====

====

“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.

source: Zach Mercurio

———-

“Books are not made to be believed, but to be subjected to inquiry. When we consider a book, we mustn’t ask ourselves what it says but what it means.”

Umberto Eco, The Name of the Rose

—–

“Treat all of your secondary characters like they think the book is about them.”

Jocelyn Hughes

——–

Purpose, to me, is an intrinsic energy and the moment someone, a business or a person, makes it an extrinsic objective/vision/”Why” I believe they have stepped on the slippery slope downwards to hollow, or hollowing, of behavior. What I mean by ‘hollow’ is as soon as Purpose becomes an extrinsic goal it encourages some aspect of ‘blindness’. It can be ethical blindness (which may seem weird to say assuming Purpose is good, but as Ann Tenbrunsel, Professor of Business Ethics says in this podcast, Overcoming our Ethical Blindspots , often the most altruistic organization can have the most ethically dubious behavior. It can simply be objective blindness (which all business deals with). It can just be an overall blindness toward a myriad of details under the guise of some laudable ‘purpose.’

That said.

In general, I wish all business people would put down the Purpose crack pipe and take a deep breath.

Purpose is an outcome, not an objective.

Purpose is certainly a higher order undertaking, but tying it specifically to business results is not only misguided but a dubious undertaking (Richard Shotton’s chapter in The Choice Factory is an excellent stripping of the Stengel Purpose argument).

Which leads me to books. Let’s say you are interested in business and Purpose and do not want to pay gobs of your hard earned money on some bullshit. Maybe start here. It’s Not What You Sell, It’s What You Stand For: Why Every Extraordinary Business Is Driven by Purpose by Roy M. Spence Jr. and Haley Rushing.

I have noted several times I don’t particularly like reading business books. And then you run across one like this one and it renews your faith in perusing the business book section seeking something to read. This book is chockfull of interesting anecdotes and sound bites. This book was written in 2009 and even by then the premise of ‘purpose driven’ had been talked about for years (don’t buy into the bs that it is some ‘new found soul of business’), but Roy Spence offers a really nice more pragmatic articulation. Much much better, more pragmatic, than Sinek’s “Why.”

Anyway. While I believe every business owner should read this (I believe it should be mandatory reading for every business class in universities) I hope that readers take to heart the individual message. The message that if you, as a person, can get a grip on the idea of individual purpose that you can truly live an extraordinary life. This is a good book. It communicates some great messages and gives you some excellent behind the scenes stories which are just plain fun to know about.

This next book may seem odd in talking about Purpose, but let me explain. The book is Technique for Producing Ideas by James Webb Young. This book (which was written in 1937 for advertising people) is relevant to anyone’s work. This little book is one of the simplest summaries of commonsense—and articulating common sense is this book’s greatest virtue. The book lays out a five-step process for generating novel and not-so-novel ideas, articulating them so that you can put to them to immediate use. It is a powerful guide for gathering information, stimulating imagination, and recombining old elements into meaningful new ideas. It is so simple you wonder why so many consultants make it so much more difficult. But the real point in bringing this up with regard to Purpose is ‘perspective.’ Purpose is all about having, and understanding, perspective and “we” not ‘me’. “How to Produce Ideas” may sound like its about ideas, but its not. its about social dynamics and understanding where you are in perspective to others and other things. I would argue, as does Zach Mercurio, you don’t ‘find your

source: Zach Mercurio

‘purpose’ it is simply there for you to see it.

 ** note: Zach’s book, The Invisible Leader, is actually one of the books specifically written about Purpose worth reading.

Anyway. “How to Produce Ideas” is about seeing and once you see than you, well, see how you can fit in and assist in the progress of things.

Beyond those books I would much prefer business people hunker down on Vision, Mission, Strategy & Tactics rather than Purpose.

Look. Let me try this as an explanation.

We often talk about IoT (internet of things). Internet of Things is about connectivity and platforms for making things happen and lifting all. Maybe we should be speaking of PoT – Purpose of Things. Look at Purpose as structural lift. If you just go about doing things to lift things, well, you have Purpose. You will have contributed. You will have meaning. This doesn’t have to be complicated or complex, simply try in each one of your 30,000 daily decisions to attempt to provide some ‘lift’. Lift the process, lift the system, lift the task, lift the moment and maybe even lift a person.

In the end.

I often find myself in an uncomfortable position. Uncomfortable in that I do not believe Purpose will ever be found by reading a book, but reading books will help you better understand Purpose. So maybe I end with where I began. Reading, with regard to Purpose, should be viewed as an intrinsic task, not an extrinsic – objective seeking – task. The more you read this way the more likely you will intrinsically embrace purposeful living. So don’t pick up book about Purpose, pick up books and read meaningful stories. I promise you that if you can find a meaningful story, somewhere within that story will be a person who purposefully did something that mattered – and it mattered.

“Why am I grown Old in seeking so barren a Reward as Fame?

The same Parts and Application, which have made me a Poet, might have rais’d me to any Honours of the Gown, which are often given to Men of as little Learning and less Honesty than myself.”

=

John Dryden

——-

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

Haruki Murakami

Fame.

Fame is an appealing concept to almost everyone. Hear me out. Even if you are one of those people who say “I don’t want to be famous”, you actually do.  Yup. Maybe not ‘red carpet’ famous, but instead maybe if but for one minute ‘noticed by many’ famous.

At the crux of this mental battle we all have is: at what price would we pay for it … this ‘fame’? What price would we pay even for a sliver of fame?

Would you pay anything for “so barren a reward as fame” as John Dryden characterized it? What is the exchange you are willing to make?

Which leads me to selfies, instagram, pinterest, tumblr, Tiktok … pick one.

