===

“It is my thesis that machines can and do transcend some of the limitations of the designs and in doing so they may be both effective and dangerous.”

Norbert Wiener, 1960

========

“As machines learn they may develop unforeseen strategies at rates that baffle their programmers.”

Norbert Wiener, 1960

===

It’s not very insightful to note that algorithms inherently increase efficiency. Similarly, it doesn’t seem that insightful to note Life, people and business, are inherently inefficient <despite all their efforts to be efficient>. I think the insight resides in the fact this creates a recipe for disaster. Disaster in that what is easy, or even useful, is not necessarily good for us.

Anyone who has even researched AI slightly would see that even if AI systems learn from accurate, representative data, there will still be issues if the data reflects underlying biases and inequalities of the system.

Oh. And it does.

Oh. And, yes, I am going to suggest efficiency is a bias and an inequality driver.

Look. We idolize efficiency and we increasingly have tools which offer some sense of efficiency, yet, the attempted ‘flattening’ of natural inefficiency, generally speaking, only creates, well, dysfunction <and, generally speaking, persona dissatisfaction>.

How the hell does that happen? Simplistically an algorithm offers a binary choice – A or B. Yeah. To do so it evaluates a variety of inputs but, inevitably, it has to choose a 0 or a 1, this or that. Not weighted, a choice. And sometimes that choice is a guess. Yeah. A guess. My favorite line in Brian Christian’s fabulous book, The Alignment Problem, is “the computer is alarmingly confident when it guesses.” When you simplify everything down to a black & white ‘this or that’ you can sometimes simply flip a coin. Now. say you are a algorithm and you not only flip a coin, but you flip a coin 6 straight times. Yeah. You can see the possible problem there. Circling back, let’s assume each of those 6 coin flips are driven by efficiency. Yeah. You can see the possible problem there. Let me stretch the efficiency issue out a bit more. Efficiency demands a division of labor, resources and energy. So, if the algorithm is driving all those things toward the ‘most efficient’, well, there are always consequences to a choice.

As a counterpoint, effectiveness, or efficacy, is found in things that are often fairly inefficient <at least in the short term or present>. Effectiveness is the natural enemy to the incrementalization of standardization.

Range:

Development is not linear, and diversions that set you back in the short term frequently become powerful tools in the long term.

More importantly, effectiveness is the natural enemy of efficiency. How? Well. Efficiency arcs toward improvement of structural character, not improvement of market dynamics. Effectiveness is grounded in the external inputs, efficiency from internal outputs. Basically, efficiency strips away systems dynamics and flattens organizational principles.

Risk is quantifiable, uncertainty is not. It’s one thing to say there is a 50-50 chance on something going wrong. It’s another to not know the chances at all.

How does it do that? Algorithms grounded in efficiency minimize the optimal organization ability to expand and contract. the tendency of everyone in business is to contract (under the guise of ‘focus’). The contracting oversimplifies, but makes it mentally manageable and certainly drives an efficiency objective. Yet. Navigating complexity <which is the standard business> demands one actually expand their situational awareness of the moment.

I imagine I am also discussing the human aspect of algorithms. What I mean by that is algorithms are meant to be a tool for people, not a means to absolve responsibility.

And what do I mean by that?

A collection of people can be stupider than an individual (often even stupider), and, an individual can be stupider than a collection of people. The trick is to always to find when one is smarter than the other.

This gets compounded by the fact technology, well crafted, actually makes people stupider. How? It actually lessens our critical thinking by offering easier solutions (knowledge gifted is not the same as knowledge earned). We need to be sure to break the stupid loop. Because the smarter technology gets (algorithms actually iterate based off of interactions), the less smart people get (we do the hard work of thinking less), so we need to actively use technology to make people smarter. We need to amalgamate company wisdom and institutional learning into critical masses it cannot be ignored and demands some interaction. It seems counterintuitive because we are activating algorithms to do the hard work of ‘thinking’ <assessing an overwhelming amount of data> and, yet, we should actually be thinking harder ourselves <people>.

Look. Algorithms can be used for the forces of human behavior team bad (default, easy answers, let tech decide) or forces of human behavior team good (curiosity, expand upon imagination, innovate).

All I know is algorithms are going to play a big role in navigating business efficacy and shaping business.

—

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

Mike Walsh

—

The key word is “shaped.” Ultimately it will be humans who use the shapes.

Anyway. Here is my wish.

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

Which leads me to temporal convergence and temporal divergence.

Temporal convergence is progressive and affirming. By contrast, “temporal divergence,“ is where we cannot see a path from where we are “now” to achieve the goal-state. Temporal divergence may result from insufficient capability/ capacity to navigate with any confidence toward any goal. Also, one may not know if one is in a state of temporal divergence. The difference between these two things is the difference between survival and death in a business. I bring this up because algorithms, driven by efficiency, are temporal, but you cannot actually see whether they are converging or diverging. Well. At least until it’s too late.

All businesses will exist, in some form or fashion, grounded in algorithms. I am fairly sure that’s a given. What is not given is what role efficiency will play in the future of business. Now, I am not naive, efficiency focus will not go away overnight, but efficiency, relentlessly pursued, is simply a path to commoditization. The challenge will be to not get consumed by efficiency driven algorithms and to realize algorithms do not give answers, but outline options. To realize algorithms don’t define redundancies, but rather define the outlines of systems. And, in the end, realize efficiency is the lazy way out and understand algorithms can make us even lazier so the double hit from the dull axe of efficiency will bludgeon us, individuals and business, into a bloody pulp even as the dashboards scream success. Ponder.

====

“Uncertainty is a bitch.”

Anonymous

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

 “It is not the strongest of the species that survive, not the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.”

Charles Darwin

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

On November 18^th 2009 I wrote these words:

Welcome to Enlightened Conflict.

It was my 1st post. I suggested the site would do 3 things for readers:

• make you think
• communicate the effectiveness, and power, of words
• may learn, and unlearn, some things

All I really believe I have done is write about uncertainty and uncertain things <albeit couched in a variety of topics and opinions>.

Over time, writing and thinking, I have learned one thing for sure — uncertainty truly is a real bastard. It encourages an inability to choose, a lack of clarity or evidence to a foreseeable outcome and throws in a nice dose of ‘little to be hopeful for’ because of that indiscernible future and some shit to fear the possibility of.

In other words. It creates a suspicion that the future just may not be the one you were hoping for.

That said.

Today I will talk a little about what I perceive as a unique time, at least in our lifetime. It is a point in which general uncertainty is colliding with personal uncertainty which is colliding with leadership uncertainty.

Why is this unique?

Well.

This uncomfortable alignment rarely happens.

