional goals:

—————————

How is it possible to balance living in each moment and the concept of personal growth and improvement? Doesn’t personal development imply a certain dissatisfaction with where you are in life? At the very least, doesn’t an obsession with personal growth indicate that you are constantly living in the future, rather than enjoying each moment? How can we remove this apparent dichotomy and get the improvement we desire along with satisfaction now? In other words, how can we live for today and still strive for tomorrow?

The old position based paradigm told us to focus on where we are in life. If we have a big house, a nice family and are in good health, then we can be happy. If we are poor, miserable and alone then we are depressed. Pretty simple. In this paradigm, our main focus is on our current position.

Some take this position based thinking to a slightly higher level when they don’t think about where they are but where they are going. Instead these people draw their level of happiness from the position they feel they will be in the future. Although this is an improvement, the cost of being unsatisfied with today is simply too high a price to pay for this paradigm.

There is an alternative paradigm, however. This is a velocity based paradigm. In this paradigm, where you are doesn’t matter. It doesn’t even matter where you are going to end up. From this perspective, our focus not where we are going, but rather, the rate we are getting there. This perspective tells us that being homeless or a millionaire makes no difference. It is only the rate at which they are improving that distinguishes them.

The major distinction between a velocity based goal and a position based one is mostly in how you view the goal. Positional goals are usually viewed as a means to achieve something. If I set a goal to lose x pounds in three months, then what I am pursuing is the goal itself. Velocity based goals take a completely different approach. The purpose of a velocity based goal is to serve to direct, focus and amplify the growth you are experiencing right now.

Imagine life is like climbing an infinitely large cliff side. Positional thinking tells you to try and get as high up the cliff as you can. Positional goals are used to reach new plateaus on the cliff. Velocity based thinking tells us that getting really high up on the cliff is irrelevant given its infinite nature. Instead velocity based thinking tells us that the true experience of life has to come from the rate at which we are climbing the cliff. Sitting at one notch of the cliff for too long is boring and unsatisfying regardless of your height. Velocity based goals in this sense are not used to reach the plateaus themselves, these goals are used to encourage, push and measure the rate at which you are climbing.

The key difference between positional goals and velocity based goals is simple. If you fail to achieve a positional goal, this is usually very demotivating. This is often why so many new goal setters fail to continue with the practice. The pain of failing to achieve when you’ve tried your best is often too great. Velocity based goals remove this problem entirely. Because the goal was simply a servant of directing and pushing your own growth, as long as you know you were trying your best (maximum velocity possible) then the goal was successful regardless of whether you underestimated the deadline necessary.

A velocity based paradigm is actually far more effective in improving our position.

The reason is actually rather simple. Positional based thinking is built on the notion of competition. As a result, we strive to make leaps ahead in our position based on where we are compared to others. If we are on the top then we slow down, for what is the point of trying really hard when you are already in the lead? If we are on the bottom, negativity and pessimism often cripple our growth. Position based thinkers tend to only achieve a maximum velocity when they feel they need to increase their position, yet that positional increase is achievable. Velocity based thinking doesn’t have this weakness. People who truly live this ideal are at a maximal velocity all of the time. Being at the top or bottom holds no distinction to these people. Rich or poor, strong or weak, healthy or ill these people are always traveling at a speed which is the most they can possibly achieve.

—————————-

I have always been a Velocity believer but what I like about personal velocity is it isn’t about frickin’ milestones and moving up the ladder and crap like that. It is about actions and objectives in a “movement” framework. And movement at your own pace. Its not a competition, but rather just with a goal of improving personal being. Judging yourself against … well … yourself I guess.

And with that I get to complete the circle on this quote and thought:

“That I am today; that I will be tomorrow.”

The only really important word L’Amour uses throughout this thought is “I.”

It’s not about competition.

It’s not about goals and objectives.

It is about I. And what “I” wants <or needs>.

That said. Life is tough enough without having to have someone else tell you how to ‘progress’ personally. Go your own speed. Fuck what anyone says.

Sure. Business weighs you down with meaningless milestones & expectations all the time.

Sure. Society, in general, crams goals down your throat all the time.

And, sure, becoming who you want to be “tomorrow” takes lots and lots of work.

But. I would suggest you are actually minimizing your chances of success if you always go the speed of what everyone else is demanding of you. Maximizing your ‘self success’ is most likely found in finding, and going, your own velocity.

Anyhow.

I love this quote.

Love it mostly because I like the way it gives the truth instead of some pithy inspirational flippant quote. I like it because while it frames time in a today-tomorrow dimension it doesn’t say how fast it should be, or needs to be, done. You choose the velocity in which it happens.

This I am today, that I will be tomorrow. Words to live by.

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

edited from original post from August 2010

===

“The list could surely go on, and there is nothing more wonderful than a list, instrument of wondrous hypotyposis.”

Umberto Eco

—-

“We made a drywall list of keyboard buttons we would like to see:

PLEASE, THANK YOU, FUCK OFF, DIE, OOPS…MY MISTAKE, DO SOMETHING COOL AND SURPRISE ME.”

Douglas Coupland

——-

Archaic as it may sound, writing things down may be more important today than ever before.

Yup. Crazy, huh?

Writing shit down does matter.

Which leads me to how many times do we hear about someone complaining about how they missed a deadline or forgot to do something?

Well. If you interviewed all the guilty parties the overwhelming answer would be. 

“TIME! 

THERE’S NOT ENOUGH TIME!”

 Yup.

There is the culprit. That bastard Time.

It pretty much is a consensus in business, and Life, that the only thing that creates missed deadlines and missed ‘task doing’ is lack of time.

If you think about it just a bit, that’s kinda nuts. Ok. Maybe it is just a bogus excuse.

The reality is the issue is not Time but rather, uhm, “everyone is always looking to do an unreasonable amount of things in an unreasonable amount of time.”

All that said. I say “nuts” to that.

Critical deadlines are part of business and will always be a part of business. If you can’t live with crazy deadlines, get out of business. Go be the person behind the counter at the bike rental place or a government employee at the driver’s license department or a park ranger.

Now that I am done being an asshole let’s assume you have a real job in a real office with real responsibilities.

This is where the whole writing shit down topic becomes relevant.

You may have heard of the Yale <or Harvard Business School> study of goals in which only 3% of the graduating class had specific written goals for their futures. Twenty years later that 3% was found to be earning, uhm (clears throat a bit), 10x that of the group that had no clear goals.

Oops.

That is an urban myth so please do not screenshot that portion and expound upon goals.

No actual study done. In fact. Fast Company published an article about the alleged study: “If Your Goal is Success, Don’t Consult These Gurus”: http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/06/cdu.html . So all those “list business consultant gurus” and the gazillion self help list making books are full of shit.

However.

Just to be fair <not to the expert blowhards, but to lists> a clinical psychologist at Dominican University in California has conducted research on goals.

1. Types of goals:

Participants pursued a variety of goals including (in order of frequency reported) completing a project, increasing income, increasing productivity, getting organized, enhancing performance/achievement, enhancing life balance, reducing work anxiety and learning a new skill.

Examples of “completing a project” included writing a chapter of a book, updating a website, listing and selling a house, completing a strategic plan, securing a contract, hiring employees and preventing a hostile take-over.

2. Goal Achievement:

Group 5 achieved significantly more than all the other groups; Group 4 achieved significantly more than Groups 3 and 1; Group 2 achieved significantly more than Group 1.

  3. Differences between all writing groups and the non-writing group: 

Although the previous analysis revealed that Group 2 (written goals) achieved significantly more than Group 1 (unwritten goals), additional analysis were performed to determine whether there were also differences between the group that had not written their goals (Group 1) and all groups that had written their goals (Groups 2-5). This analysis revealed that the mean achievement score for Groups 2-5 combined was significantly higher than Group 1.

Conclusions:

1. The positive effect of accountability was supported

Those who sent weekly progress reports to their friend accomplished significantly more than those who had unwritten goals, wrote their goals, formulated action commitments or sent those action commitments to a friend.

2. There was support for the role of public commitment

Those who sent their commitments to a friend accomplished significantly more than those who wrote action commitments or did not write their goals.

3. The positive effect of written goals was supported

Those who wrote their goals accomplished significantly more than those who did not write their goals.

——————

 My point here is simply that lists can help in a variety of ways. This study shows some evidence that a combination of accountability, commitment and writing down one’s goals demonstrates writing shit down enhances the likelihood of goal achievement.

But here is the most interesting point. Its not really about accountability, its more about eliminating stress. Yeah.  List making has its highest value not in actual productivity, but actually with stress reduction.

Stress?

