===========

“For our own success to be real, it must contribute to the success of others.”

–

Eleanor Roosevelt

======

“The way to achieve your own success is to be willing to help somebody else get it first.”

Iyanla Vanzant

=========

Business, as businesses should, think about how to improve their business. The good ones balance effectiveness and efficiency, the poor ones triple down on efficiency. But. 95% (I made that # up) of businesses focus on customers, service, process, systems and “best practices” — in their pursuit of efficiency (with head nods to effectiveness). This means 95% typically think of people as interchangeable pieces who can deliver all the service, process and outputs. All the systems are designed to ‘output’ and people simply make the systems ‘go.’

I would argue this is at the root of why organizations begrudgingly train employees. I would argue this is not only a bad ‘grudge’ if you really want to improve your business, but it is also stupid.

I always made a promise to anyone who ever worked for me – “if you ever leave this job I promise you will be well prepared to do well at your next job.” I’m not sure I was particularly good at preparing people for life, but I always said if you had a title/job responsibility with me you would be able to do that title/job responsibility wherever you went.

3 reasons:

• I knew people outgrew jobs & organizations and often organizations sucked at meeting peoples ‘grow’ needs. In other words, there is an incredibly high likelihood a current employee would become an ex-employee. I felt a responsibility to prepare them for their next job believing I/we would benefit for as long as they stayed where they were.
• Word of mouth is the most powerful recruiter. If you give, you get. The more people I sent out to build successful careers of their own, the more people recommended new employees to me or past co-workers sent people to me.
• I didn’t care about training per se, I cared about preparation to do jobs well. That may sound like semantics, but I think its important semantics. I believe businesses get hung up on “training people and receiving benefit.” And they may be right because, if you view training as simply training, you will most likely will not reap any meaningful benefits. On the other hand. If you look at maximizing an individual and enabling someone to do their job well, you will not only build individual strengths & potential, but also receive the direct benefit of them doing the job well. Choose wisely.

Regardless of your own view on this topic, the bottom line is a decision to invest in a person. Not some nebulous, often vapid, “invest in your people”, but rather ‘a person.’

I, honestly, can’t figure out why this is so difficult for businesses to grasp.

Is it lack of trust in people?

Is it a leadership ego thing?

Is it simply a misunderstanding of culture as a ‘we’ thing .. that you can enable & empower individuals and still be a ‘we’ culture?

I don’t know, but I do know any lasting change or effect in a business is not organizational or on systems or even on some broader cultural narrative. People leave, therefore, if your modus operandi is to enforce or impose (this includes ‘best practices’) systems, I can guarantee you that enforcing or imposing is not motivating nor long term effective (nor even optimizing short term effectiveness).

Truly lasting change & organization effect is within people themselves. Effectiveness is emergent. And because it is emergent it is something they not only embody when within the business, but also take with them outside the business (in life, family, community and other jobs). Therefore. To effectively lead people you actually need to view people beyond the limits of the organizational boundaries. This may sound odd, even inefficient. Its not. It doesn’t ignore the job that existing responsibilities demand, but it also enables individual potential to cross and bridge normal divides & barriers. Or, as Peter Drucker said, ‘business is of the community and the community is of the business.” And that is where true benefits reside. We far too often discuss ‘getting out of your comfort zone’ when instead we should suggest there is no zone or even if there is you should just push out on the limits and boundaries and give people the freedom to grow (and the business will grow). When a person is engaged as part of who & what they are they have the ability to engage to their fullest potential.

“Why do you, or they, or anyone get to determine my limits?”

Veronica Roth

Simplistically this is investing in people, not an organization. This leads me to the eternal question in business: “why train employees (people) if all they are going to do is leave? (and someone else will benefit by my investment).”

This is a valid, and important, topic.

At its core is, well, business’s decision to make business better. It’s like believing if you plant healthy seeds they will bloom here, there and everywhere and the entire forest grows.

Believing this demands we view a business in a non traditional way – you don’t ‘push down’ beliefs, behavior, responsibilities, etc. because, honestly, any time anything is ‘pushed down’ the world shudders to a halt as the people who are actually doing the work take the round peg senior leadership has created and try to figure out how to put it in the square hole of reality. In order to do so, most times, instead of convincing leadership they actually need a square peg, the teams design a mish mash version of a round peg that will fit into the square hole.

“In our consumer culture, we are encouraged to assume roles that aren’t truly authentic to who we are. In a way, this culture is its own kind of simulation, one that requires us to make more and more purchases to maintain the integrity of the illusion.”

Stowe Boyd

To be clear. I am not suggesting a ‘bossless’ organization. And while I do believe business has become more complex than in the past, I have always believed maximizing an individual maximizes the business. What was true then is exponentially true as business becomes more complex.

Stowe Boyd said “We’re in a time of rapidly expanding insights about human motivation and connection, but meanwhile our companies continue to be run with a perspective on human psychology and sociology circa 1970.” I slightly disagree. While, as a generalization, it may be true, I would suggest some people have always known this is the best way to maximize an organization — its just that leadership doesn’t trust it to be done that way.

Of course I believe discussing new organizational models is important and, in some cases, a business should have a new business model. But at the core of any organizational discussion it really isn’t about models but rather “how do you think about individuals?”

Because until you answer that question autonomy, empowerment, self management, is all irrelevant. If you do not believe in people, than you do believe in control. Period. Full stop.

If you do believe in people, than you will stop talking about leaders, and what makes great leaders, but instead talk about resource management – how can we get the proper resources into the proper hands at the proper times to maximize each individual and group of individuals.

This expands the business by expanding the individual. Therefore leadership isn’t about direction or control, but rather managing/optimizing expansion. Ponder.

=========

“A person often meets his destiny on the road he took to avoid it.”

Jean de La Fontaine

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

“But I live elsewhere; it is only that the attraction of the human world is so immense, in an instant it can make one forget everything. Yet the attraction of my world too is strong.”

Franz Kafka

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

So. We talk a lot about the fact you cannot run away from things and far less about avoiding.

Yeah.

We talk about procrastination, which is a version of avoiding, but avoiding, in this piece’s case, is more along the lines of ‘ignoring’. Ignoring meant by that you see the world that you want to live in and conduct yourself in and go about ignoring the rest of the world doing your own thing. That is simply a different version of ignoring the real world. Simplistically you are assuming that the world & Life, in general, is indifferent to you therefore you will go unnoticed and just be able to do what you want to do <in  a less unfettered way than if you actually remained engaged in the ‘other world’>.

Sounds good, doesn’t it?

I will say that avoiding some of the more undesirable aspects of Life and the world is pretty appealing. I would also suggest that avoiding some of the more undesirable aspects of Life and the world is pretty unrealistic.

There are a number of reasons I say that, but suffice it to say the overwhelming amount of information, even within the narrower walls of a business, is stunning. In the good old days even the worst of things worth avoiding <lies, conspiracies & implications> needed a little time to grow to some size that they became unavoidable. In today’s world those same things need seconds to gain some traction and minutes to grow to some size that they are unavoidable.

Today Google processes 61,000+ search queries a second. That’s something like over 5 billion+ queries a day. This means information is everywhere — regardless whether it is good information or bad information.

Today 99% of all employees in business are online and nearly 50% of the entire world is online and with 5.27 billion people have a mobile device <which, depressingly, means more people have a mobile device than have running water>.

My point here is not about the challenges of being interconnected with so much information driven by technology, but rather avoiding the world is just not a viable option <no matter how attractive it may seem>.

But please do not focus on technology. Technology is simply a means. Without people technology is simply an unused ancient aqueduct. It is people which make avoiding impossible <technology just enables their ability to not be avoided more>.

My version of this is office politics. I hate office politics. Ok. Not just hate … I believe it is people wasting energy and all I want to do is to focus on getting the good shit done.

In a perfect world you can decide to avoid the real world of the office intrigue and just do what you believe is the right thing to do for the business and ‘do.’

It isn’t avoiding by ignoring it is more like avoiding by deciding to ride the parallel rail on a train track.

Unfortunately the business world, and the world in general, doesn’t work that way. No matter how much I may have wished to run on a parallel track it actually works more like an atom in which we all circle the business at some maddening speed in which you crisscross with even the shit you want to avoid.