In technology’s world of the web we are not seeking our 15 minutes of fame, but our 15 seconds of fame with two paths lying ahead:

<a> hoping it will either turn into 15 days of fame as it gets reposted & discussed & editorialized, or

<b> hoping it turns into nothing … as it is embarrassing in reflection.

Therein lies the challenge of gaining fame … even a sliver.

Anyway. I have a theory about fame. Ok. I actually have two theories.

To be clear, these theories, theorems, postulates, whatever you would like to deem whatever glimpse of brilliance or absurdity within what I share, its my own with no research; just looking around at people and having listened & watched probably a million through my professional career.

First thought.

Genes. Chrissie Hynde <Pretenders lead singer> said this once:

“As far as success goes, I’ve never really got too excited about losing or winning. I don’t have whatever the gene is you need for that. Whatever the gene John McEnroe has, I don’t have that.

I don’t care.”

Some people don’t simply crave fame. It is part of their DNA. It is in their genes. I say this because far too many of us <myself included> mock the fame seekers as narcissistic or shallow or, well, pick your poison, but, the reality is that they simply have a gene we do not.

This doesn’t mean I have to find it likable. It simply means I need to recognize that not everyone is the same. And it also means we need to step back and recognize that fame can be used for good or for bad and that fame, while sought, is rarely controlled by the ‘soughter.’

Second thought.

My sense is that to most of us every day schmucks that the whole concept of fame is simply a means to an end, i.e., a vague concept that really has to do with esteem and self worth.

What?

Yeah.

I tend to believe most of us don’t really want the spotlight for life. We simply want to know that we are worth a shit.

That we are good at something.

Conversely, we fear be mediocre. Ok. Let me clarify. We fear being 100% mediocre and that fear affects how we view ourselves.

Looking at ourselves internally and looking at our selves externally seem to rarely match. We are either inflated with regard to ourselves or we have some deflated view of ourselves.

Neither is good.

“All I ever asked of life was that it should pass me by without my even noticing it.”

Fernando Pessoa

This is where that 15 seconds, or 15 minutes, of fame steps in. A spotlight shows us, even for a glimpse in time, some reality.

Something, well, good.

That we are actually good at something.

That people recognize it.

And that moment is it.

It’s enough.

Most of us don’t desire more than that. Just the validation is enough. We can step back into our lives content and continue the grind. Even if we continue the grind with a slightly livelier step knowing that somewhere someone valued us and our contribution.

And, yes, I am unequivocally discussing fame.

Not the smile of a child, the nuzzling from your dog, or even some very personal soulful evaluation and endorsement of your behavior which can provide valuable value affirmation, but differently than fame.

I am discussing fame as is in the harshest glimpse of society and life.

The unhesitating judgment of a cold and often brutal world. Unbiased personally you know when you walk away you weren’t cheated in judgment.

And in that judgment you were noticed and passed judgment.

“Everyone deserves a standing ovation at least once in their life because we all overcometh the world.”

R. J. Palacio

To be clear. The corrolary to what i just shared is your flaws, mistakes, misjudgements, also can get scritinized in the spotlight. Hence my opening where I offered an A path and a B path. Wander into the spotlight at your own risk.

That said. Fame, using Dryden’s language, it is most often not found in “the torrent of the people” or “the riot of a multitude.” Fame is most often found in a moment where the price is nothing more than facing our insecurities on whether we are good enough.

And, in that moment, the fame pendulum can swing far one way or the other.

We are not good enough.

And the world stands and stares.

We are good enough.

And the world stands and stares.

Simplistically, therein lies the price of fame.

The fact you will find out whether you are good enough. And maybe that’s why we all seek some version of fame at some point. Maybe we all really do want to know the truth; harsh or not. Maybe, just maybe, that is what fame, to the non-egotistical, is really about.

Because attaining a rich reward, or, so barren a reward, is a reward nonetheless.

==========

“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.

===

“As societies grow decadent, the language grows decadent, too.

Words are used to disguise, not to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it.

Words are to confuse, so that at election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests.”

Gore Vidal

===

“The greatest enemy of clear language is insincerity.”

George Orwell

===

Well.  I thought it was time to pull out my thoughts on political correctness. Let me begin with the poster child of political correctness – Merry Christmas. Well. I am not really sure when Merry Christmas got hijacked by Happy Holidays, but I wish I had been there to repulse the hijackers. Look. I am clearly sensitive to responses to Merry Christmas and am more than happy to pull my Happy Holidays greeting out of my seasonal greeting joy bag when appropriate but, in general, most people recognize that I like Christmas in spirit, not spiritually, and I am simply wishing everyone a little bit of the magic we call Christmas during this time of the year. But, frankly, political correctness has made it significantly harder to authentically spread joy by demanding people to actually think about what they will say (I imagine this could be good – be thoughtful before you speak – or it could be bad – takes the spontaneous out of the joy wish). In the end. Where political correctness got us during the holidays is either spew soft joyful platitudes or defiantly stabbing people with a Merry Christmas.

That is where political correctness has taken us. To be clear. I think everyone believes the idea of political correctness has gone too far.

That said. My thoughts today are about that political correctness has beget an even more heinous idea – ‘anti-political correctness’. It has become the flag bearer for anything that anyone wants to say which can span from tactless ignorance to blind ignorance to, at its best, true common sense clarity <called “talking simply” by many people>.

The trouble we are running into is all three of those are amalgamating into one big blob of things being said.

Basically, anti-political correctness is becoming the go-to answer for anything people may object to. What I mean by that is you can now say the stupidest thing known to mankind, someone can point out that it is stupid <even in a tactful way>, and the answer is almost always “I am tired of political correctness standing in the way of truth.”

Basically, we are now facing the backlash to an overextended political correctness from people sick of being told that they have to admit things that they don’t really believe <or think>.