Yup. There is a guy named James Fallows who wrote in 2004-something the fact that our brains may not be able to remember shit when it gets overloaded and, yet, at the same time the brain also can’t forget. Basically that is the cognitive paradox – overload and locked & loaded.

Regardless.

That sucks.

At some deep and not very efficient level the brain is always chewing over all the things you should have done, but haven’t. Worse? As it chews away it tends to remind you of them at the worst time – typically in the middle of the night.

What this suggests is that most of our stress comes not from having too much to do, but from trying to keep track of it all. Which explains why, when you’re feeling so overwhelmed and you finally sit down and make a list you tend to experience a sense of relief. I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that this sense of relief occurs even if the tasks just written down remain as unfinished as when you began.  Yup. But now your brain has a plan to chew on. Basically you have offloaded the job of remembering them to an “outboard brain” which then permits your actual ‘inboard brain’ to relax a little.

Regardless. Here is the deal.

If you are in a business you can make lists until you have an entire wall covered with nothing but lists, but, frankly, all the shit on your lists and why they never seem to get done are typically a reflection of the systems around you, or more specifically, the lack of systems as well as people who do not follow the system. Yeah. I just gave everyone who isn’t getting things done an excuse.

I am kinda okay with that excuse because, let’s face it, most companies just have crappy systems. Mostly because most business is done verbally or via email and true project management gets relegated to behind “all the shit we have to do now.”

Please do not misconstrue anything in what I say because project management is hard.

REALLY hard. Especially in a business organization.

Which leads me back to the main point of today’s piece:

EVERYTHING IS PUT INTO WRITING.

NO EXCEPTIONS.

It keeps you organized, because you no longer have to keep stuff in your head, but you can externalize it to a piece of paper, and later you can process it.

Why write it down?

It’s pretty simple. I don’t need research nor any guru to tell me the key thought.

Although there is no proven limit of how much stuff you can remember, there is always an opportunity cost. You cannot focus on too many things at the same time. Writing shit down is a powerful simple way to focus your attention, keep track of shit, and create a permanent record for the future.

Here is another factoid that should encourage you to write shit down: the Act of Writing Helps Your Memory.

Yup.

Have you ever noticed that when you write a shopping list, you can remember almost all the items on it without glancing at it? Or when you have a bright idea and scribble it in your notebook, you can remember it all day? The very act of writing things down helps to get them lodged into your long-term, not short-term, memory.

Look. Writing shit down on a consistent basis seems like a Time burden and often seems to not bear any obvious benefits. But, beyond achieving goals, lists can actually saves time.

——

“Things which matter most must never be at the mercy of things which matter least.”

Goethe

——

Lists can save you time because they can help you decide what to do. I say that because not everything on a list is of equal value. Suffice it to say there are want to do’s and need to do’s. It was Stephen Covey who did an excellent job outlining how to think about things on your lists. This matrix is the creation of Stephen Covey <which he discusses in his book, “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People”>.

Central to this matrix is organize and execute around priorities.

If we classify activities by urgency and importance, you arrive at the matrix above. Urgent means it requires immediate attention. Important has to do with results, it contributes to your mission, values or high priority goals. He advocates spending as much time as possible in Quadrant II, feeding opportunities and starving problems. The time you’ll need to add to Quadrant II will come from Quadrants III and IV. As you begin to spend more time in Quadrant II, the issues in Quadrant I will begin to dwindle.

Which leads me to writing shit down and the quality of idea output.

Simplistically, off target ideas are bad ideas.

<yes … there are bad ideas>

Many people equate success in ideas to how nice the idea looks or feels or how quickly it was “turned around.” Some people equate success to quantity + speed to generate. And, yeah, I cannot argue that those things are important in today’s ‘cram 10 pounds of shit into a 2 pound bag’ and slightly frenetic <if not verging on chaotic> business world, but bad ideas are bad ideas and quantity & speed are not enough.

In today’s world just getting shit done doesn’t hack it; it has to work. It has to produce results. Turning crap around around in record time only means that you are an excellent crap producer. You check a whole bunch of shit off your lists, and you may show up in monthly meetings pointing out how much shit you have checked off your list, but at some point someone is going to point out all you have done is generate shit lists.

But, back to poor ideas.

I’ve been around the ideas part of business for almost forty years. In the process of doing thousands of ideas assignments, I have learned there are basically two things that contribute most to good ideas:

quality input

=

time

Good input is critical to good ideas and the proper amount of time for the input ingredients to cook to create the idea pretty much will make or break the quality of your output from your list items. I would like to note that adequate time may be one of the most underrated important factors in the ideas process. Yeah. The difference between bad ideas, good ideas and great ideas is always about having the opportunity to look & think about what you did yesterday. I can guarantee an idea given a chance to be finessed, to be rethought a little will be a better idea in the end.

Time <some … not an infinite no deadline amount> makes an idea better.

Anyway. I thought about this after seeing another one of those lists of ‘5 things successful people do’ and, humorously, making lists almost always seems to be on that list.

It’s kind of crazy <in my mind> because we Americans are, and always have been, list makers.

—

“Americans are good with to-do lists; just tell us what to do, and we’ll do it.

Throughout our history, we have proven that.

Colonize. Check.

Win our independence. Check.

Form a union. Check.

Expand to the Pacific. Check.

Settle the West. Check.

Keep the Union together. Check.

Industrialize. Check.

Fight the Nazis. Check.”

Marianne Williamson

—-

In the end. What is the best reason to write shit down?

You avoid verbal project management <which is a 98.32764% chance of failure if verbal>.

If you want something, or something done, write it down.

Nothing should be done on a verbal basis.

Things get lost when not written down. Thoughts, ideas, input, well, anything.

There you go …  writing shit down means the shit has a less likelihood of getting lost. Ponder.

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

I used to tell people we use research to INFORM decisions and not MAKE decisions.

Then.

I told people we use numbers to INFORM decisions and not MAKE decisions.

Then.

I told people we use data to INFORM decisions and not MAKE decisions.

Now.

I tell people we use algorithms to INFORM decisions and not MAKE decisions.

Me

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

“An idea of working based on three pillars: science, insight and faith. Science because I’m a social scientist by training. I believe in data, robustness of information, making sure you’re on the right track. Insight because if you’re not able to draw insights from research, you’re not a strategist, just someone observing the data. And faith because you never know what’s going to work, so you always need a bit of faith to get everyone started.”

Laura Chiavone

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

I believe great companies have one common infrastructure characteristic: culture. Good companies can be grounded in systems, processes, operations, etc, however, the step up to ‘great’ demands a culture (which is always implemented by people) to elevate the ‘infrastructure aspects. To be clear. “Culture” is not some ‘thing’, or values, or some nebulous feeling, it is an emergent consequence of how people interact with each other within a business. It is not what someone does or doesn’t do, it is what happens when people do things with each other. I thought of this because Mike Walsh has a new book, The Algorithm Leader, which suggests that the most successful companies of the future will support/augment/enhance that culture infrastructure – with algorithms. Now. Before anyone defaults into thinking this translates into “empty soul, technology order taker” company, or even holocracy (ponder how polar opposites could be relevant to the algorithm topic), let me share some thoughts on how I believe the thinking suggests structural value creation lift: for business & humans. To me this will occur through a balance of stability (knowledge infrastructure), uncertainty (quests versus missions) & understanding of Antifragility (selective redundancy maximizing untidy opportunities).

Let me pose some thoughts on the relationship between algorithms and antifragility upfront.

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

“It is optionality that makes things work & grow.” AntiFragile

Maybe algorithms shouldn’t provide answers, but options. Maybe, more importantly, we become a little less comfortable with the need for construct and more comfortable with using algorithms as dynamic application of ‘movable construct’ at the right time & place.

“The antifragility of some comes necessarily at the fragility of others. In a system the sacrifice of some units – fragile units or people – are often necessary for the well-being of other units or the whole.” AntiFragile

Maybe algorithms should evaluate tradeoffs, fragility versus antifragility & well-being factors (of units & whole).

“The crux of complex systems , those with interacting parts, is that they convey information to these component parts through stressors.” AntiFragile

Maybe algorithms should not highlight solutions, but rather stressors or what Donella Meadows called ‘leverage points.’.

“There is a category of things that we can call half invented, and taking the half invented into the invented is often the real breakthrough.” AntiFragile

Maybe algorithms shouldn’t seek new innovations but rather ‘half invented’ ideas ripe for innovation maturity.

“Meaningful progress is non-linear.” How To Lead a Quest

Algorithms should enable an organization to identify progress paths to explore and discover rather than simply meet the needs of present identified ‘paths’ of progress or solve present identified issues & vulnerabilities.