We may have some personal uncertainty, but we look to our leaders and they offer some sense of certainty. Or maybe we have some leadership uncertainty, but we feel good about ourselves and have a sense of certainty just do what you know is right.

You get the point.

Now. Far too often, I included, we suggest that uncertainty is just about a test in character. But today, in the present, this is becoming a test in skill, competency, abilities and, yes, character. We will be tested on all fronts – inside ourselves as well as outside ourselves. We will need to decide what we are truly good, if not great, at and either stand aside and let someone else do what needs to be done or permit ourselves to accept that it just ain’t gonna happen the way we wish it would happen. That is a test on all fronts not just character.

Regardless. I truly believe this is a moment. A moment in which uncertainty reigns. A moment within the ‘tide of the affairs of men. ‘

 Within my 1^st 5 posts, on December 5^th 2009, I shared this:

—————

There is a tide in the affairs of men
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.

William Shakespeare

========

This quote is a reminder that opportunities in life are fleeting, but there are many — if you pay attention. And, yes, I do think it is nice to remind yourself there are many opportunities ebbing and flowing in front of us <because then you stop dwelling on regrets>. But I imagine my point today is that while we should seek these tides and be aware they exist and be aware that sometimes the tide in the affairs is thrust upon us.

I feel like that last thought better reflects the uncertain moment we live in presently.

To help me I pulled out my battered copy of Hayakawa’s “Use the Right Word” trying to find the right words and on page 550 there it was – significant. Synonyms for significant are listed as  consequential, grave, important, momentous, serious, vital and weighty.

These are the words we use to refer to factors, and moments, that are outstanding, crucial or that have considerable force or effect. The word ‘significant’ itself suggests something that is outstanding because it is especially meaningful or excellent; no urgency or forcefulness is necessarily suggested by the word — its impact is set in stone and solid. The power of the individual word is that it contains, and retains, each aspect of the synonym words.

So, yes, what makes this moment so solidly significant is its less than solid uncertainty.

And maybe that is why this particular uncertainty in the present seems a little more agonizing.

=====

“Our civilization is founded on the shambles, and every individual existence goes out in a lonely spasm of helpless agony.”

William James

=====

I am not a ‘glass is half empty’ view of Life and living Life guy, yet, James has a point here. Almost everything we do, certainly anything good, is built on the shambles of something. Therefore, our existence is challenged by the threat of some helpless agony … in our pursuit of being happier with some unknown certainty.

In this case the shambles we are trying to build upon is ‘uncertainty.’

And while some may suggest “how the hell can you build something out of nothing” I would suggest that is what we do when we are at our best.

When we use our skills, whatever capabilities we have and work together, actually cooperate, while being the best people we can be. In other words, we build something out of the nothingness uncertainty.

Here is what I know.

We all seek to make some positive impact on the world whether that world be our immediate circle or some grand global circle or somewhere inbetween.

Combine that with a thought I read somewhere that to live nobly is to avert one’s eyes from the bad and seek that which can be found in the light of good. And I think that is what James hints at — averting one’s eyes is … well … not easy.

Tell someone to not look at something and the temptation to look increases exponentially. And, let’s be absolutely clear, while uncertainty resides mostly in nothingness, and nothing tangible, we place that uncertainty in tangible things <events or people> so that we can stare at it as a prime example of uncertainty. It is not that we seek the agony and sadness of Life its just that I tend to believe we want some tangibleness because then it seems more easily conquered. And then this uncertainty alignment agony takes on a whole new level — our inevitable desire to create some plans to make things certain.

Yikes. That is a horrible objective.

Yet. Doing this is natural because we are taught almost from day one that planning, and a plan, is the key to success and happiness. In other words this suggests we can … uhm … plan for certainty.

That seems kinda crazy.

Shit.

It sounds like certain agony.

In fact.

It sounds like we are constantly sifting through the shambles of plans made and broken as we seek to make some meaningful progress in Life.

===

“The detective thinks he is investigating a murder. But truly he is investigating something else altogether, something he cannot grasp hold of directly. Satisfaction will be rare. Uncertainty will be your natural state. Much of your life will be spent in the dark woods, no path visible, with fear and loneliness your only companions.

But answers exist. Solutions wait for you, trembling, pulling you to them, calling your name, even if you cannot hear.

I believe that someday, perhaps many lifetimes from now, all will be explained, and all mysteries will be solved. All knowledge will be free for the taking, including the biggest mystery of all – who we really are. But for now, each detective, alone in the woods, must take the clues and solve mysteries alone.”

Jacque Silette

<fictional detective>

====

Look. Uncertainty is a bastard. It certainly makes us question ourselves — who we are as an individual and what we are truly capable of.  Today’s version of uncertainty is just our own version to the nth degree as it encompasses all things in our lives.

Here is the good news.

We all know answers exist and we all know they await us even if we cannot hear them, but we all know some certainty of some things exists somewhere.

This means we are constantly investigating who we really are and what we are really good at often desperately grabbing at clues or proof to provide some comfort that we have either solved the mystery, or, at least are on the path to solving it.

I will note that at all times I tend to find the “who you really are” as a silly, if not stupid, self-question.  Mostly because who I am today is not who I will necessarily be tomorrow. But, in particular, in this time and place I tend to think it sells the moment short. It encourages us to find our inner strength and inner core of who we are and suggest we will be able to walk the bridge from uncertainty to more certain things & places.

That is wrong.

And dangerously wrong.

We are going to be judged for this moment in time.

That I can guarantee.

And it will not solely be on character. It will be on skills, abilities, capabilities and how well we identified what we could do and whether we did it or not.

This may sound harsh, but the only people who will know who we truly are today are not us, but someone somewhere in a future yet to be defined. So looking for that kind of validation today is a fool’s errand. Yet. It should not stop us from being detectives, in fact, it will most likely be our continuous search for clues and solve what mysteries we can today that will guide us from uncertainty to some certainty of something better than what exists today.

In the end.

Sometimes we call it uncertainty.

Sometimes we call it ‘the unknown.’

But you know what? It doesn’t matter what name you put on it.

It’s fear.

In this case, in this time and place, it is an alignment of fears of whether we will be good enough as people, good enough in skills, good enough in leadership, good enough in abilities and good enough to meet whatever challenges exist in today’s existing uncertainty.

Oh.

To be clear.

Sometimes I believe we associate fear with weakness or possibly too often associated with ‘not enough positive thinking.’

That is wrong to do so.

I tend to believe we would be much better off, particularly in the here & now, to cut through the bullshit and just call fear by its name and face it — in all its black & white glory and the uncertainty and the fear associated with it — and step into it as my friend David Amerland suggests, with intentionality.