Individuals are realizing they are individuals and that they don’t have to play by the same rules as a large corporation or the ‘pretentious few who try and speak for the many.’ Speaking out has become independent of anything other than “I”, i.e., what is in MY mind, and feel like they will say whatever the fuck they feel like saying. In other words, many people are standing up and saying “I am society so why can’t I speak for society” <as if that was as easy as I just typed>.

Well. Let state the obvious point. Among the many cases in “the problems in the world today”, political correctness isn’t standing in the way of truth; stupidity <or irresponsible thinking & speaking> is. But, and this is a big ‘But’, overreaching political correctness does create a problem and it HAS created a problem in some people’s minds and it is now being released <and some of our leaders are taking advantage of it>.

Look. I am absolutely with many people who suggest political correctness has become a bigger problem than the problem it was intended to try and address. However … maybe … just maybe … instead of ignoring the original good intent of political correctness <encourage tact and sensitivity to others’ feelings around issues of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, physical abilities/disabilities … among other things> maybe we go back to its original intent and just keep the ground rules a little simpler and stop its invasion into the minutiae of Life and what we say.

We need to keep the ground rules simple because this effort to not offend has spiraled into a type of verbal censorship, certainly has generated conflict and sometimes seems to infringe upon some fundamental freedoms.

We need to take a close look at this <without completely rejecting it> because what constitutes offensive or unacceptable speech has bled into the minutiae in everyday Life approaching simple everyday actions bludgeoning Life into a … well … wussified world.

We need to “fix” political correctness because we do need some harsh truths. We need some ‘edges’ in the world view. We need to discuss them, express them and debate them. We need a little, well, enlightened conflict.

All that said that doesn’t mean that under the guise of some sense of individual sincerity <“I truly feel this way”> that good taste and respectful of what others think & feel has to be sacrificed <this is the balancing act> – everyone should show respect for your audience and any audience you are speaking about.

Words carry some responsibility beyond “what I feel.”

Yet. Political correctness has become a nomenclature for “not being able to speak what you feel” so words start getting thrown around without any thought beyond … ‘this is what I feel.’ Well. Sometimes what we feel is not what we know <knowledge is different than feeling> and what we feel may seem like truth, to us, but it is tainted by everything we do not know <therefore is nothing more than an opinion> and, frankly, sometimes what we feel should be kept to ourselves.

Let’s be clear. We got to this point because many of us were afraid to speak something for fear it offends someone rather than for fear it may actually be stupid, ignorance or just wrong <I say this because this creates misguided thoughts in one’s head on how to correct the situation>. Therefore, by overcoming our fear of offensiveness we simply roar our way into stupidity, ignorance or wrongness under the guise of simple speak or simply speaking our mind.

This also translates into the belief that all of a sudden those who decide to eschew being politically correct have decided they are smart or smarter than everyone else or , at minimum, as smart as everyone else. So smart that they can say whatever they believe and simply point to ‘I refuse to be politically correct’ when challenged over any stupidity they may be spewing.

====

Commenter: JoeAmerica • 4 hours ago

Get off my back libtard, you can’t control my speech.

====

It becomes words of stark harshness because there is no version of modesty, respect or dignity in the harsh backlash to political correctness.  And why should there be any concern for those things when you are simply stating common sense? <that is the logic>. And you get the added bonus of sticking it up the pretentiousness of, well, everyone who has even a tinge of respect for decorum or what someone may truly be offended by.

====

“Political correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes hatred.”

Jacques Barzun

===

We now have organized hatred, anger and frustration. And these organizations <and some leaders words feeding on those organizations> use words that can shame, ridicule, and humiliate … delivered not with the intent to  deliver the shame or ridicule, but to show “my point of view & thoughts should be heard!”

Anti-political correctness has simply tapped into a pent up sense of relief that people can debate and talk in simple terms. Corporate speak and political language and marketing bullshit sayings and even tmotivational speak is dying.

No. It is being killed.

To be clear. All this ‘non political correctness bullshit is not just ‘simple talk’ <therefore the path to solving this issue isn’t simplicity or ‘dumbed down’> it is simply monologue stripped of political correctness.

It is addition by subtraction.

Do I like it? Of course not.

Do I understand it? Yes, I surely do.

It needs to be addressed for the good of society and what is going on in our heads.

Someone can get a grip on this without having to be plain-spoken <which implies ‘dumbing down’>, it can be managed intellectually and smartly because, frankly, the people who are most frustrated with political correctness ain’t dumb.

=====

“Democracy was supposed to champion freedom of speech, and yet the simple rules of table decorum could clamp down on the rights their forefathers had fought and died for.”

E.A. Bucchianeri

=====

Here is why they aren’t dumb.

This is what they see. They see that we are in a bad place with political correctness because if we have to constantly censor any conversation pertaining to race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or physical ability/disability, then it seems like we will simply bury the issues and perpetuate that what exists in the minds of people without taking the opportunity to confront them. This means in the effort to protect everyone’s feelings we have essentially lost, or willingly sacrificed, the edges and imposed the wretched middle on everyone.

This wretched vacuous middle hinders progress with regard to understanding different perspectives, viewpoints, feelings, and doesn’t really permit the discussion of real life experiences in the harsh light of reality but instead in muted thoughts of what should be discussed.

Anyway. Here is my real fear about this whole political correctness shitstorm.

Inclusiveness versus exclusiveness.

While the intent of political correctness was to make a more inclusive society and rhetoric it is now creating divisive rhetoric in which society is splintering.

While I could argue that it was pious arrogant intellectuals who created the overblown political correct environment we are chafing against, it is the everyday mostly white middle aged people who are now clearly anti-political correct.

=====

The angriest and most pessimistic people in America are the people we used to call Middle Americans. Middle-class and middle-aged; not rich and not poor; people who are irked when asked to press 1 for English, and who wonder how white male became an accusation rather than a description. You can measure their pessimism in polls that ask about their expectations for their lives—and for those of their children.