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

Full disclosure on my business beliefs. Throughout my career I have always felt comfortable by making the less certain decisions just certain enough that someone would go “well, it seems riskier, but, if you own it, go do it.” I say all that because I believe all Future of Work discussion should be grounded on the relationship between certainty & uncertainty – for the business, the people within the business organization and people’s minds/attitudes.

Algorithm leadership.

Most people want certainty therefore they let research make decisions, use numbers to make decisions, show data to make decisions and, increasingly, will suggest algorithms make decisions.

This is just a different type of efficiency couched in efficient operations. It will be called “efficient decision making.” The problem is this efficiency is just an attempt to strip a decision of uncertainty and, well, the best, most effective; decisions always carry along some burden of uncertainty.

What made me think about this? I just finished rereading AntiFragile (Nassim Taleb) and reread Mike Walsh’s first chapter of his new book The Algorithm Leader.

The former is about figuring out how to maximize from disorder or uncertainty while the latter is not becoming too dependent upon seemingly ‘certainty.’

—

“The future of companies, regardless of size, will be shaped by algorithms.”

Mike Walsh

—

Ultimately, it will be humans who use the shapes created by algorithms to assess options, evaluate antifragile components and navigate asymmetrical uncertainty.

It within this dynamic environment in which we should note business is inherently fragile. HBR once said “business is a quivering mass of vulnerabilities.” I say that because as a pendulum swings one way it will inevitably want to swing the other way. We inherently feel the fragile pendulum swing and start seeking to build ‘un-natural’ antifragile aspects to create a sense of antifragility. Aspects like systems, process, rules, KPIs, data/dashboards and, yes, algorithms. Depending on how fragile we see, or feel, the business to be the more likely we use the created mechanisms to ‘tell us what to do.’ We must fight against those instincts.

Frankly, this is where generations DO become relevant in discussing business. Older workers, 50somethings, can be an impediment by seeing past experience as ‘certainty’ . On the other hand, some 50somethings can actually be a bridge between some certainty-type learnings and younger people who are more comfortable with disorder (but they don’t necessarily have the expertise do discern the best bridges between certainty & uncertainty).

Here is what I do know. Business people inherently abhor risk, business organizations inherently gravitate toward the ‘safest’ and numbers, research, data & algorithms look like life rafts in a risky, safe seeking business world. That said. I also know progress is rarely found without some risk and is often found on ‘not-the-safest’ path. Algorithms create a false sense of ‘right thing to do.’ any leader who leans on algorithms too much isn’t leading. Period.

Uncertainty leadership.

For this I lean in on How to Lead a Quest by Dr. Jason Fox. In times of uncertainty a business does not need business ‘heroes’ but rather people aligned on a quest and leaders who embrace the uncertainty of a complex interconnected multi-dimensional business world.

—-

“You must learn to be still in the midst of activity and to be vibrantly alive in repose.”

Indira Ghandi

—-

Contrary to popular belief I would suggest a highly successful algorithmic leader is likely a 50something who has navigated research, then data, the ‘dictating’ decisions challenge gauntlet, & who were more likely to see how seemingly unrelated disparate fragments could be coalesced into decisions and futures that the numbers/data didn’t completely support, but also did not completely discount. That was a long winded way to introduce the idea of “data decipherers”. This type of leadership invaluable to an organization more & more steeped in numbers, dashboards, data & algorithms.

Jason Fox calls this “shining a light on the path before us.” Leadership will not use algorithms for ‘squinting into the future but rather to identify the stepping stones in a sea of uncertainty. They will offer people moments of some certainty without promising a certain future nor even promising steady progress organizationally. It will be more about uncovering options, making choices to alleviate stressors, so that teams can breakthrough while others provide the organization with the redundancies to protect an organization from uncertainty vulnerabilities.

Here is what I do know. Psychologically businesses will arc toward a belief algorithms will provide an increased tidiness and symmetry to business. that is a false sense of tidiness. Business will become increasingly untidy, the paths will become increasingly complex, therefore business will become increasingly uncertain with regard to the best, and proper steps, necessary for progress. Pragmatically business will need more, and better, leadership comfortable with uncertainty despite more numbers, data and algorithms.

Antifragile leadership.

Crisis, disaster resolution is rarely about resources available, but rather people* availability.

• * ‘people availability’: this is all of physical energy, skills and mental energy combined.

Here I lean in Taleb’s AntiFragile. We tend to build redundancies incorrectly, don’t assume for disorder well & only enhance fragility in plans. We too often see AntiFragile as a “leadership concept” when in reality it is best absorbed by agile/adaptable teams.

Risk management almost always solely focuses on resources necessary to sustain, and manage, foreseen crisis. As Taleb points out the largest flaw in that is most crisis do not look similar to ones on the past (they will have similarities but still be unique). In addition. Most organizations build in redundancy safety nets as, well, a net.  Because we dislike fragility so much we start building in antifragile everywhere. We tend to think of leadership as “what if” redundancy design. Antifragile leadership should be more ‘aligning resources to meet different scenarios.” Some people would call this ‘agile.’ I would not. I would simply call this pivoting (I am old school) based on the Law of the Situation. Great businesses have always been able to pivot to meet market challenges and opportunities. This is pivoting – no more, no less.

This is where I would view using algorithms a little differently than other people. Algorithms tend to look at opportunities when I believe they could be better used to identify stress points and stressors. Most good leaders are best as problems solvers or maybe better said “removers of obstacles to opportunistic behavior.’ (that doesn’t mean they don’t optimize existing operations/situations just that where good leaders get paid the big bucks is getting moments/situations unstuck). I would also argue identifying stressors permits smarter experimenting and tinkering.

Here is what I do know. Algorithms, used properly, permit people to stop just optimizing for the present and start attempting to optimizing the future. Yes. It may mean being less efficient in the short term (sometimes), but, done well, will create a more effective long term construct.

Conclusion:

I think the smart businesses of the future will be “directed to act” by algorithms, but not managed by. The latter demands acceptance of algorithm as qualified to make us to do something behaviorally, the former demands we accept algorithms as something that ‘informs’ our doing. Somewhere in between is the decision of how much we, people, are accountable for thinking. Algorithms inherently encourage us to believe business is not best when it is random. Yet. The best businesses resist the urge to suppress randomness and permit people to be more accountable for some untidy decisions with some untidy outcomes.

All businesses will exist, in some form or fashion, grounded in algorithms. I am fairly sure that’s a given. The challenge will be to not get consumed by algorithms.

To realize algorithms do not give answers, but outline options.

To realize algorithms don’t define redundancies, but rather where and when to apply redundancy resources (therefore help to define how to create proper redundancies).

To realize algorithms don’t necessarily create innovation opportunities but rather find opportunities to ‘reinvent’ ideas.

And.

To realize algorithms will not replace people, but rather augment minds and skills OF people. Ponder.

===

“We find the true person only through group organization. The potentialities of the individual remain potentialities until they are released by group life. Thus, the essence of democracy is creating. The technique of democracy is group organization.”

Mary Parker Follett, The New State

===

I just had a conversation about employees with a good friend of mine who runs a business where “A clients need A players” came up. To be fair, he quickly said “I know you believe all employees have at least some A-level qualities/skills.” I do. Generally speaking, I believe most businesses squash the A-level ability in most people and the waste of human potential is immense. Certainly, some people have specific skills better than other people and ambition fluctuates person-to-person (ambition should never be conflated with skills), but, there is such a waste of human potential particularly in what many call ‘the workers’ or the blue-collar jobs or what leadership typically deems “the doers.” The bottom line in the discussion I was having was “I can’t tell you if you should be hiring anyone, or even who, if I don’t know if you are maximizing the people you have.”

But let’s get to potential.

In the 1980s Professors Edward Deci and Richard Ryan from the University of Rochester defined the six main reasons people work: play, purpose, potential, emotional pressure, economic pressure, and inertia. Since then, most research has suggested the first three motives tend to increase performance, while the latter three hurt it.

• Play is when you are motivated by the work itself. You work because you enjoy it, e.g., creating learning programs or problem solving how to break through to each person. Play is our learning instinct, tied to curiosity, experimentation, and exploring challenging problems.

• Purpose is when the direct outcome of the work fits your identity. You work because you value the work’s positive impact on, or for, other human beings.
• Potential is when the outcome of the work benefits your identity. In other words, the work enhances your potential.

Since these three motives are directly connected to the work itself in some way, they will improve performance to different degrees. If we want employees to have the cognitive ability, flexibility and agility needed to solve complex problems and collaborate effectively (whether face-to-face or remotely) as well as being able to develop and apply qualities such as critical thinking and creativity, we need to consider what we can do to enable those abilities to flourish and thrive and potential seems to be a rich mine for personal progress.

Which leads me to leadership (or nudging).