This gets compounded in several ways … two of which would be:

• Someone will always make what you are doing political even if it is not.

Office politics always contain people who play politics to meet their own ends. That is their means to do so. I believe these people can only see the world through the eyes of palace intrigue and political maneuvering therefore they filter everything done by everyone through a filter of “what do they have to gain by doing that.” That is their first filter level. Yeah. Eventually they may get to the more important “what does the business have to gain by doing that”, but they almost always judge everything being done on a ‘who is a winner and loser’ scale.

• Someone will always find something nefarious in what you are doing.

I will not call this conspiracy thinking but, in general, a business culture more often than not breeds a sense that <a> everyone is out for themselves and <b> there is no such thing as a truly altruistic business motivation.

And while it would be naïve of me to suggest that avoiding those two thoughts as ‘stupid & untrue’ it is a little sad that those beliefs pretty much are somewhere in every organization.

Please note, once again, the people aspect in everything I have noted. You may want to avoid things, but you will find your destiny along the path you have chosen strewn with a shitload of people crossing your path — many uninvited and many unwelcome.

I would suggest that Life is best lived by not ignoring shit and avoiding shit, but rather stepping into the world and deal with it. Sometimes that may mean side stepping some of the shit you don’t want to deal with and sometimes that may mean bludgeoning your way over and through some of the shit you don’t want to deal with, but if you do this you actually have some control over your own destiny. I say that because the problem with trying to maintain your Life on a parallel track, and knowing that inevitably it will be crossed by people & shit you had been purposefully avoiding, is that you will always be reacting to the bullshit rather than proactively facing it.

Look.

While you may not care about business or business politics my point is my point — you cannot avoid the world to conduct yourself in the ways & means you want to conduct yourself. You are stuck with the world, and in the world, whether you like it or not.

Oh.

The other thing you are stuck with is the fact whether you stay on the road engaged with the world or take another road to try and avoid it, well, you will meet your destiny no matter which way you go. Ponder that.

=========

“The world is too big and too intricate to conform to our ideas of what it should be like.

Just because we invent myths and theories to explain away the chaos we’re still going to live in a world that’s older and more complicated than we’ll ever understand.”

Moby

===========

“The World is a very complex system.

It is easy to have too simple a view of it, and it is easy to do harm and to make things worse under the impulse to do good and make things better.”

Kenneth Boulding

==========

Well. Today, while reading some trite business fortune cookie wisdom pulled from some gazzillion selling business book, I thought of the day I said “I worry we are killing the next generation of business thinkers with simplistic tripe” to a famous internationally renowned business book author. I did it at while on a panel at some convention in the early 2000’s. I said it <after holding my thoughts for too long> as I listened to simplistic soundbite advice being shared under the guise of “sage wisdom to enhance everyone’s success.”

I followed my statement with:

“Business is messy. Business is complex. It seems to me that those of us who have navigated the messiness have a responsibility to not undersell the messiness & complexity nor oversell simplicity.”

Needless to say it wasn’t one of my more popular moments.

Needless to say it was one of my better professional moments.

Ok. Business is made up of a mixture of skills, personalities and attitudes. Success is most often dictated by alignment of skills, personalities and attitudes, or, some special mix of all. It is that mix, or blend, of all those things which is well, frankly, an absolute bitch to make happen. That said. Let me point out three reasons why business is such a difficult complex unwieldy thing and trite soundbite wisdom rarely helps:

• Building a successful business is rarely about some wide open “white space” awaiting your arrival.

• People. You need people. You almost always have to incorporate people into your evil plan for success <and those who most desperately desire to help most often have their own evil plans for success>

• Dealing with what you have is significantly different than creating what you want <and how the initial recipe is different than the ongoing recipe>

Let me explain each.

• The white space myth:

Business success, generally speaking, comes down to one of two things (a) am I going to build a market for my idea, or (b) am I going to steal some of the existing market for my idea. Needless to say neither of those sits in some dormant white space awaiting your presence.

You either create white space by elbowing some asshats out of your way or simply walk through the front door of the homes of others and steal all their shit <that was a metaphor … you do not really do that>. This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try and be different or offer some unique aspects <if you can> but more often than not it is all about being sure you are distinct, be relentlessly persistent in communicating your distinctness and offer something that delivers value after it is purchased.

Uhm. No trite soundbites there and I have pretty much told you everything you need to know. Ponder.

• People who want to help <but you shouldn’t let them>:

Help is always available. And self proclaimed ‘disruptive/innovative’ help almost even more so. Pick a topic and go online. I can almost guarantee you will get over a million results <you actually get 31.8 million in .59 seconds> of people discussing “disruptive” ideas to facilitate progress. Many of those people are for hire. The majority are smart, articulate and have boundless energy, uhm, for their version of progress.

Finding people who assist in forwarding the progress of your idea is, frankly, not easy <although it seems like it should be>. Even more difficult is incorporating change agents or what we far too often call disrupters. It is challenging … tempting for sure … but challenging.

Soundbite experts will throw out a gazillion people management thoughts on ‘center everyone on the purpose’ and a shitload of ‘horizon direction focus’ thinking, but I gotta tell ya, I can put the biggest fucking beautiful target up on the wall to aim for but if the people I got cannot, and will not, shoot arrows at it — the target is a beautiful piece of art on the wall and nothin’ else. Ponder.

• Deals with reality and creation:

Soundbite advisors spend a shitload of their energy on ‘bringing your idea to life.’ Not a whole shitload of them invest a lot of energy discussing “what do I do once it is actually breathing.” In other words: what the hell do I do with this Frankenstein?

Huh? What experts neglect to tell you is that all that fine planning and smart implementation rarely ends up creating exactly what you intended creating in the beginning. You will naturally adapt to some things and course correct the best you can as you navigate survival <and that dynamic marketplace which doesn’t have any static white space – see my 1st point>.

At its most basic creating is about making some deals, and dealing with, reality as it gets thrown in your face and at your feet <this means you can trip over a shitload of things>. Some people call this “adapting”, I do not, I call it deal making with the world. Maybe think of creating business like striking a nuclear arms-control agreement. Simplistically the deal is the means, not the end itself, and success simply means everyone keeps their nukes they just don’t use them. But the real point is that business is rarely developed with “dealing” central to success. It is more often the idea <which motivates the energy and company/business>. Deals are simply the way you protect the business idea. What soundbite is there for how to navigate the typical business idea of “mutually beneficial transactions?”

There is none.

You deal with dealing one by one the best you can all the while trying to not lose sight of the desired objective <which can be covered in a deep fog on occasion>. Ponder that one a bit longer than the first 2.

Anyway.

The next generation of business leaders deserve experienced people who attempt to explain complexity rather than serve up trite simplistic soundbites which over time simply amount to a steaming pile of bullshit. While I have a bunch of concerns with regard to what we are, and are not, teaching the next generation of business thinkers the one I am mostly concerned with resides in the simplistic shit shared by multimillion dollar business authors and the hundreds of books you can buy which all offer “simplistic advice for business success.”

There is absolutely nothing simple about business. Misrepresenting reality, the business truth, should be called out and chastised even if it is some high falutin’ author of famous business books. We owe it to the next generation of thinkers to teach the complex and not some trite soundbites. That is, as I mentioned earlier, the deal we need to make with the reality of the business future. All that said. I worry we are killing the next generation of business thinkers.

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

obfuscate

This is the word to use when evasion is achieved by clouding the issue.

Creating a smoke-screen.

prevaricate, evade, dodge

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

“When shrouded meanings and grim intentions are nicely polished up and pokerfaced personae are generously palming off their fantasy constructs, caution is the watchword, since rimpling water on the well of truth swiftly obscures our vision and perception.

(“Trompe le pied/wrong foot.”)”

Erik Pevernagie

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

So. There is possibly nothing more aggravating in business than someone not answering “the” question. To be clear on what I am speaking about. The person answers a question just not the one you asked.

I am not going to argue that some questions are not easy to answer. I won’t even argue that we get asked questions we don’t know the answers to, but the situation dictates we make something up <yes … that happens in business>. But abandoning the question completely is complete bullshit.