On both counts, whites without a college degree express the bleakest view. You can see the effects of their despair in the new statistics describing horrifying rates of suicide and substance-abuse fatality among this same group, in middle age.

The Atlantic

======

Regardless what you read about the anti-political correctness crowd <mostly embodied it seems by those who follow Trump around these days> they are not stupid, dumb nor ignorant. Some may have less education than the population median, but since when has education always been a reflection of true smarts <never>.

Yes. It is a mainly white population that is making up the anti-political correctness crowd, but we shouldn’t ignore what they are saying or feeling because of their skin color. Why? Because they have a point.

They are angry & frustrated with how political correctness has infringed upon their lives.

Now … when people get angry or frustrated they say things that they regret <or more likely they just don’t get articulated in the best possible way>.

I think this is pretty much a Life truth.

A lot of today’s frustration with what seems to be overreaching political correctness is being captured in a loud voice fighting back without any debate wordsmithing training other than what you may get sitting at the bar with a group of your friends yelling at each other.

That said. I think it is the responsibility of those in leadership positions to recognize the frustration with political correctness and permit frustrations and anger to be heard and respectfully listened to — the frustrated masses deserve that.

What they do not deserve is to have their anger flame fanned and encouraged. People deserve to be heard and offered solutions not someone simply agreeing with them and offering platitudes.

I think the leaders who will end up being the most successful in this ugly stage of political correctness will be the one who leads us to the proper respectful place – where we respect the fact that not all people believe in the same things, that all people have the right to believe in different things and say different things, that simply having a different point of view doesn’t mean you are an outcast, ignorant or stupid just that you view things differently and, finally, that there is balance.

It will be within balance that we will finally encounter inclusiveness and not divisiveness.

Let’s handle this discourse with some respect & dignity. Everyone deserves that. I don’t need a leader talking down to me and, frankly, I don’t need some leader suggesting my frustrations are the source of the problems of the world or my country.

Political correctness hasn’t created shit for problems other than it makes discussing things more difficult. Simply pointing that out isn’t a leader’s job. A leader offers solutions in a respectful way. They offer solutions to a group of people no matter what point of view they have. They speak TO the people without demeaning the larger view of ‘what we should be’ as people.

In the end. Political correctness has created some problems, but it is not a problem (despite what some politicians suggest). It hasn’t directly created what some idiots call “the cancel culture”, but, indirectly, anti-political correctness yahoos are actually canceling out voices. The intent behind political correctness actually does have good merit – forcing society to face some harsh truths. What I would now suggest is we talk about some of those harsh truths rather than cancel them out.

** note: This does not mean everyone can say whatever they want wherever they want. Lies or, worse, heinous activity, shut not be permitted a platform. Eliminating their platforms is not political correctness nor is it censor, it is consequences for bad behavior.

This is not censorship. This is consequences.

==========

updated from December 2015

  ===

“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?”

—

“You have to break rules to break free.”

Tinker Bell

===

“The best way to predict the future is to create it.”

Alan Kay

—

A new year is always a reflective moment and a pandemic certainly does amplify the urge to reflect. Coincidentally, whenever asked about the effect of Covid on, well, everything, I say one word: amplify. It has simply amplified everything – uncertainty, change, technology (some people call it ‘digital transformation), existing business vulnerabilities, Life vulnerabilities as well as business strengths, opportunities & risks, etc., as well as certainty.

Yeah. It has also amplified both uncertainty and certainty.

The pandemic shone a spotlight on the fact uncertainty is not the sole owner of fear & risk that even certainty contains aspects of fear. And a lot of fear.

I can know exactly what I want to do, I can know exactly what certain steps I need to take, I can even know with certainty what my quest looks like, and fear will still dog you every step of the way.

Let’s be honest. Certainty was not supposed to feel this way.

While we like to say ‘change is my constant companion and friend’ it is quite possible fear will shed its superficially bad perception cloak and take its place in public vernacular as “fear is my constant companion and friend.”

Look. I am not suggesting everyone curl up in a fetal position overcome with fear, but what I am suggesting is 2021 will be the acceptance of the fear of the known; the fear of certainty.

We are certain we will survive (because what is the alternative?) or, as my friend Murray Calder is teaching me, we will not survive and, yet, the quest goes on. Why? Because what is the alternative? And maybe that is the biggest lesson of 2020. The quest goes on, despite the fear, whether you are staring at certainty or uncertainty.

** note: Please note I am not suggesting one can become fearless, in fact, I think a fearless person is a lie. I am also not suggesting becoming ‘unfeared.’ I believe we have learned un-anything, let alone unfearing, takes a lot of energy and some sometimes-absurd contortionist reasoning.

I do not suggest embracing fear just as I am not suggesting ‘not fearing’ nor am I suggesting uncertainty is better, or worse, than certainty, but rather maybe just accept it all. Why? Because as a corollary to ‘the quest goes on despite the fear’; 99% of us have a 100% daily survival rate.

If a pandemic year has taught us anything, that last sentence & thought may be it.

Which leads me to Tinkerbell and moving forward and how people should accept fear is a valuable companion.

Peter Pan and Tinkerbell are volatile companions. They fight, they scoff at each other – maybe even show a little contempt for each other -, they make each other angry and jealous, but when it comes right down to it, they would each die for the other.

** note: The book version of TinkerBell, one of the most recognized characters in children’s literature, was certainly one of the feisty imperfect spectacular ‘doer’ type of people.

Considerably different than the Disney version.

Considerably more interesting than the Disney version and, more importantly, a reflection of the fact the world is not a Disney version.

They recognize they aren’t always perfect; the world isn’t always perfect and while sometimes they drive each other crazy they also realize those very characteristics that make each other crazy are also often the ones that make the other love them so much. They also recognize that the combination of their characteristics increases their likelihood of survival.