The conscientious nudger seeks to design systems and processes to help people make better choices for themselves. That said. Any choice architecture begins with sensemaking. For example, losses loom larger than gains in our minds and this steers motivation within sensemaking and choicemaking. Potential is found not only in curiosity & learning but in accepted risk and acceptable losses. All of this can be crafted in effective sensemaking. What I mean by that is if everyone makes sense of situations in the same way, or with similar characteristics, the choice architecture (and its boundaries) is crafted by the sensemaking and not through any leader (this is called The Law of the Situation). Therefore, the leader simply nudges people with a common sensemaking framework toward potential solutions, nudges curiosity and nudges probabilistic thinking so that people can explore – which is where potential is always found.

 

“Having a better theory of emergent organization would have a lot of practical benefits, allowing us to generate or simplify sets of rules that will result in productive ends.”

John Miller, Science of Complex Systems

==

Unfortunately, too many leaders inhibit people from asking questions that once seemed too absurd to consider and thus they prevent people from probing for patterns and insights that once resided in the realm of the unknowable. Potential explores limits and imitations. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t acknowledge limits but in doing so it should not amount to a dismissal of potentials.

Which leads me to principles.

Any time we seem to discuss A players, B players or any types of players we inherently create a warped competitive environment. I am not suggesting a business shouldn’t encourage some competition but it should be competing without feeling like it is competition or you are being competitive – you compete with stagnancy & entropy. This is when you are simply attempting to maximize your own potential and skills assuming your best will be, well, your best – win, lose or draw. This also assumes you believe your best will demand everyone else to bring their best so that even in a competitive environment if you ‘lose’ it Is simply because everyone played it the best they could.

So let me offer some principles:

• Human potential represents an organization’s main source of productivity

• Technology augments people, people don’t complement technology, potential emerges from augmentation

• An individual’s potential is not defined by one skill, but rather all skills/abilities (of all depths/dimensions) an individual has

• The highest organizational productivity, progress, profitability is found through maximizing opportunities efficiently and, simultaneously, effectively maintain productivity, progress & profitability

I tend to believe if you follow these principles you will just have team players, no A, B, C or whatever, and you will increase the probability these players will maximize their potential and, as a consequence, the business successes will increase. Ponder.

———

All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary

———

Ok. I was tempted to call this ‘the glimpses of perfection’ <which I also call “the flickering of perfection” somewhere later>. What I mean by that is if you put any real effort into what you do, in business or in Life, you will actually brush up against perfection on occasion. And that’s the maddening part.  Life is pretty maddening in that it often gives us these little glimpses of perfection, but at the same time refuses to let us actually keep it for anything longer than a glimpse.

This is where it all gets tricky. Therefore <because we like … no ... LOVE ... those glimpses> we constantly attack Life & business always slightly tainted by this ‘temporary perfection’.

Why? Because the temporary glimpses, those ‘moments’, they suggest perfection <or a version of it> is achievable. And you try and plan, and replicate, those glimpses so that they become the norm. Unfortunately, we people are imperfect so replicating perfection is almost impossible. We struggle in this wretched in between almost everyday.
Now.

First. Let me be clear. The whole idea of perfection is shit.

Second. That doesn’t mean we cannot achieve perfection <whew … there was a contradictory thought, huh?>

The difficulty resides in the fact that perfection is fleeting and we only get glimpses of it. I sometimes refer to it as the flickering of perfection in our lives.

And you know what? That’s good <that flickering>. In fact I would argue it is often good enough. In fact I could argue it is as good as it gets.

Look. I imagine most of us probably feel like we are ‘doing’ somewhere between okay and good in most areas of life. We are, in our minds, doing a decent job day to day. Some days better than others, but overall decent.

But perfection? Whew. I don’t think so. Maybe at moments … but all the time in life? No way.

That said. Maybe the key point, or issue, most likely comes down to my ‘definition of perfection’.

Here is my take.

I sometimes believe we see perfection as a home to move into.

It is not. It is a hotel <or maybe a motel>. You may stay one night … maybe a week <if you are really really lucky>, but you can’t live there.

Am I saying this as a way of condoning mediocrity?

No. Absolutely frickin’ not.

It is just a reminder that people are not perfect <most of the time>.

It is a reminder that Life is not perfect <all the time>.

It is a reminder that Business is never perfect despite all the best practices, process, system, ROI & corporate cultural guidelines <never perfect contextually>.

It is a reminder that aiming for perfection <all the time> is wasted energy and maybe to take it easier on yourself.

Now. This doesn’t mean you should try to be your best <because you should>, maybe just acknowledge that your best doesn’t equal perfection <at least all the time>.

Uhm. Uh oh.

It is quite possible one would think that “doing your best” should be, well, our best, no?

And if we believe that, well, our best should equal perfection, no?

Unfortunately it doesn’t actually work that way.

That actually isn’t the formula.

This may be difficult to accept, but your best is a jagged line. Jagged as it is dependent upon what you have and when you are doing something – context as it were.

On occasion that jagged line butts up against the ‘perfection line.’

So.

Unfortunately. Under the harsh spotlight of self judgment you may be tempted to judge this as not really your best. Or maybe you make it a caveated best. A derivative of best as it were.

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

“It’s easy to miss and easy to mistake
For when things are really great
It just means everything’s in its place.”

Aimee Mann

Well. You would be wrong. Its not some lesser version as long as you were truly “doing the best that you can.”

Oh shit. Trouble. In actuality many times we are not actually doing our best.

Huh? C’mon. 90% of the time as we go thru the grind of Life & business you know you could do more <if the measure is truly our best>.

Look. I truly believe chasing perfection is an endless pursuit. And, frankly, if you try to do this you only put yourself under unbearable pressure aiming to be the perfect version of who you are. And, inevitably, this relentless quest for perfection can only bring disappointment because not only is being perfect all the time <if not at any time> an impossible task, but it becomes exponentially more impossible <ok … how can something that is already impossible become exponentially so? … its kind of like getting three death sentences …> if you actually attempt to do “it” all the time.

Planning perfection, which is most often a random confluence of factors, is a sysiphean task. Someone can waste far too much time and energy trying to be the perfect ‘whatever’.

Sure. None of us want to be ‘less-than-perfect’ in anything we do, but it is a fact of life. But. Here is some news.

Ok.

No. Here is the fact.

Doing your best isn’t about perfection and it isn’t always trying to be perfect. Because doing your best is about “good enough with what you can actually do”. Doing your best is about maximizing ‘as long as it lasts.’ And that is often not perfection.

Ok.

In the end. Don’t think about perfection as ‘your best.” Best is simply … ‘effort + attitude’. And … just … well … do your best. Choose the moments and truly do your best <and admit the other times just aren’t your best you are just muddling through>.

Why?

Well. I believe every action has an equal and opposite reaction <actually … each action can have a variety of opposite reactions of which it is difficult for you to discern beforehand what will occur but that’s a different post>. Therefore, if you perform any action the results will come, maybe not today or tomorrow, but at some time. So if people could keep their minds thinking what I just typed above and truly do your best at the right time and mentally unattach yourself from the outcome of the ‘best’ actions <and the concept of perfection> I think more people would be happier and they may actually do their best more often. And, maybe more importantly, if you do not try and fool yourself into believing you had done “your best” in certain situations you may be able to manage your life expectation-wise a little better.

Regardless.

Just do your best and, if you are lucky, you will get a glimpse of perfection. We can try and be our best all the time, but perfection is temporary. While that may sound painfully disappointing maybe look at it is “possibilities”.

——–

I dwell in Possibility—
A fairer House than Prose—
More numerous of Windows—
Superior—for Doors—

Of Chambers as the Cedars—
Impregnable of Eye—
And for an Everlasting Roof
The Gambrels of the Sky—

Of Visitors—the fairest—
For Occupation—This—
The spreading wide of narrow Hands
To gather Paradise—

Emily Dickinson

———

Remember. While your life may only have the flickering of perfection it surely seems like a positive way of attacking Life would be to dwell in the possibilities that perfection will visit again.

——

———————————–

“I feel like I’ve swallowed a cloudy sky.”

=

Haruki Murakami

—-

Ok. I am a principles person. By that I mean I believe, and have found, that most business principles have a timeless quality to them. The majority of the best of the best principles offer solid fundamentals.

That said. I cannot tell you how many times I have sat in a business meeting, often with very smart business people, and someone pulls out <verbally> some marketing, or any business process/idea/way-to-think from over a decade ago as if it represents a principle rather than a process <which is implementation OF a principle>.

As I sit there and listen, well, I feel like I have swallowed a cloudy sky.

<note: it feels a little uncomfortable>

It’s not that the old principle is wrong it has just been improved upon from an implementation aspect.