I am not suggesting you to not feel some fear of uncertainty or even that I don’t feel fear because, of course, I feel fear.

Who the hell doesn’t? <and if they say they don’t … they are lying>

I believe it helps to just face it.

And I am not saying this because I believe “fear is a great motivator” <because I would suggest that it is really survival that is a great motivator … not fear>. I suggest these things because fear, more often than not, actually freezes us … makes us do nothing. If we face it, we name it, we say ‘fuck you’ to it, we will do what it takes and needs to be done — try things in trying times.

To be clear.

I do not believe we are at a cross roads.

I believe we are on a road and we have an obstacle, one that we just cannot see and one that no one has articulated or shown us yet. It just exists in our minds and, yet, we know it exists as much as the thought of Santa Claus in the hearts of children. That is kind of what uncertainty is.

I do know I feel uncertainty and I am fairly sure I am not in a minority. I feel like most people, if asked, would just say something like “I am not sure what is going to happen” which means uncertainty resides at the core of what is in the here & now.

What I know for sure is that we will build something out of his nothingness. We will look back, or the generations yet to come will look back, and they will see something.

This I know.

Something will be built from the scraps of uncertainty and it will be built upon a foundation of what is the best of us.

The structure will showcase the strengths of our better skills, capabilities and abilities.

The skyline of the future will be a reflection of the best of us having worked together to create a better version of what exists.

Why do I know this?

Anything less is not the best version of who and what we are.

Anything less means uncertainty won.

This is our test.

This is our time.

This is our certainty.

That I know.

Yeah.

On November 18^th 2009 I wrote these words: Welcome to Enlightened Conflict.

I have never stopped believing that the best version of us is better than most of us think it is and that everyone just needs to be reminded of their ‘better version’ in order to permit it to stand up and speak out and ‘do.’

It is time for us to prove me right.

But uncertainty certainly is a real bastard, ain’t it?

It takes some intentionality to actually be the best version of who and what we are and can be.

Make your choice. Choose wisely.

=====

a version of this was posted in late 2016

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

James Monroe:

“National honor is the national property of the highest value.”

==========

“Results are obtained by exploiting opportunities, not by solving problems.”

―

Peter F. Drucker

====

Well. In honoring America on July 4th I want to take a minute or two and share some thoughts on moving forward (progress). Not about making America great again, but rather what has always made America great — a land of opportunity and not a land of solely results. Semantics? Maybe. But an important one.

Opportunities is about reaching for what could be and within that resides a good dose of failure or ‘lack of results.’

Opportunities are to be explored with no guarantee other than an opportunity for good results.

Opportunities are to be explored as ‘possibilities’; not guarantees. And those are the types of things that make a country great, not just winning or results, but rather exploration of what could be.

It is the journey of opportunity.

Look. I admit.

I am a 100% business guy and I have absolutely fallen into the “seeking results by solving problems” trap on occasion.

That said. I know in my heart of hearts that exploiting opportunities is the key to business success, but in the day to day grind, especially if you enjoy solving problems, you can get focused on “boy, I sure had a good day because I solved a lot of problems.”

It is natural because problem/solution reflects tangible, almost immediate, pleasure & satisfaction and some clear identifiable outcomes.

Opportunities are less tangible and more hopeful. And if you have ever run a business, well, unfortunately, day to day business cannot run solely on hope. Yet, true leadership is more often than not defined by providing opportunities to those who seek, and need them, the most.

It seems like on this July 4th, this America 245th birthday, we would do well to remember this.

Regardless. My biggest issue with most politicians is a general lack of understanding of business and how it applies to how a government & country can be managed.

Now. That said. I continue to believe a business person, with no government experience, can never successfully manage a country. So while a lifetime politician will always struggle to understand the underlying attitudes and behaviors of a successful business, a business person cannot simply apply business learnings to actually running a country.

In my mind I believe someone who understands attitudes & behaviors & motivations is one most likely to be a successful leader. And this doesn’t mean understanding anger or frustration, but rather what motivates, inspires and makes people move rather than stand and bitch. In fact, leadership doesn’t mean standing around, or at some podium, blaming all the problems America has on ‘other people’ or shouting at the top of your lungs saying “I can solve these problems.”

Most likely instead of pointing out the problems, we should seek the opportunities that exist <and there are a shitload> and explain how to exploit them.

Shit. The founding fathers of America did just that.

They didn’t sit around bitching about problems and wringing their hands over seemingly insurmountable obstacles nor get angry because answers & explanations do not seem to exist or maybe seem unattainable at the moment. They argued over which opportunities represented the best opportunities for the better progress of America.

They didn’t have all the answers, but they certainly knew the objective – identify and exploit opportunities.

===========

“Just because we don’t understand doesn’t mean that the explanation doesn’t exist.”

Madeleine L’Engle

=========

There will always be questions. There will always be doubts. And there will always be ‘problems.’ Making something great is most often found in looking at what is and discovering the opportunities and exploit them. Let me be clear. Opportunities don’t reside in the past.

I can’t bring back jobs … but I can create jobs.

I can’t stop globalization … but I can exploit the opportunities globalization offers.

I can’t recreate a dying industry or dying skills … but I can create new industries with the skills that exist.

I can’t stop terrorism … but I can create the positive country environment which deters people from even wanting to terrorize.

What that means about ‘making America great’ is if we, or some leader, creates an environment in which opportunities are exploitable, and exploited by those who are most in need, all the major issues slip away.

I often wonder why instead of bitching about what is ‘holding America back from greatness’ we simply just accept that everything happens for a reason. We may not understand the reason <and, god knows, these days we want to invest more energy bitching about not understanding the reason than we do making progress away from what is happening>, but just accept it and get on with getting on.

Accept the fact there will always be more questions than answers, but you ask the best questions and use the answers to discover the opportunities and exploit them.

Accept the fact that even though things may not be going the way you wanted them to go or the way maybe that it should go … well … opportunities exist <if you look>.

The American dream never resides in the past. The founding fathers had a dream of what could be and the biggest gift they gave us was not any document or law or ruling guidelines — it was the gift of looking forward and not backwards. The gift to shed problems and issues and disagreements by advancing confidently in the direction of what could be.

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

“If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.”

Henry David Thoreau

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

Making America great will never have anything to do with building any walls, or breaking up banks, or free college, or dividing people, or gun control, or abortion, or minimum wages, or … well … any issue we seem to invest far too much energy debating.

Making America great will always have to do with seeing the opportunities that exist – not any we have to actually create – and exploiting them.

Crumbling infrastructure? We have an opportunity to build whatever infrastructure we want.