And while Peter Pan may have embraced not growing up, TinkerBell embraced “you have to break rules if you want to break free.”

The pandemic put a spotlight on rules, boundaries and norms. Some were needed and, well, some that existed before the pandemic simply became useless within the pandemic. We reflected on so many rules, so many things society tells you to do, so many things business tells you to do, and began to realize if you want to break free, if you wanted to find some success, shit, if you wanted to survive, you have to decide what you want to do – and be. In some way 2020 encouraged us to find our inner Tinkerbell.

The rules of the status quo, the rules of what we viewed as ‘certainties’, became silly cages to stand in. In fact, many of us began to realize fear was a silly cage. We saw uncertainty was actually the norm and certainty was also to be feared. What do I mean?

We stood in March and we knew, with certainty, it would be shit.

We stood in March and knew, with certainty, we would survive (we just didn’t know how).

We stood in March and we knew, with certainty, we would have to do different things.

There were a lot of knowns and, yet, many of us were shaken; even some fear. On other words. Fear was a certainty. And. Certainty was fear.

Uncertainty wasn’t the cage, certainty was. This, upon reflection, freaked us out. It freaked us out because the certainty cage has always been a comfortable cage for us. It has always barred us against the nastiness of the outside world. All of a sudden, the cage we accepted as a comfortable cage (or maybe not recognized we were in), the way it was supposed to be, some of the ‘certainties’ in Life, shit, even the uncertainties we normally accepted (including “life cannot be planned”) became simply wisps of smoke from the dumpster fire of 2020.

Suddenly we were free.

It may not have looked like freedom in March , but freedom it was.

And maybe, just maybe, we learned to think like a bit TinkerBell with this freedom.

She wasn’t always nice. She was feisty. She was willing to break rules. She had an imagination. I am not suggesting you shouldn’t be nice, but freedom does mean some shaking up of things, some discomfort and some conflict. Look. I am suggesting we need to ‘break some norms’, break some of the Life rules of emergent living (and, no, I do not mean not social distancing or wearing masks, etc.; but rather break some of our expectations of how Life is supposed to be lived), and break out with fear in hand.

Maybe break out our inner Tinkerbell.

It’s about flying.

It’s about finding and embracing the magic in Life.

It’s about recognizing the world has dark places, but still be willing to venture out

It’s about being nimble where evil <or ‘the bad’> tends to win thru stolid unmoving sturdiness.

It’s about not always being nice, but being true of heart.

It’s about being smart, not strong.

It’s about breaking some norms in order to be free.

It’s about using your pixie dust.

Far too many of us see a dark world and instead of imagining what could be simply hold on to something in the past because it <a> seems better and <b> seems safer (as known). It is our way of ‘unfearing certainty.’  I would argue we do not seek certainty, but rather seek unfearing aspects of our lives and, as a consequence, miss out on the magic in life.

Now. In the absence of a pandemic, in and of itself that seems like a good idea, but as everyone is doing it and as everyone decides to hold on to their ‘own thing’ we simply stay in our own little NeverLand.

** note: Peter Pan’s author made Neverland these places that are found in the minds of children and each is “always more or less an island” not the same from one child to the next.

Its not a good idea for two reasons.

• The pandemic pretty much blew up anything we had been holding onto that could possibly be ‘unfearing’ life
• That kind of thinking actually encourages is to become islands, avoiding adventure <except in our own mind> and not sharing adventure, and a pandemic clearly showed us to survive this ‘adventure’ you need others. Your Tinkerbell needed Peter Pan and Pater Pan needed Tinkerbell.

Anyway.

I think more of us need to seek our inner Tinker Bell in 2021. And in doing so we have a chance to refind the magic in Life and embrace fear and guide ourselves to new and better adventures not alone but together. Maybe in 2021 we stop valuing certainty over uncertainty, stop embracing uncertainty, and simply grab our fears, place them in pocket, and get up and go.

Aw.

This may sound silly.  This may sound Disneyesque <mostly if you haven’t actually read Peter Pan and only know the Disney Tinker Bell>.

But do not disregard the thought.

Tinker Bell sought something better even when faced with reality. She desired to create the future. She guided from adventure to adventure. She may not have liked all her companions, but she never desired less for them at the expense of something more for the ones who mattered most to her.

Oh. And she had pixie dust.

Metaphorically, I could argue we all have pixie dust it just seems irrational to think so in our rational brains.

Seek your pixie dust. Tap into your inner Tinker Bell. Have faith and maybe find a Peter Pan or two to trust on your quest. And maybe reflect on the fact the fear of the known, the certainty, is equal to the fear of the unknown/uncertainty, and that 2021 will be where norms are redefined, adventures will abound and Life’s value is found in valuing the fact 99% of us have a 100% daily survival rate.

====

“There’s a place they can go if they’re tired of chains,

And our roads may be golden, or broken, or lost,

But we’ll walk on them willingly, knowing the cost –

We won’t take our place on the shelves.

It’s better to fly and it’s better to die

Say the wicked girls saving ourselves.”

“Wicked Girls Saving Ourselves”>

—–

———

“What we call chaos is just patterns we haven’t recognized yet.”

=

Chuck Palahniuk

———————– 

“Confusion is a word we have invented for an order which is not understood.”

=

Henry Miller

————-

So. Businesses absolutely freak out over the whole idea of chaos & confusion.

They see it as a terminal virus for which they spend gobs of money trying to inoculate the organization against and invest gobs of time trying to tamp down <or stamp out> any outbreaks within an organization.

Well. Let me suggest that, on occasion, a little chaos and confusion outbreak is good for an organization.

Yup. I just said that.

I wrote fairly recently that great organizations tend to linger on the edge of chaos … or ‘bedlam’ as I called it. 