My whole issue in this situation is a version of unlearning.

Anyway. By a ‘version’ I imagine I am thinking it is maybe more unbundling and shedding some of the outdated features and learning some of the newer features rather than simply unlearning something.

I fully understand that most business people are under constant pressure to learn more and to learn quickly and to mostly focus on the shit that is most important to them. Therefore, they will also tend to absorb one of their ‘non expertise competencies’ in the most simple sensible fashion possible.

But here is the issue in today’s business world.

The future belongs to the people who can unlearn stuff faster than the rest WHILE leaning into the timeless principles.

In other words. The ability to apply principles in new contexts.

I know I didn’t say ‘adapt’ or anything except ‘unlearn shit.’ I did that because it is almost impossible to learn something new until you have created some mental space by letting go of something else.

** note: it is a skill to know what to let go and what to hold on to.

So I am suggesting you cannot do that <adapt> unless you learn how to do this <unlearn>. You either learn to unlearn quicker, on everything that reflects context, not just your core competency or … well … you will either be too slow <because that one part is like dragging algae on the bottom of a sailboat> or you will fail <because even that one part can blow up the entire engine>.

I know.

I know.

What I am suggesting is hard.

REALLY hard.

Because, as I noted earlier, discerning between principles and implementation of principles is often difficult to discern let alone explain in combination with the fact this will sometimes means letting go of something that has worked really well for you for a long time.

Now. To be clear.

I do not think that just because something is an ‘older idea’ that it is not usable. In fact I believe we have shed more good thinking under the guise of some bullshit ‘pop business culture’ soundbite type thinking than is good for us. But there are aspects of old thinking & ideas that can be updated.

I don’t suggest this simply or flippantly. I do so because I see the value of new thinking, but from a more practical aspect – the business world has changed in some dynamics that should make us not simply reapply a slightly tired business thinking ideas.

Once again. This is all hard. Really hard. It gets harder because the business world is demanding us to ‘think new faster.’ Most simply this has created the perception business life has become even more fragile than ever before which increases the stress upon us to do things faster (which encourages is to reapply past ideas & thinking that may have worked).

The perception is buttressed up by some contectual facts. A Yale professor noted the average lifespan of a company listed in the S&P 500 index of leading US companies has decreased by more than 50 years in the last century. <67 years in 1920s to 15 years today>. I’d also not in 2020 around ¾ of the S&P 500 are companies that either did not exist in 2010 or were below the awareness radar.

So how do principles stand the test of time. Well. Relevance is the name of the game. Which means context matters and adaptability addresses the most basic business truth that much of what used to work will not work now and what works today will most likely not work in the near future.

Old business models and old business thinking has been shaken to the core which has two obvisous consequences:

fundamental principles are mistakenly tossed away as outdoated (a mistake)

new (loudly spoken) ideas are confused with real principled thinking (a mistake)

This is not just because of ‘old people.’ This is thinking survival. You store away thoughts in your head and prioritize what you just use, and reuse, and what you unlearn and what you learn anew.

Look. I know I still hear people quote ‘good to great’ tripe <when I wish more people would pull out Covey’s ‘Habits of’ instead> so I know we get confused on what to hold on to and what to let go of.

I know I was just in a meeting where an incredibly smart person discussed the traditional purchase funnel <see image to left> and he was kind enough to chuckle when I pointed out that model type thinking had solid aspects, but there were significantly newer models which reflect the dynamics of today’s word better.

I guess I need to remind myself a couple things:

1. 1. I live, eat & breathe new thinking and new ways of doing things.
   2. Most people do not.

This doesn’t mean I am better than anyone, it is just that I am always seeking the ‘right way to think in a particular situation’ rather than ‘best practice for all.’ And I am involved with such a wide variety of industries and business and business people that ‘one way does not fit all’ and context, or contextually applying principled thinking, can often make a principle look not like a principle, but rather look like a new idea.

Today’s business world is all about living in a non-stagnant world. Business has always been restless … it just seems more restless.

Stay still and get run over.

Something you learned in the past, which is logical & makes sense, seems counterintuitive to ‘unlearn’

Or as John Maynard Keynes said:

“The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping the old ones”

We are all creatures of habit and custom ingrained by decades of repetition.

In addition. Smart people have a tendency to hold on to sensible smart ideas.

Escaping old ideas is hard.

REALLY hard <especially if they were good>. And sometimes seems counterintuitive to let go because “I found something that works and I want to maintain it as long as I can.’

Sounds smart.

Sounds sensible.

Uhm. Now hear the sound of your business getting crushed.

All that said.

What made me start writing this post?

An old friend of mine wrote the following words on his linkedin site and I liked them <albeit I did find a typo … to his chagrin>. It is about branding and advertising … but the concept behind the words ring true thru any business category:

===

I want to encourage our industry to evolve beyond the tired branding principles that haven’t changed since Oglivy made his bones over 30-years ago.

If you find yourself baffled by double-speak and special language that only brand experts seem to understand, trust your instincts and find a firm who is fast and whose counsel makes rational sense.

A client told me about his experience with one of the agencies in his stable:

“… it’s like talking to the Mandarins that keep all commoners from the Forbidden Palace … I don’t speak their language … the process takes too long … and I have other things to do ….”

Getting to the Forbidden Palace of Brand shouldn’t take three months and war chest of fees that would be better off in working media.

This, I know, will upset an industry cobbled together on pre-recession consulting contracts just to come up with a snappy line, color palette, and logo.

If you find yourself sitting in yet another meeting where somebody poses the question: “But who are we really, and who do we want to be when we grow up?”

Run.

You can shape your brand in less than four weeks. You and your company knows who they are and your consumers know who you are. The faster you come to leverage points and missed opportunities, the faster your retail or sales organization can get back to doing what they do best — SELLING.

You need to unleash a burlap sack of caffeinated ferrets into your marketing world to get things done, excite your organization, and make sales happen.

That’s where I come in … head caffeinated ferret at your service.

Mandarins need not apply.

===

Look. I know it is difficult to stay in touch with the newest best thinking. I also know it is difficult to stay in touch with the principles. I even know it is difficult to discern what is good new thinking and what is shitty useless new thinking.

But.

Tired business thinking is tired business thinking.

Sorry.

But it is what it is.

Thinking with fresh legs will pass tired thinking any day.

All I know is that, personally, every time I hear someone speak tired business thinking I feel like I have swallowed a cloudy sky – its pretty but useless. I do believe the business world does need to reenege with some of the timeless principles but at the same time i believe the business world need to reinvigorate those principles within a contextually dynamic world.

Maybe I am also suggesting we need to begin teaching some classes on the differences between principles and ideas. Ponder.

——

Portuguese:

saudade

… a longing for something so indefinite as to be indefinable.   Love affairs, miseries of life, the way things were, people already dead, those who left and the ocean that tossed them on the shores of a different land – all things born of the soul that can only be felt. 

==

Anthony De Sa

———–

“He marveled at the indifference of the world, the way it kept on, despite everything.”

==

Anthony Doerr

————-

Ok. I am fairly sure everyone desires the greater intangible things in life: the things, or thing, you just cannot put words to but you know is out there and you will “know it when you see it or feel it”. Unfortunately, well, the intangible also tends to be elusive.

It is also very very difficult to clearly define or put words to it <hence many people choose to focus on some specific milestone or objective>. I would suggest the intangible is elusive because the world is indifferent to our desires. What do I mean? The world is relatively uninterested in offering the intangible in tangible form. The world simply tends to fork over tangible crap to us and it is up to us to peel it all back and bask in the intangible good stuff found within.

But that takes time and is more difficult.

Therefore. We tend to seek tangibles.

And more tangibles.

And then more tangibles.

This means that we are almost destined, despite that in our soul we deeply long for something indefinable, to settle for tangible proof that we are showing some progress.

I do not really care what the proof is … just that we settle for it.

What Is Elusive? The definition of “elusive” is:

elusive: evasive, slippery, difficult to find, catch or achieve

Speaking of desiring proof – that is why we often create deadlines. Deadlines are powerful things as we face our longing for the indefinite <and the definite>. More often than not we use the deadline to insure we do not waste too much time on something we are not sure can be easily defined. But think about what a deadline really is.

Today the term is now used, mostly, to refer to “the time by which something must be completed.” In the historical sense a deadline refers to the boundary around a prison which, if prisoners crossed it, they’d be shot by the guards. Wow. Okay. So while deadlines are everywhere in the business world and we no longer get shot it does seem like we just get shit when we cross a deadline.

Now. Psychologists have done a boatload of research on the effect of deadlines on people. Invariably the majority of people actually improve performance as a deadline nears. They explain this by something called “the Yerkes-Dodson law.” This law suggests performance increases as arousal <excitement, stress, tension, nervousness> increases. Well. At least up to a point from which performance declines as the person, and senses, are overwhelmed.