But you know what?

I think the main reason it is so aggravating is because it is truly a reflection of intentions. There is even a book called The Anthropology of Intentions by a professor, Alessandro Duranti, who kind of tackles this whole discussion of intentions and words. He offers us the thought of ‘intentional discourse’ wherein an individual filters words through their beliefs & desires and their plans & goals to guide the discourse <regardless of whether the rest of the people want it guided that way>. In other words, using another phrase he offers us, by engaging in an intentional continuum people ponder their use of words through self-interest motivations <some good & some bad>.

By the way I am fairly sure I mangled his academic masterpiece, but you get the point.

Ah. “You get the point.” I share that again because while we sit there aggravated at someone who completely avoided answering the question asked we almost always also sit there wanting to invest a little of our own energy trying to assess why they did it. Because, in our aggravated minds, in its most simplistic viewing, avoiding the question is solely about shifting attention – away from something and toward something else.

…………… question deflection …………

Sure. It could be something as simple as steering you away from their lack of knowledge and steering you toward something they may actually know. But, in most cases, a full abandonment of a specific question is complete & utter deflection.

In the intelligence community they call this effort to shift attention as deflection or misdirection. Magicians do something similar getting people to focus on one thing and away from the trick itself. Completely avoiding the question is the business version of a distract-the-audience approach. It is this weird moment in which someone pretends to answer the question by actually answering some other question that magically appeared to replace the question really asked. It’s almost like entering an alternative universe for a while.

Sadly, aggravated or not, the more practiced the deception <the more practiced the business magician is> the more likely you hesitate to step in <and the more you get aggravated as you hesitate> and correspondingly … the more many of these people actually believe deception works.

It is maddening.

Worse? If they are good at it, when someone responds to a question by not addressing the points of the question, thereby avoiding the issue itself, it doesn’t create unrelated discussion to the issue … it simply avoids the issue in totality.

Well. I am fairly sure we have all sat there in a meeting and watched something like this unfolding right before our eyes. The visceral response, the aggravation, we have to this ‘answer evasion’ situation is most likely found in the revelation it is occurring (watching it unfold before our eyes). Philosophically, we can see that through some internal conviction to retain something they feel like they should own <their reputation, their title, their perceived intelligence, their whatever> they justify evading the question.

Conviction. Yeah. I just used ‘internal conviction.’ This means their intentions reflect they are more important than not only the question itself … but you. You are not even dignified with an answer.

It is irksome <at its least worst>.

It is loathsome <at its most worst>.

Look. I give a partial pass to the asshats you can see who have some answer they want to give everyone, regardless of what question is asked, and blurt it out when given the opportunity. They haven’t deflected the question they just ignored it as unimportant to what they want to say and have been planning to say no matter what has been said up to that point. It’s the ones you know heard the question and just ignored it. Or avoided it. Or just didn’t answer it despite the fact they heard every word, every syllable and every intention from the question giver. In other words, they intentionally do not answer the question.

<envision a deep sigh here>

I want people to face questions head on. And what makes this even more aggravating is that you know these people are quite capable of taking things head on.

How do I know that? These are the same people who will attack, or ‘aggressively question’, the intentions of the question giver themselves. It is a common tactic for the answer avoiders. The natural instinct is to ‘defend’; to answer the attack. Fuck that. I want to say “just answer the fucking question asked.”

How else do I know these people are quite capable of taking questions head on? These are the same people who will attack, or ‘aggressively question’, the question itself. This is not a deflection tactic. This is a ‘turn the question back on itself’ tactic. And, once again, your natural instinct is to defend or, well, answer the question you are asked.  Aggravating. I want to say “just answer the fucking question asked, you shithead.”

And maybe what makes this ‘not answering the question asked’ so maddening is that we, most sane pragmatic business people, tend to sit back <after saying “WTF”> and try and unravel why it happened and what the hell just happened. Unless you are in an interview scenario <in which you always have an opportunity, one-to-one, to hunker down and hammer out a clear answer> you are most likely in a room with other people and the non-answer has sent at least some of the people careening down a completely different road.

That makes it even MORE aggravating.

One intentional non answer to a question can completely derail a meeting or a discussion. That is intentional discourse. Or how about the other phrase from that academic’s book: engaging in an intentional continuum.

Oh. One last way you know these asshats are intentionally not answering the question is when they cleverly decline to answer the question with the infamous head fake answer: “I don’t know the answer to that question. I’ll work on finding the information for you and then get back to you with an answer” <and they have no intention of ever getting back to you>.

Yeah. You know … sure as shit … they have no plans to work on it and will never ‘get back to you’ unless you call them on it. They are intentionally refusing to answer the question assuming the conversation will move on and, in a laundry list of other shit to do, that this one will either never make the list or be so low on the list they can stiff arm you on answering based on “working on things more important.”

Its bullshit. You know its bullshit. They know its bullshit.

Well.

Fuck you.

Fuck you and the non-answering horse you rode in on.

In my mind a good well-articulated question demands some accountability. The one given the question is now accountable for the answer. They may try and deflect and they may just answer a completely different question, but a question asked exists, it does not disappear. You cannot get away from it.

Let me share a graphic example of why accountability remains whether the question dodger likes it or not.

You open your front door in the morning and there is a nice pile of dog shit squarely in the middle of your front door opening. You either clean it up or you avoid it. The question dodger never acknowledges the pile and steps over it moving on to something else. The shit stays at the front door and over time the smell increases and the flies crowd around. A good question unanswered is just like that. And a question dodger cannot avoid the smell in the end.

All that said. My message to the asshats who completely do not answer the question asked:  You will be accountable to the question and to cleaning up the mess … now … or later <and quit aggravating me by not answering the question, you shithead>.

====

Author note:

When I reread this, which took me less than a ½ hour to write, I was a little surprised by how … well … aggravated the tone was.

Some ‘fucks’ and ‘asshats’.

I left it as is because as a 50something business guy who has always attempted to take on what needs to be taken on regardless of how painful it may have been <and career wise possibly less than prudent> I get a little angry about how the business world has become incredibly unkind to the risk takers & truth tellers and seems to reward the less-than-competent and ‘political maneuverers’ more often than it should. That’s my excuse for why I let this one stand as it does.

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

====

“It’s hard to be always the same person.”

Dorothea Tanning

====

the epigraph for ‘A Table of Content’ Dorothea Tanning’s first book of poems

—

A friend, W. S. Merwin, said of Tanning: “She goes out of the room, comes back, and she’s someone else.”

======

Consistency of character.

Consistency in actions & behavior.

Consistency in thinking & opinions.

Consistency of … well … self.

Well. These are things that are much much harder than one would think.

In fact , with all the talk about how hard change is <I really don’t believe it is>, we never talk about how hard staying the same is.

Whew. When I first wrote that last sentence I had to sit back and make sure I got it right. I have written about change so much it seemed strange to me to suggest that staying the same may be as, or even more, difficult. And, you know what? I think I am right.

Change is most often something with a specific destination in mind. Leaving something behind and gaining something, or going somewhere, ahead and something better. It’s difficult, but at least you are aiming for something which you assume is better.

Staying the same is actually a battle against the natural & unnatural elements.

It’s kind of like the shore refusing to change or erode despite the constant attacks from the ebb & flow of an ocean intent on stealing something from the shore. There is no destination, you are defending your home. I would argue what makes it REALLY hard is that you are actually defending your ‘best you’ in a world in which is constantly whispering “is that your best?“

Anyway.

I knew what I wanted to write today on this topic, but I googled “hard to be always the same person” just to see if I could dig up any research or some factoid to throw in so this wouldn’t just be an opinion piece.

There are no articles on this topic. Zero. Nada. None.

And, yes, that surprised me.

There were gazillions of articles on “changing to improve” and “how to manage change” and … well … let’s just say that change is a pretty popular topic online.

Now, as for staying the same, philosophy has addressed something similar to this topic in something they discuss as Personal Identity.