Massive debt? We have an opportunity to cut unnecessary expenses <in the real world this is called “down sizing”>.

Archaic education system? We have an opportunity to throw out the old way and build a completely new way <and this doesn’t mean privatizing education … which is not a real solution>

I could go on and on.

Every supposed “problem” America has represents an opportunity. So maybe instead of running around trying to ‘fix’ all the problems someone should sit down and say “they are what they are … what are the opportunities moving forward?” We should inevitably seize opportunities as a pathway to something better ahead.

Harry S. Truman:

“Men make history and not the other way around. In periods where there is no leadership, society stands still.  Progress occurs when courageous, skillful leaders seize the opportunity to change things for the better.”

Leadership is never about just solving problems — that is simply a different version of ‘standing still.’

245 years ago a relatively small group of men with really only one thing in common – a vision & the opportunity to build a country – saw opportunity as what would make the fledgling country great.

They had no interest in standing still, but rather moving forward.

That didn’t mean there were not problems nor did it mean they ignored problems, but they recognized the way out of almost every problem and issue was forward, not by fixing, and therefore they sought out opportunities and  sought to exploit the existing opportunities to the benefit of a better America.

My wish for year 246 is to stop talking about what is wrong and who has done something wrong and instead talk about all the opportunities that exist. Stop talking about what America is, or isn’t, whether its great or not, and get on with getting on.

Happy July 4^th.

==== postscript ====

One could read this, should one choose to read it a certain way, and think I am suggesting ignoring some fairly important societal/institutional flaws under the guise of ‘not looking backwards.’ One would be mistaken. You have to clearly see where you have come from before you can fully tap into the potential of what could be in the future. Part of recognizing the past is to recognize why some opportunities were missed so that potential can be maximized in the future. Racism, institutional and societal, misogyny, institutional and societal, among some other issues cannot be ignored. Until we, as a country, accept them as truths, true potential cannot be unearthed in the future.

====

“Embrace the present and invent the future,”

Karl Lagerfeld Chanel

=====

“Questions are what matters. Questions, and discovering the right ones, are the key to staying on course. The wave of information threatens to obscure strategy, to drown out details and numbers, calculation and analysis, reaction and tactics. To have strong tactics we must have strong strategy on one side and accurate calculation on the other. Both require seeing onto the future.”

Gary Kasparov

=====

This is about technology and intentionally shaping the future we desire and, peripherally, about business.

Where we are.

Human-ness: what it meant to be human and how to intentionally be human. It didn’t start with technology, but then again it did. Technology has introduced all the distractions necessary to forget we are human. To be clear. This is different than a ‘different than when I was growing up’ discussion (past), this is a discussion about our future and our intentions with regard to being human – individually, societally and in business. The debate, the discussion, should ignore the definitions of technology and focus on the definitions of humans – not generational mumbo jumbo – because there is no contrast between generations (in any meaningful way), the contrast resides in the liminal space we currently stand in – standing between the definition of who and what we want our future to be and a future, as yet, to be defined. Clearly there is room for improvement in how we engage with technology and even in the technology itself, but the expectations of the future should not reside in some fantastical technology, but instead the fantastic visions for people and what they will be defined by. Think about that because although we have a nasty tendency to view society and institutions as an array of products and services to ensure people succeed, the truth is that people will succeed with, or without, technology. That means to view technology as having an important role it should be viewed as integrating into the human experience for who and what they want to be – not manipulated by some technology trying to convince them what to think and who to be. This also means just as our notion of technology needs to be expanded, our notion of people needs to be re-explored, re-instated and reimagined. I imagine I am suggesting some version of a future in which it is a Learning Future where technology is simply learning systems undergirding learning people. Regardless. Intentions. Intentions matter if we desire an intentional future, rather than some future we adapt to, we need a vision for humanness.

Again. This discussion didn’t start with technology and, yet, it did. Technology has forced us, and is forcing us, to think more about being human than ever before. That, I imagine, means technology has forced us to state our intentions for the future.

Technology as an enabler for humans.

The reality is very few of us care about technology itself, we care about what it enables. Technology, wherever it resides (in hand, on desk, in lap, in car) are just tools to get things done (and ‘done’ can be answering questions and learning). Technology represents the means, not the desired outcomes. Technology is just a tool like all tools, if used properly it is effective, if it used improperly, it simply becomes an obstacle to attain some objective. What that really means is before we develop any technology, or technology plans, it would behoove us to articulate some unambiguous vision of what we desire in order to create the framework within which that technology can effectively enable. Let me be clear. This means technology does not lead, it follows and supports. This also means neither the availability nor the adoption of technology, its applications or construct, does not change the responsibility nor the overall focus of the business – we should be attempting to attain the same vision whether the technology is adopted or not. yes. What I mean is that technology adoption should not decrease the likelihood of attaining a vision. This also means technology must be relevant and connected to the vision, the strategy, the objective and the humans (and humanity). Ponder that thought.

Human-centric technology world.

Which leads me to the idea of human-centric and a human-centric Future. In November 2018, prior to the pandemic, I approached the Georgia Tech School of Human Design with a conference idea – The Humancentric Organization – in which speakers** would talk about technology through the eyes of creating learning organizations. In other words, human centric organizations enabled by technology:

It’s an exciting time to be a person in a technology world because it is all about Humans.

I’m convinced that ordinary people have more power in their hands to shape the world, including the future, than ever before. They just don’t know it because they keep getting told it will be a robot, automation, AI/Machine Learning world. The truth is technological progress is dependent upon people, conversations and thinking (morally & behaviorally). It’s clear that Artificial Intelligence, Robotics, Biotech and any number of other technology-based innovations are set to impact society with consequences we can only imagine. This represents significant opportunities for people who recognize it will be a Human-centric future.

** note: the speakers who I had asked and expressed interest in being involved included Grady Booch, Mike Walsh, Dr. Jason Fox, Dr. Leda Glyptis, Teodora Petkova, Faris Yakob, Lisa Gill, Zach Mercurio and several others. All portray the goodness of human beings when given the opportunity to do good. I thought it would be interesting to have Mike Walsh, an unabashed futurist, and Grady Booch, one of the forefathers of software, together. Grady, in particular, portrays the goodness of technology when given the opportunity. He is the conscious of technology. He, above all, see humans create. He, above all, sees the integrity within the invisible, the black box of technology, which 90% of people will never understand and therefore are dependent upon the 10% accepting the burden of responsibility.

The human centric future, to me, will see a world in which:

• • Technology will thrive or die depending on humans, not the opposite.

  • The world, business & society, will thrive or die depending on humans, not technology.