Basically this suggests we become more aware of consequences of failing to complete what we want to do as time slips away and act upon that awareness <with some focus because the consequences of not meeting the deadline while may not include being shot certainly includes a load of shit>.

In addition. Deadlines tend to eliminate procrastination mostly because we dislike the unpleasant feeling of consequences of not meeting a deadline.

Note: Stick with me because this all has to do with our longing for something indefinite.

Ok. Now comes the next horrible thing that happens as we pursue what we truly long for. We have a deadline in our heads and we encounter something called the planning fallacy. We suck, extraordinarily so, at estimating how much time to allocate for things because our brains, in general, are quite overly optimistic with regard to our own capabilities. Therefore we underestimate time. In addition we do this because our brains have a nasty habit of looking back on past poor time allocation and failed deadlines and blame external causes <and yet the next time the thought will be that this time we will be unencumbered therefore meet our deadline successfully>.

All of this circles back to that ‘arousal’ consequence, which we hate, as it rears its ugly head one more time as our optimistic assumptions crash into the actual reality of the situation. I bring it back to ‘arousal’ because all that painful consequence stuff occurs WHEN YOU ARE PURSUING A TANGIBLE GOAL.

The waters get even murkier if you are setting some deadline on how much time you want to spend on pursuing this elusive indefinite thing. But. We are truly optimistic folk. Well. At least some of us are. What one person thinks of as elusive and indefinite another sees hope and opportunity. And depending on where you are in Life your feeling can change. The one consistent steady thing is that at all times there is a longing for something more, some longing for something so indefinite as to be undefinable.

So what can we do? We have to take responsibility for our lives and choices and this indefinite thing. We cannot subvert the longing and suffocate it with the tangible.

To be clear <part 1>. The longing should not dictate our lives and behavior, but it also should not play a role in our lives and actions.

To be clear <part 2>. That isn’t easy. Life can throw a bunch of curve balls and … well … some high hard fastballs. The biggest fastball Life throws at you is what I call “Life comparison shopping.” You shop your life against other lives.

In the good ole days it was called “keeping up with the Joneses” <using one’s neighbors as a standard of comparison for the consumption of material goods>. This sounds silly, but we are human, and it is hard not to notice when your neighbor buys something. But they are not the only standard of comparison. Television shows, magazines, websites, and pretty much anywhere you consume information inundates us with stories about what other people have, wear and do.

Yes. While we know we shouldn’t care mostly because, while we may not articulate it this way, we know conspicuous consumption is ubiquitous.

But.

Tangible proof is, well, tangible proof.

The tendency to compare yourself to to other people is fundamental and is going to occur whether or not we intend it. And, yes, in some cases, social comparison is useful. In the absence of objective standards of success, social comparison  helps us to evaluate and improve ourselves. And yet, at the same time,  sometimes social comparison suggests you are inferior in some aspect <wealth, intelligence, appearance, etc.> which can create some feelings of envy or ‘lesser than.’ Okay. This is where the tangible proof path absolutely frickin’ kills us on this pursuit of something undefinable.

“Lesser than” feelings erode the belief you can ever attain what you long for <I mean your head says “c’mon … if you cannot even be good enough to do that how can you be good enough to attain something you cannot even define .. all you can do is just discuss as something you ‘long for’?”>.

Then we remain on the middle path too long. We start missing out on the dreams. We shelve the longing and inevitably that which is undefinable remains undefined and that which we long for simply becomes an immature pursuit for only those who are dreamers. You justify this decision, and personal behavior, as you walk the middle path by always thinking that eventually you will get around to pursuing this longing … and eventually reach this undefinable thing that will makes you happy.

And then time is gone. And the longing, which is easily dismissed as “shit, I couldn’t even define it anyway”, is still there but the opportunity is gone.

Look. Pursuing something so indefinite as to be indefinable is tough. It is not for the faint of heart. To do so you need to accept that while some results are very tangible others are less so. The secret is to get your head straight from the outset on how ‘performance’ is to be measured then build in the means for measuring activity. I say that because I think the measurement is much more important than setting a deadline.

I mean, well, how can you set a deadline on something you cannot even define? <someone smarter than I would have to figure that out>.

In the end I use this quote:

====

“A rat race is for rats. We’re not rats. We’re human beings. Reject the insidious pressures in society that would blunt your critical faculties to all that is happening around you, that would caution silence in the face of injustice lest you jeopardise your chances of promotion and self-advancement. This is how it starts, and, before you know where you are, you’re a fully paid-up member of the rat pack. The price is too high.”

Jimmy Reid

=====

Part of being a human being is this inherent longing for “something.” Maybe it is captured in that one word:  saudade.

“all things born of the soul that can only be felt.”

I am not suggesting we shouldn’t do the day to day stuff that needs to be done nor am I suggesting that deadlines aren’t quite useful for some day to day shit, but I am suggesting that stuff shouldn’t be done at the sacrifice of our longing for “all things born of the soul that can only be felt.”

=====

“Every man gets a narrower and narrower field of knowledge in which he must be an expert in order to compete with other people.

The specialist knows more and more about less and less and finally knows everything about nothing.”

=

Konrad Lorenz

——————

—————

Well. Someone asked me what I do.

I answered I am mostly a pain in the ass to current business consultants, leaders and people of my generation <50somethings who I believe, in general, have their proverbial heads up their asses>.  I write, and speak, about the changing face of the business landscape and what that means for businesses.

My view of things suggest consequences:

– Young people in business disengage from what could be learned

– Young people in business manage on instinct <disregarding what older generations have done> … which is fraught with peril

– Young people in business make unnecessary mistakes

– Young people in business are now tending to guide themselves into a generalist role/view of business rather than a specialist <and older people thrive on hiring specialists, but value ongoing performance based on generalist qualities>.

I am only going to speak to the last point today.

I cannot remember where, but I saw someone write about being a generalist. Okay, what they actually said was none of us should be just one “thing” and we all possess a variety of skills – including skills we aren’t using.

In addition … The Guardian published “Specialists or generalists: what do Employers Want.

This is one of my favorite topics to rant about. Being a specialist versus a generalist.

It drives me a little nuts that people naturally associate “being accomplished” with specialist.

It drives me a little nuts that people naturally associate “unfocused” with generalist.

Suffice it to say people’s perception when you suggest you are generalist is rarely <see: ‘never’> good. People seem to wonder if you just were not smart enough to specialize <which presumes ‘talented and skilled’> in something.

People seem to immediately assume you have some attention deficit disorder <why else could you not focus on one thing> or a general lack of ability to stay the course on one thing.

Maybe worst of all, people assume being a specialist means you do have a skill and being a generalist means you do not have a skill. That last thought is most bothersome because a good generalist actually offers the highest value skill – the ability to create structural value creation.

Regardless. I admit I have a love/hate relationship with specializing.

I love the fact someone can find something they are interested in, are good at and acquire a skill which permits them to offer a service which others can not.

I hate the fact someone can often blindly sacrifice learning and ‘enlightening the mind’ under the guise of this thing called specializing.

Far too often I find specialists have sacrificed so much outside of their specialty they know more about nothing <things outside their skill> than is actually good for them. While I admit I am biased I believe if you’re multi-skilled or curious over a variety of topics & skill development you tend to be more adaptable and more ‘evolving’ as a human being — and this person ultimately adds value anywhere and to anyone <ability to offer transactional value AND structural value creation>.

I believe I have stated this before.  The world actually needs a mix of generalists & specialists and that alone means maybe we should not only give generalists a break <for not being a specialist> and maybe we should be encouraging generalist attitudes & behavior.

Anyway.

Suffice it to say successful people do not always do one thing. As a corollary doing a variety of things is not an exclusive characteristic of unsuccessful people.

My personal belief is that a generalist is too good to specialize.

And I wish more people were generalists.

I believe everyone is capable of a variety of skills and I believe most people have skills they aren’t using.

Me?

I specialize in being a generalist. And my specialty in discussions with people is to ask “what else?”

Huh?

<1> What do you do?

<2> What else?

 Maybe that is my simplest thought with regard to specialists versus generalists, I just wish more people would pursue ‘what else’ in life.

Maybe view “what’s next” with curiosity and energy more often.

Maybe be a little more perpetually dissatisfied with what they know.

In the end. I imagine I don’t really dislike specialists or like generalists I simply abhor stagnancy and, in general, I view specialization as naturally arcing toward stagnancy and generalization arcs toward progress. That, in the end, is my best argument for generalization versus specialization.

=========

“Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future.

—-

Niels Bohr

——-

“The future is purchased by the present.”