The interesting thing to me that I dug out of that was something called “psychological continuity.” Without boring you with details it basically suggests that we psychologically evolve experience by experience through overlapping chains of direct psychological connections, as those causal and cognitive connections between beliefs, desires, intentions, experiential memories, character traits, and so forth. And while this suggests we evolve, what about remaining true to our self? How do we do that with all these ‘overlapping chains of direct psychological connections’ constantly bombarding our true self?

Why is there no advice on how hard it is to maintain our identity?

Everyone, experts included, must believe that once you have landed on some person who you actually want to be & like that it must be easy to maintain.

Well.

That is nuts.

Let me explain why it is nuts <and why it is so hard to always be the same person day in and day out>. Practically speaking the difficulty actually resides with … well … us. You & me.

Every day we act, albeit mostly unconsciously, to recreate the day before and the person we were before.

With the same habits, routine, and daily rituals always attempting to replicate the ‘same’ which makes up the same person we kind of liked the day before but, uh oh, all those little pieces actually all adds up to something new — sometimes a small new and sometimes a big new.

Go figure. Despite all our effort to replicate shit and enjoy consistent rituals the truth is that no matter how hard we try our days are always a bit different and put a slightly different imprint upon us.

Try this thought on for size.

This means in a world striving for repetition all we actually achieve is change.

Reality is messy, complex and a fairly fragile web of repetition and change. Therefore if reality is messy that means always being the same person is a big mess day in and day out. Now. Here is where ‘self’ runs into some issues. If we are not careful, a little of us gets chipped away simply by attempting to handle all the everyday messiness.

Look. I am not suggesting that daily we don’t learn a little something new and that every day we slightly evolve, change, as a person. Most of us do. But as we change based on experience and the context of our lives change that is where it gets hard to always be the same person.  All that experiential change starts easing its way inside you trying to pry away little bits of who you are.

Experience can be very demanding of us.

Anyway. Our attempt to maintain some sameness as a person is not only about character, but you probably realize that consistency is important for making progress, doing better work, being efficient and ultimately achieving some level of success in most areas of life.

The power of consistency is that repetition is actually more important than perfection. And that ‘sameness’, while often associated with ruts & boredom, actually represent small gains which inevitably add up to bigger results.

The challenge, of course, is balance <or equilibrium>. You cannot be “all consistent” just as you cannot be “all change.”

I could argue that the success of balance resides in whether you can always be the same person. Because, if you can, it provides a solid fulcrum as Life naturally see saws between consistent repetition and change.

I tend to believe this solid foundation permits you to go forth into Life everyday trying to always be the same person and meet each new challenge represented by each situation, moment or experience which seem intent on forcing change to ‘being the same person.’

I imagine I am partially talking about “being true to thineself.” I once discussed this challenge as the “just this once” justification. Because the world & Life is so messy it is fairly easy to make an excuse for not always staying the same person you want to be. But that just makes it easy to step onto that slippery slope which can slide you much farther, and faster, away from who you are than you can imagine. Life make it far too easy to leave a room and come back a different person.

I also sometimes think this is why so many of us hate, or just get grumpy, with Life. It is easy to hate something that makes it easy for you to lose sight of the ‘same person’ you liked when you began.

But you know what?

Always being the same person is hard, but doable. Ultimately it is about choices. Choices on what you will and will not do and choices of who you want to be as a person. And I actually believe once you find your space & place in Life as a person you actually come to love the world a little more.

For, well, as Tanning says …

=======

He told us, with the years, you will come

To love the world.

And we sat there with our souls in our laps,

And comforted them.

Dorothea Tanning

========

We all change.

That is what experiences do. We simply become a little wiser with regard to the realities of Life. And in our wisdom we tend to watch & participate in experiences without changing.

We don’t permit those experiences to change the character and soul we each have inside us and permits us to sit there and comfort our souls and be comforted, in turn, by them.

All that said.

“It’s hard to be always the same person.”

===========

“I’m an egomaniac with an inferiority complex.”

Eric Clapton

==========

“Not everything is about you,” Clary said furiously.

“Possibly,” Jace said, “but you do have to admit that the majority of things are.”

Cassandra Clare

===========

“Who knows himself a braggart, let him fear this, for it will come to pass that every braggart shall be found an ass.”

William Shakespeare

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

“Or, rather, let us be more simple and less vain.”

Jean-Jacques Rousseau

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

We all have worked with assholes.

We all have also most likely worked with egotistical assholes.

And, unfortunately, we all have most likely worked with competent egotistical assholes. This is the particular type of asshole who actually kind of knows their shit, is overly satisfied with their competence, tells everyone who good they are and says all of this no matter what has actually happened <good or bad>or whether it is actually reflective of reality.

I have never really worked for anyone like this <fortunately>, but I do know from experience that these people particularly suck to work with because, yeah, they don’t completely suck from a functional professional standpoint so you cannot completely ignore them and, even worse, they may actually even have some specific skill you may need at some point.

What makes it suck for you is that they have some serious flaws <not that they would ever admit it> and that they will take credit for anything and everything they can, they will multiply wins in exaggerated results and effort and diminish, if not even blame others, for lack of successes.

They are, and always will be, the biggest self-promoters <assholes> you will ever encounter.

They are, and always will be, the biggest selective users of facts and specifics to showcase whatever self-style & strength they want to portray <their own assholedness>.

They are a legend in their own mind <and an asshole to the rest of us>. But, at their best, they are not only competent, but can actually contribute.

These assholes are tougher to deal with and manage than the incompetent. You can ignore the incompetent <or the ‘less than useful’ or the “beyond their sell-by date’ people>.

Once again, I have never had to report to an incompetent blowhard <or an incompetent non blowhard> but I have had several “senior people who were beyond their sell-by date” who you never permitted in a meeting by themselves <for fear of what they would say or promise> and you always tried to diplomatically curb their responsibilities and impact. “Beyond their sell-by date” people were not always truly assholes or incompetent just ‘less than desired usefulness’ for the business needs.

But the competent blowhards are a bear to deal with. You are constantly sitting there thinking … “Jesus … wouldn’t it be terrific to be able to reap the rewards without putting up with the blowhard bullshit?”

I actually found an article suggesting some tips on how you can “harness the superb results these folks generate without having to put up with their acting out.”

Whew. That article was off base. You cannot harness a blowhard — competent or incompetent. An egotistical competent person is, well, an egotistical <typically “narcissistic”> competent blowhard asshole and there is little to get around that.

You just figure out how to get around them, use them the best you can and take them head on strategically <knowing you cannot take them head on all the time>.

To be clear.

I am using “asshole” loosely here. As someone noted somewhere the term “asshole” is also used as a euphemistic reference to people whom we classify as “disagreeable.” A blowhard is disagreeable, but so can a lot of good people who aren’t narcissistic. Shit. Contrarians can portray some asshole tendencies <see myself as a prime example>, but not all contrarians are fucking egotistical self-promoting blowhards.

I could argue that since each of us is an asshole to someone the term is always relative. In other words, one person’s asshole can be another person’s hero.

Therefore … in my eyes … it takes a lot of effort to be a competent asshole.

Incompetent assholes don’t know that they are assholes.

Competent assholes KNOW that they are assholes.

I am writing this because, unfortunately, this is a conversation we all have in business. Egomaniac assholes are in every business. We have to deal with them and the reality is that sometimes they are in senior management.

They may actually be competent, but they are manipulative, obsessive, and aggravatingly boastful and far too often bullies.

They may actually have some aspects of competence and use it to throw anyone around them who also shows signs of threatening competence under the bus at any given opportunity.

They actually do all of the above under the guise of “creating a competitive always improving environment” when they are really simply insecure assholes who want to diminish anyone around them so they look bigger & better.

—————————————–

Hayakawa: Use the Right Word:

By definition ‘boast’ suggests a self-important and tasteless pointing out of one’s own successes.

Occasionally the word can refer to self-congratulation for a victory not yet won.  Brag intensifies the note of tastelessness in boast, suggesting limitless conceit and, possibly, inaccuracy of the claims being made – bragging about imaginary exploits. And then there is ‘crowing’ which suggests a noisy or vociferous bragging of an extremely offensive kind. And ‘gloating’? Gloating is an intensification of crow – although it need not be verbal and sometimes suggests taunting someone that one has bested.

by definition: egomania

…. an obsessive preoccupation with one’s self and applies to someone who follows their own ungoverned impulses and is possessed by delusions of personal greatness and feels a lack of appreciation.