We must keep an unwavering focus on humanness because as technology improves (as it will do) there will be a tendency to turn our focus more sharply toward seeing technology as the solution to, well, everything in the future. But this belief should give us some pause. If we focus too much on technology, we lose sight of the true purpose of technology which is to facilitate learning and improve the situation for humans.  I know I could argue whatever example someone comes up with that the future solutions should be created with same care and expectations as traditional effective solutions. Why? Because everything will still revolve around humans – an individual doing and thinking things interacting with other humans who are doing and thinking things. This is where complexity does come into play. We often, even with technology, think of our solutions in a one-dimensional way. The solutions, particularly if interested in creating a learning revolution, shouldn’t simply be based on convenience and simplicity but rather challenged and challenging. There will have to be a multi-dimensionality to the future – a complex one. I guess what I am suggesting is the we should not diminish the need for traditional principles like engagement, interaction and critical thinking but rather the strategic objective should have the intention to create some additional depth and dimensions to these principles.

A learning revolution.

Technology is first and foremost used for educational purposes. Now. We can debate the definition of education (beyond the institutional aspects), but for the most part people interact with technology to learn and do. [ponder.  This makes technology a transformation tool, but to what? There is certainly a role for undirected education/learning but inevitably if we seek to have a better system, the system should have an identified strategic objective. Far too often we make technology benefit into some simplistic ‘convenience’ tool. Why shouldn’t we expect technology to enable a learning revolution? This will demand a different type of leadership – one that is not passive but rather one that leads a revolution into the future. Since the preservation of the status quo tends to be equated with either protecting traditional values or principles, most leaders have learned (from experience) that ensuring a transformation unfolds slowly permits them the luxury of maintaining positions of power longer. A learning revolution demands a new type of leadership one that is active, enlightened and engaged. Any revolution is part push and part pull but technology offers a new dynamic environment in which opportunities can be exploited, in pursuit of a grander vision or strategic objective, if one is willing to actively engage with them. I have said this before but this new type of leadership is not about charisma, but rather about framing and thinking conceptually. The revolution only occurs if someone can frame the issues in terms that are directly relevant to the communities. The concepts are framed in a way that are easily articulated, understood and assimilated into individual (and collective) objectives. This is a bit grander than alignment (although alignment is certainly a key aspects) but rather it is about finding the coherence necessary for energy gravity grabs hold to increase progress.

Part of this progress, within a learning revolution mindset, is an understanding one cannot study something to death. Emergence demands some resolve to understand and take advantage of trends, opportunities and learning I general. Evidence gathering needs to be effective AND efficient wherein the mechanism neither slows nor delays yet offers up enough guidance to insure movement toward the vision and objective rather than away. This gets tricky with technology for 3 reasons:

• • Technology software is designed and consequences can run away faster than humans can actually assimilate. This is a Norbert Wiener concept.

Design carefully.

• • Technology is often the biggest contributor to ‘over-evidence-seeking’, big data and overwhelming amounts of information, and it must instead become a balancer to a culture of proper situational evidence – seeking not certainty, but rather probabilities.

  • Technology embeds some human bias/beliefs/convictions. What I mean by that is institutions, believing they are uniquely unique, put an overemphasis on what they perceive to be their uniqueness blinding decisionmakers, and learners, to realities which could actually improve their situation if not their learning (which is the first step to improving their future situation).

“The empires of the future are the empires of the mind.”

Sir Winston Churchill

Uneven progress.

Now. Understanding that technology in and of itself is significantly different than effective use of technology is the first step to achieving the future system we desire.  Technology, when implemented, will have an impact and an uneven one. As a result of these impacts a new set of rules, roles, relationships and behaviors will emerge. This emergence will recast any business, as an institution, in a new shape – one of which was not designed by someone upfront. The business model, as an unchanging institutional environment, no longer exists. In fact, the new business enterprise has little in terms of boundary constraints (even in expectations), but rather will reshape itself relying on dynamic, interrelated networks to enable the examination of arising issues within timeframes, some compressed some elongated, under which the system itself operates. In other words, people will change without any ‘transformational plan of action’ or ‘change management’, but rather through simple continuous iteration through interaction with each other and the marketplace/society/community.

And maybe this is where I touch on Purpose a bit because I envision someone saying to themselves “well, if the organization/person has a Purpose, that would probably resolve all future concerns of too much unevenness.” 

I believe 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 – all of them.

An intent to contribute to the environment.

An intent to act with integrity every day.

An intent to engage with community.

Things like that (and there should be no limits to # of intentions).

Within these intentions the people IN the organization 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. Intentions put some boundaries on the unevenness while actually encouraging unevenness which increases velocity toward some vision. Intentions put some boundaries on technology.

—

“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

—

Intrinsic energy.

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. Technology is simply a means to help achieve these outcomes.

Positive progress.

I have always believed we do a disservice to 90% of people by scaring them with disruption, revolutions and robots/automation stealing their jobs. I gravitate to people who make the pragmatic exciting. I gravitate to people who articulate change in ways people don’t distrust it, but instead are open-minded. I gravitate to people who don’t spew bullshit to sound intellectual, but rather see smartness in communicating in ways people can understand. The world, to me, is careening between technology-based fantastical hollow promises and dystopian technology hyperbole. I think we do a disservice to people by suggesting some piece of technology is more meaningful than a human being. I think we do a disservice to any person doing any job that they cannot find meaning in what they currently do therefore they should be happy some algorithm or robot can do it for them.  I believe we should put a stake in the ground for understandable positive human progress in an increasingly technological world. Progress, with or without technology, should be positive for humans and humanity.

Integrated.

I have always believed most futuristic discussions have done disservice to people in its “one-offness” or one-dimensional discussions. I believe we would benefit in presenting the future in an intentional integrated way – a system in totality. Software engineering, how people think, organizational structure, media & culture, power of individual purpose, how we speak thru technology. I believe if showcase humans at the center of the future in an integrated way we can show people that people are the thread to the future, not technology. Show people that if we are empowered to think and do, we will think and do. Show people the system is them and they are the system.

Human Future view.

I am tired of digital transformation, artificial intelligence and even customer-centric. The future is about human transformation, human intelligence and being human-centric. This can be practical business principles or larger societal issues, but at the center of all that will be done, what will be created, will occur thru humans talking with humans and humans creating things. That should be our strategic imperative for future intentions. Period.

Humans should tinker with the future, not technology, and they should do so intentionally.

In the end.

Intentions matter. What I mean by that is if we do not embrace a human centric world, intentionally, technology will be increasingly less likely to (a) be optimally effective and (b) optimally useful to the betterment of humans. Establishing the future is not about technology. It is about humans, society, culture and institutional tradition. The decisions for our future are both top down and bottom up, simultaneously, in which vision and pragmatism are aligned (and resources are equitably dispersed).