—

Samuel Johnson

===========

“If the people in this room were right just 1 percent of the time, we’d all be telecommuting from Tahiti, eating dinner in pill form and having literal sex with our virtual selves.”

The Futurist (James Othmer)

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

Around the new year everyone gets into the prediction business. Basically, a shitload of people become “futurists.” Well. I wrote in 2011 the whole ‘futurist’ career was bullshit and suggested I could never be one. Let me begin by explaining where “Futurist” began.

The “Manifesto of Futurism,” written by Filippo Tommaso Marinetti was published on the front page of the French newspaper Le Figaro on February 20, 1909. It proclaimed the desire of the author, and his fellow Futurists, to abandon the past and embrace the future.

The point here on the whole concept of a “Futurist” is that their very existence is disdainful of the present.

Anyway.

Should we have an eye to the future? Absolutely. To not do so is to remain stagnant with regard to thinking.

Should we ignore the present? Absolutely not. If there was ever a time that a Futurist discussed the present, now would be the time.

Future thinking is purchased in the present. In other words, something existing within the present – most likely some type of behavior is the future opportunity. Saying that permits me to say that I believe Futurists, or the label/title, is kind of silly. Suffice it to say looking at trends and envisioning ‘what could be’ doesn’t need a title. And you certainly cannot earn a living doing it if you get paid for successful futuristic prognostication.

Why? Because the probability of being right is very very low. Pretty much every so called futurist <excepting maybe Toffler & Drucker … who never called themselves Futurists> has had an incredibly poor success rate in outlining future trends & behavior <and sometimes even attitudes>.

“The futurist was never cutting edge or far ahead of the curve. He was often only just a few minutes in front of the pack, or a couple seconds ahead of the global zeitgeist, or at least of the middle american one. It is rare, and a gift, to be able to see something was going to be big in a mainstream way months and sometimes years before your hipsters, your early adapters, your so called thought leaders embraced it.”

The Futurist

Moving beyond simply slamming futurists, in my mind I believe futurists shouldn’t predict they should inspire thinking <which could beget the future>. This kind of career activity is sort of like NASA, i.e., unintended innovations and learning.

The truth of a trend spotter or a ‘futurist’ is that they steal <reassemble> the thoughts of others and repurpose them for slightly different purposes under the guise of ‘recognizing disparate facts that impact the bigger picture.’ Once again, I do not begrudge them. That takes a skill (I highly recommend both Mike Walsh books, Dictionary of Dangerous Ideas & The Algorithmic Leader as he is what I envision a Futurist SHOULD do). Its just that many of the so-called Futurists take advantage of a world where it is acceptable to not to know the answers to the questions that the world asks every second of the day. It’s okay to not know what you want, where you want to go and who you want to become.

It’s okay to wonder.

It’s okay to question and ask.

And it is okay to not to know<although those listening then take it as gospel>.

And what’s not okay is to stop wondering. So the faux Futurist steps in and uses all of those to create answers (to unanswerable questions) and create a made up future world everyone can think about.

Ok. All that said.

Here is a truth <and Futurists clearly understand this>. The people they are talking to don’t really want wisdom. Those people just want shortcuts to getting more. Therefore if the message doesn’t match the ‘more’ desires ultimately it doesn’t engage the listeners because it doesn’t contain the inevitability of something positive.

It may sound cynical but nowadays a message needs a sense of some guarantee that prosperity will never end <that is a thought from the book>. And therein lies my biggest issue, the fact that trend watchers are seeking future prosperity versus discussing empowering present prosperity.

That “seek future vs. empower present” is the issue we should skewer 99% of so-called Futurist, predictors, over.

The truth is that the future is actually found in the now. Uhm. I mean that future ideas are actually found in the now. Note that this ‘now’ is not just in thinking, but in doing.

Thinking about what is happening now <attitudes>.

Thinking about what is being done today <behavior>.

Say what? How can it be futuristic if it is just a derivative of something in the present?

Well. To me real futuristic trending type thinking has to have a slightly pragmatic foundation residing somewhere in the minds of the rising generation. The real, the truly meaningful, behavior shifts occur not within a generation, but within transition of generations. Therefore any pie in the sky type thinking has to be made up of some pie that <simplistically> the kids of the present have an interest in eating of. For any future type ideation will live or die not with existing attitude generations but more so in evolving attitude generations.

To be clear. People’s attitudes do, and can, evolve as they age and experience things <and they are exposed to new and different attitudes and behavior>. But that isn’t futuristic thinking, that is simply critical mass thinking (I recommend Mark Earls “Herd” for this).

It’s a different ability. That is someone who can look at existing trends and attitudes … mostly looking at those that reside in fractions or in the minority of minds … and figuring out which ones will actually gain enough traction to attain the critical mass to ‘evolve’ the majority of attitudes.

I say that but also suggest that this is often a Sisyphean task.

Attitudes are imprints. They are almost like tattoos. Once established they are almost impossible to remove.

Think about how the past minority point of views have shifted to a majority more mainstream view acceptance and, yet, there still remains a solid steadfast unrelenting minority attitude system in place. Evolution of attitudes is like glaciers. And they also tend to follow generations … and not single generations. Early adopter generation transitioning to a vocal minority generation to a majority acceptance generation and ultimately a generation who not only has the attitudes but behavior is established.

Ok. Last thought on predictions.

Toffler co-wrote the 1970 book Future Shock and also Power Shift and also The Adaptive Corporation <all of which I have sourced so often it is embarrassing>. And while some of his writings were off base and some a little bit of a stretch, most of his writings were incredibly insightful and we are living much of what he outlined then – today. He predicted the rise of the internet, the impact of the internet on the workplace, how technology would affect sociological norms as well as labor needs and he even discussed the decline of the nuclear family.

In general, he foresaw the larger impact related to technological advancement.

And far too often we ignore what he wrote and had the foresight to point out. My point is far too often today’s experts and pontificators act like what is happening today is some seismic shift reflective of an earthquake happening before our eyes.

They are wrong.

What is happening today is the tsunami occurring on our shores from the earthquake which occurred under some deep ocean decades ago. And that is what Toffler outlined for us. And that is what I wish far more people would invest the energy researching to better understand why things are happening in the here & now (not just Toffler but the underlying attitudinal shifts).

As I write I can look up on the closest bookshelf and see my well worn copies of Future Shock and PowerShift. Toffler writing should be mandatory for anyone who wants to discuss current trends and current business issues. And you, and I, should demand that they do so. To not do so is to commit professional malpractice. At its least worst it reflects intellectual laziness to discuss what is happening today without the proper background.

Well. Paradoxically … future ideas are actually best found in looking backwards — at those who are coming up behind … the young. Futurists have to look forward, but seek truth in the young. Their predictions will never come true if there isn’t a pragmatic realistic foundation to be found within the youth. With no traction, the idea, shit, any future type idea will die.

As I type that it sounds so obvious, yet, it seems like futurists and trend identifiers seem to focus on today’s people and gaze at the horizon.

Shit. What do I know.

I am not a futurist. I am not a predictor. I like to live in the present & make sure I have a future to be doing something in. I also know that past behavior is NOT a predictor of future behavior. So what do I know? Predictions are shit.

==========

‘res gestae’

latin for “things I have done” or “things done”

—–

À la recherche du temps perdu

french for remembrance of things past

<“In Search of Lost Time” Marcel Proust>

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

So. This is about things you do in life and the remembrance of things past and the fact that in today’s society you cannot permit things you may, or may not have done, become lost and gone.

Oh. And I imagine this has to do with business and building a resume and ‘marketing yourself’ <a term I abhor almost as much as ‘personal branding’>. I begin this discussion with a quasi-Life truth warning about how things you do, in the end, can blow away in the wind<if you are not careful>:

———-

“I spend my time building castles in the air but in the end all of them, and I, blow away in the wind.”

Don Juan of Austria

——-

Now. To be clear. This is not about not doing things, or not having the drive or passion or persistence to go and do, this is more about having actually done <things> and whether it matters if you tell anyone you actually did them or not.

Anyway. I just used a quote from Don Juan of Austria to make a point. He was a young man in the late 1500’s described as having an unquenchable appetite for glory and certainly a man of action. He was the leader, and victor, of the Christian coalition against the Ottomans in the battle of Lepanto at the age of 22 in 1571.

Yup. 22 years old. Oops. Only to die not too many years later of typhoid somewhere in the Netherlands <while seeking further glory & action>.

Well. We do not all have an ‘unqeuenchable appetite for glory’ <I know I do not>, but I do tend to believe that we all would like to have developed a nice list of ‘things I have done’ throughout our lives.