I believe the part I left out is the idea that in a great organization, well, what appears to be chaos is not really chaos, and what appears to be confusion, is not really confusion. To be clear … it can have the same feel, the same smell, the same look, but it is not really chaos or confusion.

Well.

Than what the hell is it? Well. I believe it was Peter Senge who said “Living systems, and organizations, have integrity.” Using that I would suggest 99.9% of organizations have structural integrity, therefore, true chaos is 99.9% impossible. What that means, pragmatically, is chaos in a typical organization is simply a pattern, or an order, we just don’t recognize — yet. Yeah. It is quite possible we will never see the pattern or create the order as ‘learning’ from the confusion. Instead we may only see the outcome of the seeming chaos and confusion and that outcome is most often a new idea or a new thought or a new invention.

===

“Invention … does not consist in creating out of void but out of chaos.”

Mary Shelley

===

New shit always confuses, and scares, the crap out of an organization.

Most organizations seek consistency & order & patterns of behavior that they can manage and guide toward the holy grail of business – efficiency <which means you can lower costs and either make higher margins or lower prices>.

Shit.

I hate to break the news to everyone, but efficiency is not the holy grail of business.

The holy grail is ideas, inventions and thoughts.

Efficiency tends to grind those three things down to dust. Situational or moments of chaos and confusion tends to create the friction necessary to spark those three things to fire.

Maybe that’s it. Great organizations burn on occasion. We confuse the flames as chaos and confusion and only see the organization going down in flames. Instead maybe we should see some chaos & confusion as the phoenix. What I do know for sure is that more often than not, chaos and confusion in business is not really chaos & confusion <despite the faux leaders running up & down the hallways waving their hands trying to get things back to the way they were – orderly>.

Most times it is simply something happening in which we have yet to recognize the pattern … the NEW pattern the organization is adopting <or should be adopting>.

I am also pretty sure about this.

Inventions, ideas and innovations, the good ones, the ones that are dynamic beyond their own purpose, are more likely to come from chaos than from ‘efficient orderliness.’

That said.

Maybe the worst thing a business can do is try to tame the chaos within. Its like asking an organization to not feel. Is there anything worse then not feeling?

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

Originally published May 2015

So. Getting gifts at Christmas is awesome, but it always seems to take music to create the Christmas spirit.

With that thought … I started thinking about my top 5 Christmas songs.

Anyway.

I began with 5 but the list kept growing (& I am sure I have missed some awesome Christmas songs). It is a mix of traditional and non traditional. But here are the ones I would request to get me in the Christmas spirit.

Numero uno.

No doubt.

Any Christmas anywhere … I will never get tired of this song:

Nat King Cole and The Christmas Song

Ok. I have no clue what chestnuts are and no idea whether roasting them over an open fore is a good idea or not … but dammit … if I had chestnuts I would roast them.

No Christmas is complete without this song.

Next.

A classic (most young people have no idea who Dean Martin was and almost everyone forgets he actually sang in between cocktails).

Dean Martin singing Let it Snow

And then Amy Grant.

I am not a huge Amy fan in general but I would have to say she is my top female xmas singer. I think she could sing any Christmas song and … well .. it would sound like it was meant for Christmas.

Amy Grant and Grown up Christmas List

And then a different Aimee.

Aimee Mann Christmastime

On a side note … I almost picked Calling on Mary or her vision of The River, both of which sounds languid and nice, but kind of has that infamous Aimee ironically truthful realistically darkish side to the holidays …

I heard the sidewalk Santa say:

Merry Christmas, Merry Christmas

Salvation’s coming cheap today

Merry Christmas, Merry Christmas

Next. My first memory of a non classic contemporary Christmas song.  And it still sounds great today.

Waitresses Christmas wrapping … a classic.

Next.

Beautiful voice. Beautiful Christmas song. Sappy but good stuff.

Carpenters singing Merry Christmas Darling

Next.

Have yourself a merry little Christmas.

Yikes.  There are a bunch of great renditions to this song. Maybe my favorite? Vonda Shepard’s Merry Little Christmas.

Next. How The Grinch stole Christmas is probably the best Xmas cartoon of all time (maybe Charlie Brown close behind), but this song is awesome … the original  The Grinch song:

But. It may be Hip Heavy Lip’s version that introduced this song to an entirely new generation (NEVER get tired of this).

Next. Pretty much anything Leigh Nash sings sounds good but holiday songs … well … she should do an entire cd sometime …

Sixpence none the Richer  Carol Of The Bells

Next. Whew. Incredibly sad and thoughtful and … well … heartfelt … which <the latter> is what I expect Christmas is really all about.

Robert Downey singing The River:

Next.

The one people probably haven’t heard ….

Glasvegas  singing A Snowflake Fell (And It Felt Like A Kiss)

Next.

For a slightly different sound and it sounds fun in the traditional xmas music mix … Sally Shapiro sings kind of a techno Christmas song …

Anorak Christmas

Next. Cocteau Twins are an acquired taste in general … and their sound is always up & down (to me). But.  They nailed this one.

Cocteau Twins and Frosty The Snowman

Next. Just a nice one. And Heather Nova’s voice is a nice contrast to the more traditional Amy Grant and Leigh Nash and Karen Carpenter.

Always Christmas by Heather Nova:

Next.

Christmas (baby please come home) by Death Cab for Cutie

I love Ben Gibbard’s voice. And I love this version of the song. Whoda thunk one of the best emo bands of all time would crank out a good holiday song.

Next. A good modern one.  Surprisingly good.  Surprisingly little played.

Sleigh ride by KT Tunstall:

Next.

Listen The Snow Is Falling by Thea Gilmore

(had to include this one)

Its just nice. And you never hear it on the radio <and most people have no clue who Thea is>.