I would note that when goals and objectives are not reached, it has little to do with technology, but has a lot to do with people. This future system will not be the result of incremental change but rather of a strategic decision and structural mental models. The strategic decision, stating the intentions, permits the system to emerge rather than be driven by external forces and we inevitably find ourselves in a system in which human-ness thrives.

Toffler in 1980 about an alternative currency

” … should remind us that when we seek to bring something new to a culture, one must adapt the idea to the culture.

It doesn’t work the other way.”

Clotaire Rapaille

======

So. Last week I was on a podcast talking about bitcoin. I am fairly sure that podcast will never be aired. While invited on to talk because I talk about value all the time, they were unspoken bitcoin evangelists and I am a bitcoin skeptic. Needless to say, they didn’t exactly like the way the discussion veered nor did they like the questions I asked of them (or maybe they felt uncomfortable with their own answers).

Let me say upfront:

• • I am a cryptocurrency believer. I think digital currency is inevitable.

  • I am a blockchain ‘hoper.’ I think blockchain has massive potential.

  • I am a bitcoin skeptic.

It is the last, the skepticism, which I will explain today.

I’ll do so in three sections – gamification, value creation vs wealth creation and Value.

Gamification.

At its core Bitcoin (and all existing digital currencies) are an output of the gamification of finance. Conceptually, a bitcoin is no different than the tokens my 89-year-old mother earns when she plays some game on her Kindle which can eventually gain enough ‘value’ she can leave Australia and get to another country to play the game. Sure. There has always been some version of gamification in finance, arbitrage, hedge funds, ‘shorting’, etc., but all that gamification has not been a product in itself. All that gamification has been a reflection of ‘gaming of existing value.’ Bitcoin is a game in & of itself. The value is generated from the game and in the game. It is an attempt to create something from nothing. I would be remiss if I didn’t point out, as I did in the podcast, that while today’s financial market is not tied to Gold, the value was established BASED on gold. At some point, when base value was established within the market, currencies ‘unpegged’ from a tangible asset to let the market drive the value derivatives. Which led me to point out to them that currencies are now pegged to millions of market transactions which, if digital currencies want to become a global currency, will dictate the value of any future currency (see full explanation under ‘Value’ below).

Anyway. I would note that basing value, or grounding value, from nothing but some smart game is a dubious way to create a resilient system.

Getting Bitcoin evangelists to accept this, let alone think about this, is next to impossible.

Which leads me to.

Value creation versus wealth creation.

Bitcoin is a fabulous tool for wealth creation (as long as its value maintains some significant level and it has some growth potential). At the moment it has no value creation. What I mean by that is it has no labor, it makes nothing tangible, it is created from nothing tangible, and, excepting some few cases, cannot be transacted INTO something of value (Tesla is attempting to change that formula). It is currently solely wealth creation and mainly speculative wealth creation (wealth invested to create wealth). Value creation is grounded in labor, or work, in creating some value to the marketplace. Or, as Mariana Mazzucato would suggest, something that contributes to a GDP and something that does not (Bitcoin does not). this is an important discussion because Bitcoin evangelists talk about becoming THE global currency and what they are today is light years away from what they say they want to be.

Which leads me to.

Value.

This is where the rubber hits the road in this entire discussion. What is the future of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin? As a global currency or as a speculative investment?

Bitcoin evangelists speak of it as a ‘global currency.’

I speak of the future of bitcoin, and cryptocurrency, as inextricably linked to its future relationship with value (which inevitably will circle back to the outcome the evangelists always espouse & desire). Currently the value is easy to see because it resides in the hands of investors. But that is speculative value. At some point for cryptocurrency to cross the Rubicon it must make its value appealing, and discernable, to the productive masses (the value creators as it were). It must go beyond Tesla and start being used in a way that its true market usable value can be discerned. Its pathway to becoming a currency is to actually act like a currency and not an investment.

I would note, oddly, this is both good & bad for Bitcoin people. Good in that it gains a more tangibly viewed value. Bad in that, in most likelihood, the market value will appear quite close to the gold standard driven market value. Yeah. This is where the rubber hits the road. The market, what people consume, has been established and millions of products & services have established their current value. And, unfortunately, the value has been established via euros, yuan, dollars, drachma, etc. Here is where that nasty marketplace comes into play. For Bitcoin to become a currency people will immediately associate it with $10,000, 1,000,000 rubles, 100,000 yuan. You get it. And it will not be an exact one-to-one negotiation (so its possible that a Bitcoin gets valued higher than a dollar value) but, in the end, the Bitcoin will get dragged kicking and screaming value-wise from the investment speculation market to the real market where people have to spend WHAT THEY HAVE EARNED. I imagine my main point to them was the market will establish the value, not them, if it is to become a global currency.

Look.

As I told them in the end. I do not have a crystal ball and many of the things Bitcoin advocates talk about are quite appealing. It is quite possible I am missing something, but I will also say that I hear a fairly naïve view of the transition from a speculative investment tool to a value exchange tool. That transition will not be a simple liminal space, but rather, more likely, a jarring event to the existing value of the Bitcoin. Why? Because the existing marketplace value, existing country currencies (fiat) and existing marketplaces values (prices) and existing mental values (people attitudes on what to pay) have a significant grip on Value.

This doesn’t mean that Bitcoin cannot become a ‘use case’ currency (global companies who transfer significant exchanges of wealth between each other and would like to avoid the financial systems), but the thought of Bitcoin as a ‘gold standard’ or THE global currency remains beyond my current grasp of what could be. And, yes, that could simply be a lack of imagination on my part but for the moment I’ll stick with what I do know a lot about – Value. And through the Value eyes Bitcoin has a tough gauntlet ahead of it especially the day the US, China, Euro, etc decide to establish a digital currency version of the tangible currency.

Lastly.

Here is why this discussion is important. If you are holding Bitcoin you will have to make a decision at some point. Is it a speculative generating asset or is it a value generating asset? And watch what Bitcoin does because at some point they will make that decision for you. It is at that point you decide – cash out or hold on. Ponder.

“You’re more likely to act yourself into feeling than feeling yourself into action.”

Jerome Bruner, Psychologist

—————-

Achievement provides proof.

Proof provides affirmation.

Affirmation provides actualization.

Actualization provides emotion.

Emotion provides behavior motivation.

Behavior motivation is desire.

I don’t understand how when people talk about purpose or meaning they do not talk about doing.

I don’t understand how people talk about a world without work where people can do what they want.