Glorious? Maybe. I think ‘meaningful’ would be a better word and thought. But here is one of the challenges Life throws you. It doesn’t really matter what you want or desire because society wants and demands something else. The whole world of ‘understatement’ and ‘being humble’ and ‘letting my actions speak for me’ seems to have disappeared.

I know … I know … that sounds cynical … but look around.

Self-help books scream “if you don’t tell anyone what you have done how will anyone <in this fragmented short attention span world> ever know what you have done … don’t fear telling people your accomplishments!!!!” <yes … they always include exclamation points>. Or … “you need to be your own best advocate … and don’t be afraid to tell people so.”

In addition, you cannot escape it in the business world because business management demands you to point out your accomplishments in interviews and annual reviews <at the same time demanding you never use “I” because that implies you aren’t a team player>.

Let’s be honest. Today’s world makes it difficult to be humble or quiet with regard to … well … anything, but especially your actions and accomplishments. Simplistically this happens because businesses want to pay people off of results, i.e., ‘responses’ not stimulus. Uh oh. That means you may be a catalyst, but you will get paid less than someone who ties themselves to results.

Sorry. That is today’s world.

Well. Let me take on this whole res gestae thought in pieces <or parts>.

• Accountability in our lives <us common everyday folk>
• Accountability in business life … possibly in Life in general … for leaders.
• Defining accountability in interviews and in business <from a personal perspective>.

–          Accountability in our lives <us common everyday folk>

Personally I do not believe the majority of us have to show ‘accountability’ for our lives. I believe this mostly because most of us are just trying to do our frickin’ best without having to be accountable for all of our actions at the end of it all. Sure. We would maybe like to have a list of ‘things that I have done’ that reflects … well … a job well done. A measure of the overall effort we put in over time and at critical times <I tend to believe it is really really rare we would ever look back and say ‘wow … that was perfectly the best and I couldn’t have done better!” – note the shouting for affect>.

I tend to believe most of us will be pretty content saying we did the best we could.

Ah. But its a ‘res gestae’ world. What have you accomplished? Where is the list of things you have done? Suffice it to say, this sucks.

–          Accountability in business life … possibly in Life in general … for leaders.

Now … leaders? Well. Yeah. They are accountable.

They accepted responsibility. They should be accountable and dammit … silly or not … I want them to step up to the plate as examples for the next generation of leaders and say “yeah … this is what I did … and didn’t do.”

As I type that … I will visit what actually got me thinking on res gestae … Roman Emperor Augustus. He was most famous for listing his deeds <Res Gestae Divi Augusti …. – Latin: “The Deeds of the Divine Augustus” –  is the funerary inscription of the first Roman emperor, Augustus, giving a first-person record of his life and accomplishments>.

——-

By its very nature the Res Gestae is less objective history and more propaganda for the principate that Augustus instituted. It tends to gloss over the events between the assassination of Augustus’ adoptive father Julius Caesar and the victory at Actium when his foothold on power was finally undisputed. Augustus’ enemies are never mentioned by name. Caesar’s murderers Brutus and Cassius are not referred to by name, they are simply “those who killed my father.” The Battle of Philippi is mentioned only passim and not by name. Mark Antony and Sextus Pompeius, Augustus’ opponents in the East, remain equally anonymous; the former is “he with whom I fought the war,” while the latter is merely a “pirate.”

———

Some examples of deeds <or accomplishments> he listed:

16) I paid cash to the towns for the lands that I assigned to soldiers in my fourth consulship, and later in the consulship of Marcus Crassus and Gnaeus Lentulus

17) Four times I assisted the treasury with my own money, so

20) I restored the Capitol and the theatre of Pompey, both works at great expense without inscribing my own name on either. 2 I restored the channels of the aqueducts, which in several places were falling into disrepair through age, and

25) I made the sea peaceful and freed it of pirates. In that war I captured about 30,000 slaves who had escaped from their masters …

Well. While I worry that this can quite easily turn into self-propaganda I do see the value in leaders having ‘deeds.’ Do they write them themselves? Yikes. I don’t know. I would prefer some unbiased people providing the list, but I do like the fact that as a leader they are accountable. In addition, maybe this is where I am different from other people, I am okay if they sucked as a leader. I do not believe we demand this list to crucify them <or worship them>, but rather simply to learn. The fact that their ‘deeds’ were underwhelming or they under delivered on what was set out upon in the beginning is not the point. Huh? For a variety of reasons good, or great, Leaders do not succeed and just as often some people overreach and attain leader positions and are not really leader types. But if we do not demand that leaders list their accomplishments how can the next generation better assess whether they should lead or follow?

Augustus may have been a toga wearing blowhard, but he sure had an impressive list of accomplishments. I ahve no clue whether he was a good leader or not, but I do like the fact we have something to view  as a ‘res gestae.’

–          Defining accountability in interviews and in business <from a personal perspective>.

Well. Let me begin with an interesting factoid – res gestae is a legal term:

 “Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place of at different times and places.”

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … facts which may be proved, as part of res gestae, must be facts other than those in issue but must be connected with it. Though hearsay evidence is not admissible, but when it is res gestae it can be admissible in a court of law and may be reliable evidence.

Anyway. This is whole res gestae and interviewing <or business in general> is an interesting topic & situation for me. And before I wrote this section I had to go for a run and ponder what I would say.

Here is a truth.

I am naïve about this whole res gestae and interviewing and business thing. Yup. I have been in the working world for over 25 years and not counting the gobs of interviews I had to do to get my first job I have had 8 interviews in my entire career and had 6 offers from those 8. And I have had 9 jobs <yes I got 2 jobs without interviews because they were old bosses reaching out and hiring me>.

I don’t interview. Well. I just haven’t, jobs have appeared.

That said. In an interview I imagine if you are investing in res gestae you only have to provide ‘reliable evidence’ as to things you have done — including some hearsay. In other words you can make shit up or create some very very tenuous links with regard to what you have done. But, in today’s interviewing world, you are increasingly being demanded to step up and list your accomplishments. Hearsay, tenuous or direct … whoa … provide no list … and no job offered. That is the equation in today’s business interviewing world.

Me? I won’t do that. Well. I certainly would struggle to do that <hence my hesitance to go out and interview>. Combine that challenge with the fact that, well, I know everything … and nothing. Let me explain. As a generalist I know a little about everything and not a lot about anything in particular. I imagine I am more of a catalyst type than I am an ‘accomplisher’ <at least in my eyes>.

So. I have a double whammy challenge in today’s world – I am a generalist <when the business world is endeared with specialists> and I don’t really accomplish anything <but organizations accomplish things around me>.

Bottom line? This whole topic is a tricky one for me personally in Life and in interviewing.

I don’t get, nor like, the whole concept of even listing ‘things I have done’ even in a resume.

I imagine I should be quite thankful that I have avoided having to go through the interview process a lot. I suck at listing ‘what I have done.’ The few times I have interviewed I suggest ‘situations in which I have been involved have tended to end in positive places.”

Inevitably I get the follow up question(s) … what did you specifically do? How did you contribute to that success? … in other words … res gestae … you are demanded to give ‘the list of things I have done’.

I don’t.

I won’t.

Ok. Res gestae and this whole personal interviewing thing. I am relatively sure I have done some meaningful things, but most likely not any more meaningful than a bunch of other people.

So how do I resolve this in my head? Geez. Shit. I will suck in interviews <because I won’t ‘res gestae’ like many others … or invest any time and energy in remembrance of things past> and I simply will hope that others will recognize that I provide value in some form or fashion. I will not play this game. It is quite possible that I am being foolish. But I also tend to believe in the long term … which permits me to remind everyone of the quote I opened with … “I spend my time building castles in the air but in the end all of them, and I, blow away in the wind.”

If people demand that I list all the castles I have built <in the short term> which will all inevitably blow away in the wind <over time> … I just cannot. How big is an accomplishment if it simply blows away in the wind one day? And I certainly doubt I am good enough to have built any castle that the wind cannot blow away some day.

Ok. So <the conclusion to this rambling observation>.

I can hope when all is said and done, just as Shakespeare did in his plays, in the end maybe I will simply ask for a “pardon “as his actors did if you don’t enjoy the show called my Life:

If we shadows have offended,

Think but this, and all is mended,

That you have but slumber’d here

While these visions did appear

And this weak and idle theme,

No more yielding but a dream,

Gentles do not reprehend.

If you pardon, we will mend.

If you believe that Life is a stage and we play our part <as I do in most cases> than I will take a bow and hope everyone will recognize I played my part as well as I could. That is all I hope that people remember about what I have done. In business, interviews and most importantly life.

Yup … after taking a bow … I will <as Shakespeare did> offer a good night unto you all. Give me your hands if we be friends … But. Please don’t ever ask me for a list of things I have done.