——————————————

Look. I don’t mind a manager with a healthy sense of ego, but the true competent blowhards are best to avoid if possible because they have elements of toxicity.

In Toxic Workers , a new Harvard Business School working paper, Michael Housman and Dylan Minor look at the paradox of “superstar” workers who outperform their colleagues by 2:1 or more, but who are “toxic” — awful to work with and be around.

The connection between toxicity and productivity has been validated in several studies, but the question that Housman and Minor set out to answer is, “are 1%, superstar workers worth the trouble they cause in the workplace?”

Using a clever empirical methodology, they demonstrate that, basically, you shouldn’t work with assholes. It’s better to hire two average employees than to keep one “superstar” on the payroll, once you factor in the disruption that your talented jerk wreaks on their colleagues.

Simplistically, blowhards distort things. They exaggerate good, diminish bad,  consistently use a made up unique formula of uncertainties & lack of clarity, offer alternatives <facts & universes> and serve to only create difficulties in exactly describing what is, and isn’t, actually happening. While accomplishing some things, which if discussed like a normal human being everyone would be fine with, the abnormal human being says shit like: “I don’t think there’s ever been anyone who in this short period of time has done what I’ve done.”

Uhm.

Unfortunately for whoever says this there is typically some actual proof that someone somewhere has actually achieved a lot more. But that really doesn’t matter to this type of person … all they have to do is do enough and make it look hopeful enough that a group of employees ignore the hyperbole and focus on the fact someone has done something.

By the way.

What makes this truly toxic is the fact the competent non-blowhards around this person start ignoring the blowhard and just doing their own thing <this is a passive level of tolerance and this because even more toxic to a business the more senior the blowhard is>.

I imagine my point here is that we all know someone at work whose biggest fan is himself/herself. They exaggerate all their contributions and diminish & deflect any blame or negatives.

Those people make it really difficult to compliment. Our first instinct is to try and deflate <or ‘right-size’> accomplishments so that even good gets diminished so it doesn’t get exaggerated. Unfortunately his sometimes means that even when credit is due the person has just made it hard for us to WANT to give them credit.

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

“Until the lion learns how to write, every story will glorify the hunter.”

African proverb

===

Regardless. We all know some of these people who do not recognize that they are one of those people. Particularly in business.

They aren’t psychopaths and they aren’t the kind of assholes that are raging assholes, these are just the assholes oblivious to their assholedness. Suffice it to say far and away the number one way they justify their existence is “the end justifies the means.”

“But I made the numbers.”

“We won.”

“We finished.”

All the while ignoring the carnage left behind. The carnage can be lost employees, pissed off employees, tired <emotionally and physically> employees, angry peers and disappointed or abused partners. Let me explain each from the viewpoint of the incompetent blowhard asshole:

<lost>

They couldn’t keep up or they were not good enough <good they are gone … we weed out those who can’t keep up>.

<pissed off>

You can’t always pamper people to get them across the finish line <they like me because they know it is all done with ‘tough love’>.

<tired>

I pushed them beyond what they thought they could do <they won’t be angry once they see how I helped them realize their potential>.

<peers>

The other managers don’t recognize what it takes to get it done <my project was more important and they won’t be angry once they see the result and how the team responded …or … I am showing them how it should be done>.

<partners>

They have good intentions but I need to keep them focused on our priorities and objectives and needs <they work for us and need us more than we need them>.

Those are the tricks of the trade of the competent blowhards.

Regardless.

Yes.

Success does matter.

No.

I am not suggesting we shouldn’t value ‘the kill’ or even ‘ability to effectively stalk the prey’ in business.

But.

Yes.

I do believe how you kill or stalk matters.

Look. Blowhards can try and convince us of competence in a variety of ways … they can showcase fulfilling promises which does not show the actions of a skilled CEO, but rather a bumbling overwhelmed CEO focused on showing action to try and cover up incompetence. I say that because even bumbling incompetent CEO’s can do some things right in a flurry of ‘doing shit.’ I say that because even a semi-incoherent senior business person can do some things right AND justify it in some fairly creative common sense sounding ways.

The following is something I found somewhere <I cannot find where> from a competent asshole who actually responded to “being an asshole manager” which showcase how a competent asshole business person can quite easily justify their actions.

** Please note that there is a strong thread of truly competent thoughts.

** Please note that if I were so inclined I could go back through every point and slice out the slightly self-righteous aspects and showcase how you can actually be competent and not an asshole AND not pamper your employees’ every whim … but I will not.

=======

…. not sure how you define asshole, but I suppose being blunt, efficient, and unable to cater to every employee’s wants (not needs) goes a long way. I go out of my way to reward my best employees, give them the resources they need, approve their time off outside of work, etc. I take a pedagogical approach to my role, passing knowledge to my employees that will help them advance their careers (and make my job easier). Yet, I’m still the asshole.

Here are some reasons I’m an asshole manager:

1. I’m responsible for making a diverse group of people with varying job roles work together. Try coming up with one rule or guideline that makes everyone happy.

2. Some employees only work as hard as they have to. And they hate it when you ask them to do more.
3. Some employees (often the ones who only do the bare minimum) expect to be promoted just for showing up. You can print them a crystal clear roadmap to success within your company, and they’ll still paddle along, doing nothing to distinguish themselves, then ask to be supervisor.
4. Ingratitude is the status quo. Once, everyone in the department got tiny raises (three figures). The reason they were tiny is because we shifted our fiscal year; there was a tiny pool for compensation increases. Because someone had left, I was able to get every one of my employees a raise larger than the 1.5% average everyone in the company had to adhere to. I know it’s not a lot, but I put in a lot of effort to make their tiny raises a little less tiny. The fact they got more than the average was clearly explained to them. The response: the raises “were a slap in the face.” Fine. Next time, we’ll spend the money on a clever fucking food truck half of you won’t like.
5. As a manager, much of your employee’s well-being (compensation, promotion, career growth) depends on you. At the same time, this isn’t a day care center; it’s a business, and my job is to get my employees to do their jobs. That’s a hell of burden, and it makes me less likely to be everyone’s buddy when instead I have to be fair and compassionate, but also directive and efficient.
6. In the same vein, employees know how much power you have over things like compensation, so they’re never, ever totally honest with you. Personality problems I constantly hear about third-hand magically disappear when I’m leading from the floor. Also, employees will admit to making small mistakes, which upon five seconds of investigation, turn out to be related to much larger mistakes they say nothing about.
7. Paranoia is the status quo. I can’t explain to employee #1 why I wrote employee #2 up. That would be unprofessional, and would betray the disciplined employee’s trust. Yet if it appears on the surface that I’m being unfair, then the conspiracy theorists kick in and all of a sudden I’m playing favorites. Example: Two employees don’t show up to work. One is written up. The first employee has a documented record of excessively calling in sick, and misses work yet again, without notice. The other, who has an exemplary attendance record, has a family emergency and calls into work in advance. The former would get written up before the latter every time. Employees aren’t privy to these details, so they form their own conclusions baked in resentment. And God help you if the employee who incorrectly thinks they’re being treated unfairly is a woman or a minority.

8. You can’t listen to music with the N-word in it. You can’t describe the hot girl you met. You can’t tell off-color jokes, listen to Howard Stern, or share clips of that R-rated stand-up comedian. I’m going to write you up for breaking those rules. You may even get fired. The alternative is me losing my job because I tolerated a hostile work environment. So yes, we’re a friendly, down-to-earth, casual company…until tone-deaf legal standards force us to behave otherwise.
9. Millennials, calling into work because you’re stressed isn’t a good excuse. Especially if it happens exclusively on Fridays and Mondays. I’m going to call you out on it.
10. When HR makes a decision to fire you, I’m the one who breaks the news. When finance says we can’t afford that tool to make your job easier, I’m the one who communicates the message. Part of my job is to be the face of the company to you. Your bridge to the massive bureaucracy. Of course I’m going to sound like an asshole to you. And no, I don’t have time to make you feel better about it. So put my picture on the dartboard. Slander me if it makes you feel better about things. As long as you’re doing your job and I’m doing my best to treat you fairly and humanely, the rest is your problem.