I don’t understand how people don’t understand the value of doing and, specifically, work doing.

I don’t understand why people diminish doing (or, at minimum, constantly separate thinking/dreaming/desire and doing into some binary way of living life).

I do understand that because if most work, and work environments, are shit, people will want to talk about not doing shit (or diddleysquat) but in doing so misses the point.

The point? it may be a shitty working world, but people still love doing good shit. So maybe we should be seeking to create work, and working environments, in which people can actually do good shit.

** note: the definition of good shit is where what one does actually achieves what one desires

But let me discuss the relationship between doing and desire.

Let me begin with the unfortunate truth that the world relentlessly demands answers – the tangible. Without an answer, without a tangible thing to point to, far too many of us decide there was no value. Ok. Maybe we, as in ‘the self’, are hesitant to accept there is no value because the rest of the world relentlessly hammers away at our belief of value saying “if you cannot pinpoint what offered the value then it was just one of those ‘feel good’ non practical exercises (or ‘just a hobby’)”. Yet. Value is created in so many ways our heads will spin and the majority of the world is nonlinear, non-cause & effect, where causation & correlation is a slippery concept. Yeah. None of that last longish sentence doesn’t mean the world will be any less relentless in demanding you pinpoint value in everything you do. I think the connection between doing and desire and value is grounded in this Victor Frankl quote:

“What man actually needs is not a tensionless state, but rather the striving and struggling for some goal worthy of him. What he needs is not the discharge of tension at any cost, but the call of a potential meaning waiting to be fulfilled by him.”

Look. The world will never stop demanding some fairly absurd things and the self will demand something else in the search for meaning. I’d suggest within that tension lies an uncomfortable, but fulfilling, existence.

This leads me to doing.

Doing is not just doing. What I mean by that is context, and desire, matters.

Moral responsibility of business and your role in it (doing things).

Community of doing.

Doing makes strategy meaningful.

Doing that aims to “make the world a little bit better.”

I bring up the multiple aspects to suggest there is a symbiotic relationship between tangible & intangible. The psychological and reality.

If I were cynical, I would suggest this is a halo effect in a formula world.

The ‘formula’ in the world suggests you need to choose a plan, or an objective, or a specific motivation. In fact. You get rewarded in life for what you do (this can be creation or simply action) based on how your plan has been framed.  In other words. You get encouraged to conduct life in a finite, linear, fashion. I would also suggest this means you inevitably get rewarded for your body of work not the work you do to create the ‘body.’ Yeah. You get defined by doing. Now. The halo effect is that it becomes a doom loop of belief, attitude and actions. You are encouraged to compartmentalize. Now. This can be rewarding. It certainly can meet a portion of your desire (completion), but it’s like using one desire muscle and ignoring all the other muscles.

This also means that your work life will become a reflection of the past and not the future and today will look quite similar to tomorrow. 2019 will look similar to 2018, 2022 to 2021. Yeah. A doom loop.

** note: Gapingvoid on predictability- Most people’s lives are highly predictable. And there’s a very good reason. Your brain is quite literally a “prediction machine” designed to keep you from situations and scenarios filled with uncertainty and possibility of failure. According to several psychologists, the foundation of all fears is the “unknown.” We want our lives to be predictable. We don’t want to deal with the intense emotions involved in doing something new and different. Trying something new and attempting to change your life will, without a doubt, cause anxiety. But according to the philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard, “To venture causes anxiety, but not to venture is to lose one’s self. Anxiety is the dizziness of freedom.”

“When the situation is obscure, attack.”

General Heinz Guderian

So how do you cross the space between doing and desire? Well. I hesitate to use the word uncertainty so I will instead use “obscure.” Doing is stepping into the obscure and making something happen. That, in its essence, is doing.  It creates what Kierkegaard called the “dizziness” of freedom – some anxiety coupled with some satisfaction. In other words. You design a less obscure world and situation by doing and that doing provides value in that it contributes to reasons why people work.

** note: in the 1980s where professors Edward Deci and Richard Ryan from the University of Rochester distinguished the six main reasons why people work: play, purpose, potential, emotional pressure, economic pressure, and inertia.

• • • • Play is when you are motivated by the work itself. You work because you enjoy it. A teacher at play enjoys the core activities of teaching — creating lesson plans, grading tests, or problem solving how to break through to each student. Play is our learning instinct, and it’s tied to curiosity, experimentation, and exploring challenging problems.

      • Purpose is when the direct outcome of the work fits your identity. You work because you value the work’s impact. For example, a teacher driven by purpose values or identifies with the goal of educating and empowering children.

      • Potential is when the outcome of the work benefits your identity. In other words, the work enhances your potential. For example, a teacher with potential may be doing his job because he eventually wants to become a principal.

They called the three listed above as motives, but I call them desires directly connected to work. Completing the halo effect thought, these improve performance to different degrees and improve ‘attained desire’ to different degrees. This happens because all performance is grounded in making the obscure more tangible – the nebulous turns concrete.

Conclusion

I read somewhere once that when you write down your dreams in vivid detail, you begin to engage both your conscious and subconscious minds. That writing down your dreams and visualizing them will create the engagement internally and externally more concrete. It’s kind of like visualizing doing and desire.

They also suggested that as you write down dreams you start thinking about what people may be part of those dreams (people who can help you ‘do’ the dream). People who can help your doing be better. I actually believe we don’t think about that enough when we speak of doing. Doing is too often discussed in an individualistic way but, as I noted earlier in this piece, the best doing makes the world a little better and ripples out into the community – your tribe, your department, your organization, your family, your neighborhood, your world.

Look. People are complex, their desires & wants are complex and the world they live within is not only complex, but demands some alternatively contradictory things of people. Maslow was never intended to be used as a ‘pyramid’ nor did he ever suggest a simplistic linear relationship between needs & desires, but he clearly pointed out that doing has a role in reaching desires (and the relationship between the two in creating meaning). I imagine my point in ending with Maslow is that at some point I wish we could just accept that people are an imperfect collection of ideas, attitudes, needs & desires and that coherence in Life is most likely attained not through success, but meaning. And that meaning, and coherence, is actually grounded in some version of doing. Ponder.

==========

“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.

 << ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED NOVEMBER 10, 2016 and PAINFUL REMINDER >>

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

“There is an ancient Greek legend about harpies,” she told me. “They are shadows that can come to life only if they drink human blood.

The life of a scholar is the life of a shadow. When one participates in making the future happen, even a small part of the future—and this is what politics is about—that is when one who was a shadow can come to life.

But for that, one has to drink blood, including one’s own.”