Next. Oh yeah.

O Holy Night by Josh Groban (his voice sounds pretentious at times … but … for the holidays? … his voice was made for songs like this).

And lastly. Just can’t leave this one off my Christmas list.

So This is Christmas by John Lennon

How could this not make anyone’s list?

Done.

That’s it for my list. 19 songs (if I counted correctly)

I have more but these are songs I like to hear in order to get me in the melancholy state and upbeat state and in general … the Christmas state.

Thinking about the past.

Remembering friends and family <here and gone>.

Reconnecting.

Seeing the joy in a child’s face …. Ok … anyone’s face.

Ok.

To make it an even 20. Just for a smile. Listen to Guster sing “¿Donde Esta Santa Claus?”

Merry Christmas.

—————-

“Where a society is defined by its boundaries, a culture is defined by its horizon. A boundary is a phenomenon of opposition. A horizon is a phenomenon of vision. One cannot look at a horizon, it is simply the point beyond which we cannot see. One never reaches a horizon. It is not a line, it has no place, it encloses no field, its location is always relative to the view.”

James Carse

——————-

Let me begin by suggesting a company has one of 2 choices to meet its objectives:

– enable innate desire for meaningfulness

– exploit people as resources

Most companies build an environment somewhere in the wretched hollow inbetween with a practical emphasis on the latter and superficial emphasis on the former.

That said.

Technology plays a significant role. It plays a role because it amplifies. It is here that I will suggest that morality, ethics and empathy need technology. Yes. I just said that. The destiny of all those things are dependent upon technology. If that is so then I imagine I could say society’s fate resides in the hands of technology. That may seem backwards in that all of these things reside in humans, not technology. Well. They do but technology will either flatten, amplify or even extend the reach of all. I am certainly not suggesting that technology will guarantee morality or ethical behavior, but I would suggest improving technology increases the likelihood that morality and ethical behavior becomes more pervasive (expansive) all of which are integral to a healthy culture.

Technology, in and of itself, is nothing. Without people, without people generating content, it is a passive tool regenerating itself to its own purposes. Yet. Once humans become involved technology begins to amplify – amplify divides, fragments, groups and tribes. It is within the fragmentation aspect in which we begin to pause on the benefits of technology with regard to society. The fragmentation, the phrasing of ideas, ideologies, values, norms and actual ideological commitments just begin to blur the greater truths associated with each. Fragments get emphasized to strengthens pieces of views all the while blurring larger issues.

Today I propose a business model which proactively seeks anticipatory triggers to predict emergent activity and yet keeps people’s heads on a swivel for the unseen triggers which activate ‘surprises’ or opportunities.  And that is where technology can play a role – a significant role.

It is a business environment in which technology is a distributor of data, and knowledge (Intelligence Driven Software) and data drives strategic decision-making. This means Data drives potential, not just efficiency in decision-making & strategy, but effectiveness. The value of an AI infrastructure, leaning on algorithms, is that knowledge tends to pool rather than trickle throughout. AI (algorithms) become the irrigation system for institutional knowledge, data, individual knowledge and resources. In fact. Algorithms may actually be the order needed to provide the guardrails to an emergent organization.

Note: Some thoughts on the Intelligence Based Software (IBS) Concept

At its core this intelligence software is an iterative knowledge distribution system grounded in both predictive (recognized) patterns and emergent (unpredictable) patterns.

I envision a two stream of intelligence, one predictive and one emergent. The concern with having only a predictive stream, one based on boundaries, is even constantly evolving technology cannot outrun problems or be fluid enough to recognize emergent patterns (even technology doesn’t know what it doesn’t know). So, I envision a software intelligence/information distribution infrastructure which is rigid enough in one stream to consistently distribute useful intelligence, based on recognized symbols/words/topics, to have pattern recognition and, yet, have another stream which is fluid enough to reimagine patterns.

The intent is to find the optimal newness in intelligence, i.e., purposefully build in some intelligence dissonance with the information flow with the objective to both captures defined ontologies as well as escape from defined ontologies. Bottom line. Context matters. If we change the circumstances, we change the inspiration. The intent is to inspire from the known and the unknown.

This is an ambitious idea. it seeks to corral the ambiguity in the larger system of intelligence, as expressed by humans, and share it with people with enough clarity of the complexity challenge that someone, or someones, become curious enough to conceptualize ideas. This idea is an attempt to appeal to the rationality, and irrationality, of thinking minds. Explore the recognizable patterns, the easiest to replicate resources efficiently against, and explore the unrecognizable patterns which may represent the most effective velocity opportunities.

This is where I connect business culture to technology.

I would argue a business needs a culture to even envision the potential of an Intelligence based Software (IBS) structure. What I mean by that is:

(a) simply placing IBS into a business will not generate any meaningful behavior response (note: this is similar to most digital transformation plans),

(b) simply getting people to use an IBS system will not generate any meaningful results, and

(c) meaningful behavior and meaningful results are only achieved if the culture embraces the idea of people being augmented by IBS.

We should always remind ourselves of what James Carse said, “Since a culture is not anything persons do, but anything they do with each other we may say a culture comes into being whenever persons choose to be a people. It is as a people that they arrange their rules with each other, their moralities, their modes of communication.”  While I (slightly) hesitate to suggest people, technology (software) and information, each by themselves, are simply discernible bits of something that are actually nothings, I will suggest in a Conceptual Age frame of mind those things are nothing until they actually “do with each other” and collectively create progress. a culture forges them all together into something worthwhile.