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

So. That sounded fairly reasonable, didn’t it? I chuckled a little and stopped myself from going back and showing the author where they were … well … an asshole <but still pointing out their competence>. Being a manager and a leader is not easy. If it were then, well, not only could anyone be one anyone could actually be a good one.

I shared the 10 thoughts above because the difference between an asshole leader, and a competent non asshole leader, can often be defined in shades, not vivid colors <although the result often can be viewed in vivid displays of rich & royal hues>. And that vivid comparison truly comes to Life if you are viewing a competent arrogant blowhard.

I was an okay manager & leader. I did some things okay and some things not so okay. I can honestly say I did get better at it as time went on and I am much better now, and how I discuss leadership, than I was even 5 years ago.

I am much better at identifying incompetence and the characteristics one should look at in defining and judging managers and leaders than I was at the beginning of my career <at the beginning it was just “boy, that feel and looks wrong” and now it is “let me point out the five things which are wrong that makes it feel wrong.”>

And I will admit that it can sometimes be a fine line between solid confidence and overestimated ego.

What I can tell you is that you don’t need me to point out an arrogant, narcissistic, semi-competent blowhard. You can see them a mile away and even if you just “feel it” you are more than likely right.

An asshole is an asshole. Once you have seen an asshole and felt what it is like to be around an asshole you will never forget the feeling.

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

“Besides, nowadays, almost all capable people are terribly afraid of being ridiculous, and are miserable because of it.”

Fyodor Dostoevsky

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

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

“I eventually came to understand that in harboring the anger, the bitterness and resentment towards those that had hurt me, I was giving the reins of control over to them.”

Isabel Lopez

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

“Beware of those who are bitter, for they will never allow you to enjoy your fruit.”

Suzy Kassem

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

Well. Spite and resentment is one of the least discussed business ailments in the business world. What I mean is that businesses around the world <including the good ole USofA> are strewn with middle management and upper management who carry around a full backpack of resentment. This backpack has a nifty well designed logo on it — victim.

I would imagine <this is a guess> that this significant sprinkling of people in the business world carrying around the resentment of being victimized in some form or fashion do not hold the most senior spots, but rather they hold the responsibilities most dangerous to the overall health of an organization – middle management.

They are most likely not at the top because those people got the positions they deserve.

** note: while a significant amount of less-than-competent people, mostly men, get promoted into senior positions the majority of senior people do have significant skills

The ones who carry resentment are the ones who have been promoted “too slowly” or maybe haven’t been “recognized for the talents they offer” or maybe have been passed over by “someone who doesn’t know half the shit I know” and then, to their satisfaction, they have FINALLY been promoted. They take the step up, but before they do, stop at the bottom of the stairs to pick up their backpack of resentment and then accept the step up.

I often think of this as the ugly underbelly of ‘entitled’ or “finally getting what one deserves.” This is … uhm … in other words, resentment. And resentment carries a nasty quiver of grievance arrows to shoot when given the opportunity.

And grievances have a nasty habit of being one of those things that like to be addressed and not ignored.

Now. Some people confuse this with “carrying a chip on their shoulder” which is what got them to where they are today.

That’s bullshit.

People mistakenly conflate “carrying a chip on their shoulder” with ambition.

It’s not as simple as that. In fact that simplistic ‘go about business like they have a chip on their shoulder’ is actually just a lazy attitude toward motivation.

It is more often than not some self-created ‘boogieman’ someone has created in their mind in order to go out and be your best. It’s faux extrinsic motivation rather than intrinsic and it’s bullshit. If that’s all you have for motivation, well, that’s just not good <for you and the people you work with>.

Yes. In small doses a ‘chip on your shoulder’ can give you some well needed nudges to “I will show them” attitude at some key moments.

No. Large doses, or constant, “conducting myself with a chip on my shoulder” attitude simply makes you an asshole.

You become an asshole because this 100% chip on shoulder attitude actually makes hate, in some form or fashion, the energy to drive everything – it creates an outsized sense of grievance which you bring with you wherever you go. This grievance not only seems to pour from every pore in this person, but also seems to appear every time this person makes a decision <if not in the words they say>.

Yeah.

The resentment people can be crafty.

Crafty in that they justify their behavior not just based on their outsized chip, but more often that they are standing up for all who have been overlooked and begrudged of what they were entitled to by some unfair system or ‘cadre of assholes driven to let mediocrity thrive.’

It’s bullshit and it’s another version of us versus them, but with a total selfish foundation.

In addition. If they are good at masking their resentment, each decision, taken as mutually exclusive of all other decisions, can maybe be explained as a ‘personal issue being addressed’ or sometimes even simply an impulsive instinctual decision.

That’s bullshit too.

I am not suggesting all employees burdened by an unhealthy weight of resentment are actually bad managers and business people <in a pragmatic competent sense>, but they do have a nasty tendency to have built this façade of some “personal brand” which they have honed over time as they have been ignored & overlooked so much so that all decisions and choices get instinctually filtered through this personal brand filter.

Nothing is impulsive, nothing is “resentment driven” and nothing is “addressing a grievance”, it is all simply driven by the personal brand, i.e., I am what I am because of who I am.

What makes this behavior confusing to people <in terms of trying to discern motivations and the sense that there is an unhealthy amount of resentment incorporated into the management style> is that there is no long term strategy, it just assumes that all transactions meet the brand therefore, in the long run, it is good.

Exceeding expectations is defined in a transaction by transaction basis and weapons used to meet expectations <responsibilities> are justified as means to an end. In other words these managers can screw anyone they want professionally, but if within that specific project, assignment or transaction the greater organizational expectations are met or exceeded … well … this manager has “won.”

Oddly this behavior creates an odd sense of consistency … & inconsistency.

It can often appear inconsistent in that the actions, behavior & decisions are not particularly driven by any business philosophy or ideology or even based on what is right or wrong.  This drives the appearance of inconsistency.

The consistency is grounded on vindictiveness. This doesn’t mean any and all actions are vindictive just that if the opportunity arises to address some self-defined grievance and the window of opportunity to be vindictive opens this person will jump through that window.

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

“I must fight with my weapons. Not his. Not selfishness and brutality and shame and resentment.”

John Fowles

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

Here is the problem with all that I have shared today.

Resentment is part of the devilish trinity of bad shit in a business environment – fear, anger, resentment.

All the yesterdays make this person angry and humiliated and, frankly, they feel like they have been taken advantage of. It creates a negative emotional foundation from which all behavior and actions are leveraged from.

I could argue that this is a cultural thing. Something like a “culture of entitlement” in which people feel like they are promised promotions & money simply because they work hard.

I will not.

This is an individual issue.

Individuals are responsible and complicit in this attitude and behavior – culture does not force them to do anything and think anything on this issue.

I could argue that this is some version of culture encouraging a larger sense of victimhood.

I will not.

This is an individual issue.

It is not victimhood if you shoulder your own responsibilities and are ‘punished’ if the chips do not fall your way.

I could argue that thus is some warped version of culture encouraging unrealistic expectations.

I will not.

This is an individual issue.

Expectations are defined personally, society and culture doesn’t tell you what to expect, You craft that expectation all by your lonesome. And, I have news for everyone, while Life & business can be pretty cruel and unfair, in general, those who have ability and work hard do not typically get overlooked or left behind. Hate to tell the “resentful managers”, but I feel pretty confident suggesting that as a basic business truth.

The only thing I will argue is that someone who has a big backpack of resentment should never be a leader.

Why?

Anger today.

Resentment of yesterday.

Fear of tomorrow.

That is the trio of partners in crime in this sad story. I have to tell you. I am fairly sure no business wants those three sitting in any one office every day in their business.  And I am absolutely sure these are not qualifications one seeks in a new employee.

Beware the bearers of resentment in business.

====

====

“I am not afraid of my truth anymore and I will not omit pieces of me to make you comfortable.”

—

Alex Elle

===

So. Being yourself is a tricky topic. In business, Life & deciding what you want to do.

I know <I know>.

Seems like “being yourself” should be simple. Like ‘breathing’ type simple.

But it’s not. It’s not because there is a constant struggle between an internal part <’who am I’ type shit> and external <figuring out how ‘who am I’ should actually act in public>.

For example, one of my favorite young writers, Jamie, describes herself this way:

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

I’m a writer, pretty much by process of elimination. I am also a professional aspirationalist.

That’s not a word, but I’ve made it into one, since there was nothing that could quite describe me because I didn’t want to say I’m a “professional dreamer” because that sounds like some hippie shit.

I have aspirations, like, lots of them. If you’d like me to create a TV show, get in touch with me. How about publishing my memoir? Get in touch. If you are from The Ellen Show, I will, of course, accept your interview and would be delighted to dance it out with my girl, so long as she doesn’t prank me by making me eat cilantro. In fact, I want no cilantro in anything.

<Jamie Varon>

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

Professional aspirationalist. Not ‘professional dreamer’ nor ‘professional pragmatist.’

Ok.

Professional aspirationalist is just awesome.

If I could ever vote for a new term, that would be it. It’s fucking awesome. It captures the essence of restlessness & hope & striving & unlearning &, well, all the things I believe are good and healthy with a person seeking to be better tomorrow than they are today.

What I truly love about it is that she came up with a term to capture her “self.” I love it because being yourself, and even recognizing who ‘yourself’ is, is hard. And when I say hard think even harder than maybe becoming a Navy Seal type hard.

……….. self …….. an entanglement of nuances ………….

It is incredibly hard because the truth is that ‘my truth’ , more often than not, is most likely an evolving tangled web of characteristics which, as it evolves, simply becomes more tangled <rather than untangled>.

Yourself is constantly adapting to new learning, new learning about things and new learning, and unlearning <changed beliefs, opinions, attitudes, perspectives>, about oneself.

That’s why I love professional aspirationalist.

True north on Jamie’s compass is defined. And its not a destination, but rather it is a direction.

Aspirationalist is a moving target. It is restless and unmoving at exactly the same time. It is an adventurer with some pragmatism. It’s not being on Ellen <although she would be delighted to do so> because once that happens there will always be something else.

Being an aspirationalist means not only having dreams, but dreaming … oh … and doing.

Yeah.

Doing. As in doing lots of different shit.

Uh oh.

That also means … well … increasingly more and different dreams <and aspirations>. And increasingly doing more and different shit. Dreaming and doing. Lots of different dreaming and doing.

In the end <to me> being a professional aspirationalist means being a restless soul. Restlessly seeking, traveling, doing, thinking. Professionally constantly in motion <mentally or physically>.

I love it because it captures my personal belief that becoming ‘better’ as a person is experiential rather than tangible <although tangible ‘doing stuff’ is certainly a component>.

I love it because it isn’t for the faint of heart.

And isn’t what truly being yourself is all about? Having some courage to even suggest ‘I will not omit things just to make you comfortable.’

Professional aspirationalist reminded me of this other quote:

 ==

“I am a world that cannot be explored in one day. I am not a place for cowards.”

Caitlyn Siehl

==

Yes.

Being a professional aspirationalist means you are not a place for cowards.

Anyway.

I wish I had come up with this word, but I am not as talented a writer as Jamie.

I like it for its sense of Life’s paradox. Paradox in that it is independent and dependent at the same time.

I like it for it’s sense of Business’s paradox. Paradox in that success in business is a combination of stillness, at the right times, and movement/restlessness at all times.

I like it because at its core it doesn’t mean shunning the world and simply being a dreamer. It has rich & royal hues of reality threading its way through its fabric.

I would like to believe I am also a professional aspirationalist.

Now.

To be clear <because Jamie is correct the word selection was thoughtful to avoid the ‘hippie shit’>. Pragmatically, we aspirationalists do seek <some> approval and acceptance <ohhhhhhhhhhhh shit>.

Accept what I just wrote <that last sentence>. Don’t fight it <even if you are one of those who say ‘I don’t give a fuck what anyone thinks”>.

Because you do care.

Whether you like it or not, whether you think it is right or wrong, whether you think it is a good thing or bad in that it makes you ‘weak’ in some way, just get it set in your head – in some form or fashion – we care.

Don’t worry … we all care <not just aspirationalists>. We all care what the people around us think about us. And by ‘people’ I mean everyone from those closest to you <who would most likely accept you in any shape and form you ended up in … but you don’t want to disappoint them> to society overall <there is some value in gaining credit for who you are and what you do>.

Some acceptance from others feeds our self-esteem & self-worth <and all that Maslow stuff>.

Ah.

Please note I used the word “feeds.” Approval and acceptance is not the only nutrition necessary for a healthy esteem and worth.

It is simply one part of the diet.

Even we aspirationalists need a balanced ‘self diet’. We do not seek sole value from proving ourselves to others. And we don’t accept sole value in and of ourselves.

Being an aspirationalist is … well … the paradox. Independent dreamer with some dependence on external cues as to the value of our aspirations.

We want to fit into the world on our own terms.

Regardless.

What a description:

                       Professional aspirationalist:      I am not afraid of my truth anymore and I will not omit pieces of me to make you comfortable. I am a world that cannot be explored in one day. I am not a place for cowards.

We need more of these people in our world — in Life & in business.

Me? I will continue living life, trying to do good shit in Life & business, as a Professional Aspirationalist.

==========

“We all have one foot in a fairytale, and the other in the abyss.”

—–

Paulo Coelho

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

My anger at the world coils inside of me. It’s a directionless seething, there’s no name or face to aim at.”

————–

Claire Zorn

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

Well. Life demands us to draw a lot of lines.

And more often than we would like to admit it demands we place one foot on one side of a line and the other foot on the other side of the line.

That may not sound … well … right.

Or maybe the best thing to do.

It may even sound like I am suggesting you ‘straddle the fence.’

Nope. This isn’t straddling, this is about being grounded or balancing oneself.

Balancing? If you don’t place one foot solidly on either side, you can be quite easily consumed by the extremes of Life which are, more often than not, found on only one side of a line.

If you don’t place one foot solidly on either side, you can be quite easily consumed by others who seek to consume what you may think you don’t really care that much about <but you should … and actually do when you care to think about it enough>.

If you don’t, you can be quite easily consumed.

I guess what I am saying is that Life demands you pragmatically be active in drawing some lines so that you have some sense of when you are getting too, well, “too”. It helps if you can have some sense of where to actually place your feet that is meaningful.

Maybe what I am saying is that many of us have no problem ‘making a stand’, but if you really aren’t sure where your line is then it is quite possible you aren’t really sure you are taking your stand in the right place.

Okay.

Maybe think of it this way.

It’s kind of like making sure you have things in perspective when you take a stand.

It’s kind of like demanding realistic hope.

It’s kind of like demanding some hopeful despair.

It’s kind of like demanding you believe in some fairytales and some abyss-like darkness.

It’s kind of like demanding lines for yourself so you can deal with the lines Life is going to demand of you.

Look.

I don’t really believe there are angry-only people. They just have so much anger within themselves that their line is drawn differently than others.

I don’t really believe there are dreamer-only people. They just have so much imagination within themselves that their line is drawn differently than others.

But here’s the deal.

You have to draw some lines.

There has to be some reality to ground some imagination.

There has to be some truth to ground some questioning.

There has to be some principles to ground some rebelliousness.

There has to be some fairytaleishness <I made up that word> to balance out some of the inevitable abyss.

You do have to have one foot somewhere other than where your other foot resides.

I know.

I know.

That sounds a little of whack from conventional wisdom because far more often you hear “both feet on the ground” and shit like that. But if you have two feet on the line … well … you have chosen to stand on a thin balance beam and will teeter your entire life. That is tiring & dangerous. But if you have two feet, one on each side, you have chosen a life of fairytales AND a life in the abyss.

All that said.

Yes.

There are times you draw a line and make a choice to shift both feet solidly onto one side. I would suggest this is a situational decision and not a “living Life” type decision. Situational like:

That is right and that is wrong.

That is good and that is bad.

That is normal and that is not normal.

Those are most likely the moments in which Life says “now, in this time and place, here is the line … on which side to you choose to stand?”