From a larger perspective one could suggest the Cloud is the key to making it all work but the truth is, from a more granular pragmatic aspect, it will most likely be cognitive algorithms (intelligence-based software). Yes. Progress, and agility, isn’t tied to access of knowledge, but rather use of knowledge by individuals and individuals interacting with each other. Its within the collective interaction, culture engaging with a system, from which continuous improvement and progress is found. I would be remiss if I didn’t note that the truth is if you have to “reskill” your employees, it’s a reflection that you have not created an organization in which people are “continuously skilling”. Create a business that is continuously improving, even its employees, and you will never have to “reskill.” In fact. Just create a Conceptual Age organization and you are set (but I am biased).

One of the questions I asked myself is not only can an organization be 100% emergent, but if it actually were could it have a healthy culture (because culture does need some predictability)? Well. I believe yes and no. Yes because people behavior naturally arcs toward predictive, repetitive, behavior and rhythms. So, while the structure may encourage 100% emergent, people will inevitably seek some aspects of predictable. That also explains the no. No replication of systems & process ignores the fact replicable activity is where pockets of efficiency reside and without any replicable behavior optimal organizational efficacy can never be achieved. And maybe this is where I touch on Purpose a bit because I envision someone saying to themselves “well, if the organization has a Purpose, that would probably resolve his concerns.”

Individuals can have a Purpose and, in fact, if tap into Purpose are happier, healthier and more productive.

I do not believe Business has a Purpose in the sense Purpose is typically discussed. I don’t believe ‘shareholder value’ is a Purpose, it is simply an objective (which creates systems in the business to achieve). I believe business has intentions. These intentions can get masked by visions or missions, both of the which can play valuable roles, but I believe a business should lay out its intentions. An intent to contribute to the environment. An intent to act with integrity every day. An intent to engage with community. Within these intentions the people IN the organization then have a variety of paths they can choose to walk on – and clearly see where paths do not lie. I hesitate to call these principles because, well, they seem simply like intentions. With intentions understood a business can have a community of people interested in working coherently (some people may call this culture) and pursue quests to fulfill those intentions.

“Community is the fact that we work toward the same goal, that we accept our respective roles in order to reach it.  Values is the fact we trust each other. And, culture?   Culture is as much about what we encourage as what we actually permit. That matters because most people don’t do what we tell them to. They do what we let them get away with.”

Fredrick Backman

In having intentions and pursuing quests the business rely less on not having to tell people what they cannot get away with and encourage them more to go do what they can do. People gain knowledge, get better at whatever they do (and how they think), there is continuous improvement, progress is achieved (for the individual and the business), quests are pursued and everyone feels a sense of meaning in having contributed. That is possibly the best summary of what I envision a Conceptual Age Organization is.

With all of those positive organizational attributes there is a technology truth: “The computer is a moron.” (Peter F. Drucker) Ok, it’s not, but it has its limitations. On this topic I am reminded of Intelligence Analyst Walter Laqueur in 1988 “A World of Secrets” saying “the need for Human Intelligence has not decreased, but it has become fashionable to denigrate the importance of humans assets because technical means (technology) are politically and intellectually more comfortable.” This came at the height of the struggle going on in the world of intelligence between those who deny the usefulness of agent and those who defended the worth of Human Intelligence in the face of the technological revolution.  At the time the New York Times estimated, from intelligence officials, 85% of all information gathered came from all the hardware sources (ELINT/SIGINT/PHOTINT/RADINT) opposed to information gained by spies (HUMINT).

The ultimate conclusion the intelligence experts reached was “what’s the good of knowing the SIGINT without knowing what the motive is.” In other word, technology shows, humans understand. AI, technology, will never replace humans.

Which leads me to organizational culture, the difference between collaboration and the collective acting coherently and technology. Organizational collaboration, technically, doesn’t need to be led. I will also suggest that collaboration does not guarantee success. Collaboration, done poorly and in the wrong culture, can actually lead to mediocrity. What s much better for a business is a community of people, collectively behaving in a coherent way, pursuing a common quest. Technology can play an integral role.

Technology offers the public transportation of data, knowledge and words – to & from the cloud to the people. At the core of this business model I am suggesting (an emergent conceptual organization) is the relationship between people and accessible knowledge through technology.

The cloud elevates all businesses to the level of the best generic technology. Think of it as the common power grid from which a business opens up for business daily. But the power of the cloud is it elevates the greater potential of any business as it taps into shared information to supplement, & compliment, the institutional data – while maintaining privacy of the institution itself.

While the cloud represents an almost limitless pool of ever-growing knowledge and data, I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that the cloud, in and of itself, can be just as stupid, if not stupider, than any one individual. More knowledge, used poorly, simply makes one stupider rather than smarter. The collective knowledge is only as good as who uses it.

As a corollary, individuals, and small groups of people, within an institution (augmented by the cloud collective knowledge) get smarter iteratively (even if they misuse knowledge because they learn from mistakes). Conceptually they get smarter than the cloud due to understanding of context.

I say all of this because in a conceptual age, in which understanding concepts and implementing well against them being the objective of the institution, these separate ideas should remain separate & distinct from each other. This must remain so because conversely, the more similar the two concepts get the more stupid both ideas get (arcs toward mediocrity in terms of response to emergent concepts).

“In all things that are purely social, we can be as separate as the fingers, yet one as the hand in all things essential to mutual progress. There is no defense or security for any of us except in the highest intelligence and development of all.”

Booker T. Washington

Once again. the collective mind, the cloud, can be just as stupid as any one single less informed individual. A large quantity of collected data/knowledge does not guarantee smart solutions in contextual conceptual environments. In general, people create smart solutions, therefore, an emergent organization must balance the collective and individual(s) collaboration to command the highest order of value against emergent opportunities. And, in general, technology creates organizational stupidity when the culture does not embrace it’s thinking potential and simply use it as tools to ‘do’. The smartest organizations will be the ones in which there is a strong culture attracted to the benefits of technology and, specifically, an Intelligence Based Software system constantly feeding them predictive and emergent knowledge to assist them thinking conceptually about the business at hand.