I would suggest sometimes we fuck this up by confusing a ‘Life one foot here & one foot there’ decision and a contextual situational decision. What I mean is that in that time and place you may try and keep your fairy tale foot in place and your abyss foot in place … and mistakenly take on a different type of decision demanding a different type of line.

That would be a bad decision.

The good decision?

In that time. in that place. In that moment. You shift your feet.

Sigh.

I never suggested lines were easy. Just that Life demands we draw a lot of lines. I would suggest that if you do not draw some lines you will find yourself lost in anger coiled within, or maybe constantly living a less than fairy tale life dreaming it all away, or stuck in some dark abyss seeing no way out.

Yeah … lines come in pretty handy at times. Pretty handy in managing Life. I can tell you <for sure> that lines can be pretty handy at helping you decide when something should end … and something should start.

  ===

“Choose your corner, pick away at it carefully, intensely and to the best of your ability and that way you might change the world.”

Charles Eames

—–

So. This is most likely a bookend post to my “where are you going?” thought piece which was directed to younger people. This is directed to the 50somethings who actually figured out, as well as anyone can, where they wanted to go … and went there.

To be clear. This is not about “was this not what I wanted”  — that is about questioning direction. This is actually about, well, assessing value for the direction you chose and the direction you have no, or few, regrets over.

That said.

What happens if you believe you have something of value to offer the world, and you actually did it and earned a consistent living and … uhm … you find yourself in a place and time where, well, you aren’t sure you have anything to show for it?

It’s not that you weren’t good at what you did <you may have actually been pretty good>.

It’s not that you didn’t earn some good salaries <you may have actually earned higher than the norm>.

It’s not that when viewing your professional resume you sucked <because others can view it and think ‘huh, that’s good stuff’>.

It’s not that your personal life is strewn with divorces or negative broken relationships <because you can actually look around and see some good friends, look at past relationships as generally good and your current personal life relatively healthy>.

It’s not that you don’t look out at the whole world and think “I have no value moving forward” <because you most likely feel like you have something to offer given the right situation>.

It’s not even that you are unhappy <because, in general, you view most days in a relatively optimistic way>.

In fact, taking all of that into consideration you can look at your life and say “I knew where I wanted to go and, in general, I did a pretty good job getting there.”

But.

Let’s say that the average American worker/person most likely has worked about 60,000 hours or so by the time they are 50 <a lower income worker/person who scrambles to earn enough most likely has worked about 70,000 hours – and earned less – and someone like me who likes their work and is a quasi-workaholic will have worked closer to 90,000 hours> and your current steady current annual income is enough to get by, but certainly not more than enough to pay bills and the random expenses that come up.

And you have some debt, no savings and, well, financially there is no room for much more than basics because, while professionally successful, you find yourself in a position where you can now relate to people in poverty <in some ways> in that you are constantly preparing for the next inevitable expense.

Life isn’t bad.

But.

You wonder what you have to show for it all.

You don’t dwell on it but it’s a niggling feeling especially if you did work hard, you did it the right way and you actually did some good shit on occasion.

I imagine this is nothing like fantasizing about being rich.

And I imagine it has little to do with regrets.

It simply revolves around effort expended and gains to show for that effort.

The truth is life, in general, almost always equates to some type of value equation – did I receive acceptable value for the cost incurred.

Most of us are fairly content with a nine-to-five job and people like me who love what they do are actually happy with an 8 to 6+ job and most of us realize we will never buy some island or even have some extraordinarily luxurious vacation when it is all said and done.

But.

I imagine everyone, excepting the wealthy, stop at some point and think “what do I have to show for it all?”

I imagine everyone, excepting the wealthy, stop at some point and realize that rest is a luxury only for the rich and retirement doesn’t mean doing nothing — just maybe something different.

Look.

Life naturally causes you to question yourself and feel like there is some grand design out there to frustrate and defeat you.

And you know what?

Most of us recognize it isn’t easy, and that it sucks to have to brush off the inevitable natural disappointments which occur even if you have worked hard and tried to do the right thing and conduct yourself with integrity, but we, more often than not, just get up and get going again. And we do that without really questioning ourselves. It is just what you do and what Life demands.

So.

That said.

But.

But you wonder about your worth professionally or personally when you don’t really have a lot to show for it.

It is basically a value question.

This is about that someone, sitting at home some nights, saying to themselves … “What the fuck do I have to show for what I did?”

Its just the pragmatic basic formula to assess value.

Someone asks themselves “what I did”:

Over 60,000 hours worked.

Some good titles on your resume.

Some great memories.

Add in some other positives.

And then they sit back and look around at today.

Materially, tangibly, you may have diddleyshit.

Professionally, you may be in a diddleyshit position.

Financially, you may have diddleyshit.

And in that time, in that place, in that mental space it can be fairly easy to view “what do I have to show for it all” as … well … diddleyshit.

And I imagine viewing it that way … well … sucks.

I imagine at this point I could sagely lean back in my chair <assuming the chair was a recliner> and wisely place my hand under my chin and sigh … and say:

“you have made a difference in other people’s lives through your integrity driven actions … you personally have memories, experiences and successes to show for it all … reflect upon that … oh … and you are a good person.”

But I won’t say that.

Because while that may be true, it is bullshit in this time place and situation for someone in this position.

Its bullshit because more often than not people will view this “what I put into Life and what did I get out of that effort” in a fairly selfish way. In other words:

“what does it matter if I was a good person if I don’t have diddleyshit to show for it?”

To be clear. This is actually an okay version of selfishness.

It’s okay because you put in the effort, you worked hard, you did things the right way, you didn’t cut corners, you didn’t demand much, therefore, you want to take a moment and reflect on what YOU “have to show for it all.”

And, selfishly, it looks like you have diddleysquat to show for it.

And, selfishly, scanning your Life … well … it kind of looks like if you don’t want to be in this diddleysquat spot you gotta get back up and start all over again.

Ok.

I don’t have answers for this one.

But I do know what I am discussing happens. And maybe more often than everyone thinks. And the answer will be driven by what matters most to a particular individual.

Those who valued family above all will reflect on the value equation with that as a foundation.

Those who valued professional success will reflect on the value equation with that as a foundation.

Those who valued … well … pick your passion & focus which got you to where you are now and you will assess “what do I have to show for it all?” based on that foundation.

To be clear. If you are not careful they are simply nice condiment sbeing placed on a nothingburger.

To be clear. This doesn’t have shit to do with whether you had a shit life or not <because most would say they didn’t have a shit life> nor does it have to do with being ‘filled or unfulfilled’ or even having been ‘inspired’ in Life, this is clearly “I didn’t have, or live, a shit life … but I’m not sure I have shit to show for it.”

And, yeah, maybe my thinking is driven more by a world that is driven by outcomes and materialistic assessment, but I would also be unenlightened <if not stupid> if I ignored that.

For all I write about the grind of life and the consistency <not exactly drudgery> of most of Life, most people really don’t drift through life, most people are aware of Life <at least when it truly matters> and most people find moments of inspiration that lift Life above … well … nothingness.

But.

At some point most people sit down, pull out the Life balance sheet, put all the shit they have done in Life as well as all the shit they have accumulated and lost <money, jobs, things>, put the amount of energy & work they invested in Life that has been invested up to that point and sit back and see what they have to show for it all.

Does the work, the fun & the hard, equal the output?

Does the work, the fun & the hard, equal what I have to show for it as I look around what I have?

And, yes, this implies I believe this assessment has accumulation of shit over time as well as what has been accumulated and is currently in hand.

I imagine the comparable discussion is if you have put in 10,000 hours of practice playing the piano you want to be able to show everyone you can play something other than chopsticks.

Anyway.

I have been part of several of these discussions and … well … they are difficult. Shit. I have had these discussion with myself.

The harsh truth is that platitudes & ‘feel good’ assessments seem not enough. Good, maybe even great from a feeling perspective, but, well, not good enough for all the hours invested and energy expended.

Yeah.

Money does matter <financial security>

Yeah.

Material shit does matter <Life environment rewards>.

Certainly not the only things that matters, but in a Life value equation, they matter when you decide to sit down and say “what do I have to show for it all?”