=======

“I am not one and simple, but complex and many”

Virginia Woolf

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

Ok. I am tired of talking about the presidential election. Shit. I was tired of the election itself before it ended. But I have been asked so many times about the result I am going to roll out one last final enlightened conflict thought on the election because yesterday I was mostly discussing the global repercussions, security/financial/nationalism, of the election choice.

I will begin with 62,984,828 popular votes. That is how many Trump received <give or take>.

That is 19.5% of the total US population <321,418,820>.

That is 25% of the total adult US population <247,813,910>.

That is about 31% of the total registered voter US population <a little over 200 million I believe>.

<just a note: about 72,000,000 votes, 29% of the adult population, actually did not vote for Trump>

Yeah. A minority just chose the most powerful position in the world. A minority just put possibly the most incompetent unqualified person to the most powerful position in the world.

But, most importantly, a majority did nothing to stop this from happening.

This is not an ‘anti-establishment movement.’

This is not a ‘reestablishment of conservative values.’

Nor is this a rejection of current policies.

This is nothing more than a large indifference to involvement with a sliver minority voice being pissed enough to push one candidate over the finish line.

Ah. That ‘sliver voice.’

Trump won Pennsylvania <+68,236>, Michigan <+11,837> and Wisconsin <+27,257> by 107,330 votes. Ironically … that is almost the same as the capacity seating for Michigan Stadium the home of the Michigan Wolverines.

Florida and North Carolina by less than 200,000 each.

With voter turnout so low <historically low in America compared to other democracies> the actual ‘difference’ is relatively easy to identify.

Trump’s campaign fully admitted that they had “major voter suppression operations” all with the overall intent to create and encourage a sense of disillusionment <whether it is truly fact or fiction> thereby encouraging an overall lack of enthusiasm to show up at all. Their campaign created one of the most negative ‘hollow of policy’ public discussions of all time.

And.

Well.

It worked.

Despite the fact that 87% of Congress was up for reelection and there were a number of state by state initiatives which will have a direct effect on the people living there and the fact the least qualified candidate of all time was in position to take the most powerful position in the free world … only one significant voting block segment really showed up <Latinos showed up, but represented too small a segment to overcome a significantly larger white voting block>.

White rural Americans.

Life, just as in this election, is filled with winners and losers. And no one likes to lose. And, to me, that is what this election revolved around. Rural America and working white people feeling like losers or they are losing … even when we all know they are not losers and many of them really are not losing <even though we most likely do not publicly verbalize that enough>.

Ah. But this all feeds into a perilous topic … white people and their identity.

Far too often when this topic comes up it is cloaked in white supremacy or simple racism … in this case it is not. In fact many people have researched some of the isolation populist thinking working its way through the Western world and consistently identify ‘a crisis of white identity’ as a common thread.

In this case it is more revolving around what does it mean to be part of this country, what is my role and what is ‘our nation anymore’ as well as “what should this nation be”.

As for identity … experts typically define it in two categories –

• “achieved” identity derived from personal effort
• “ascribed” identity based on innate characteristics.

Jessica Nagy

I bring that up to make the point that this election was not an indicator, for the most part, of any real pain, but rather of perceived pain and identity.

Please do not read that as any indication I am diminishing areas that have lost jobs and lost opportunities. I am simply making the point that, in general, lives are lived in relative comfort, people have jobs <even if they may not be the ones they really want>, the economy is growing and culturally we are as open as any country in the world. I am simply pointing out that many white people feel like it should be better than it is <even though what is ain’t that bad>. Therefore, if they feel like their role in the nation’s achievements is diminishing <perception wise>, they believe that it would be better if they had a larger voice.

I have purposefully worded it this way, as I did yesterday to a consulting firm, because this is not racism — this is ‘doing and fixing’ at its core. It is achieving and ascribing.

White rural people, hard working Americans, believe they offer the solutions to achieve as well as they ascribe themselves to the solutions. And you know what? The other 25% of non whites who voted for Trump most likely also would throw their achieving & ascribing hats into the same ring.

We cannot get around the fact that older white people were the reason Trump will be our next president.

We cannot ignore the truth that a portion of that older white people segment are racist and xenophobes.

But we cannot ignore the larger truth that this segment believes their white identity, as achievers & ascribers, actually reflects a larger identity of what makes America great.

And, on that? They are correct.

Anyway.

Hillary did not lose the other night.

Working class America did not win the other night.

White identity did not win the other night.

America lost the other night.

I am not suggesting having Hillary Clinton as our president would have been a resounding win for America all I am suggesting is that Trump, an asshat incompetent narcissist who I am hoping with my deepest hopes will actually rise to the occasion, is a resounding loss for America. And our citizenry lack of involvement and how we have elected to voice any displeasure we may have with the status quo was a losing tactic.

Lastly. I do have a piece of advice to the politicians who are now forced to work with Trump <and, on a side note, this drew some chuckles as I stated this yesterday>.

Trump is not a Republican nor is he a Democrat, nor is he a thinker, he is a tactical doer <with an eye toward how those tactics “look”>.

That means <part 1> … you would be foolish to believe that there is now a “dictate for Republican ideology as spoken by the people” and start believing you have a president who will ‘do shit’ <and, as note earlier, only 24% of adults ‘mandated’ that>. You may get some of the stuff done you want, but only if it meets the Trump “doer” filter.

That means <part 2> … well … those of us in the business management world are quite familiar with the incompetent ego driven leader focused on doing shit. They aren’t smart enough or skilled enough to recognize the true ‘good doing’ versus the ‘not-so-good’ doing. Their natural instinct is to just do. You would be foolish to try and block the doing. It is wasted energy <and I have the scars to prove it>. You have to learn to maximize the good and minimize the bad.

All that said. With an incompetent ego-driven leader in charge America will have some wins and some losses as he forges ahead with doing shit. It would be foolish of us to assume we are destined for the shithole. We will be forced to do shit and manage the shit he starts making us do. Frankly … the success of America resides less on Trump than it does on the people surrounding him. I have worked with shithole leaders before who surrounded themselves with good people who herded the leader’s doing stupidity into meaningful pastures of profitable use of time, energy and resources.

As I told someone yesterday, there will be costs <protectionism comes with an expense> and there will be profits <doing inevitably creates something>. There will be winners and there will be losers <both of which are yet to be identified>.

Sigh.

I am done with writing about Trump until he does his next anti-American buffoonish maneuver.

What I do know, for sure, being a business guy, what this election has done is permit me to see the problem to be solved. That is what a business leader dreams of.

The worst problem is the one you cannot see.

We can now see this one – identity (real or ascribed). Trump is not the leader to solve it … yea … he may make some decisions that will help business (most likely at the expense of morals), but he has no clue on how to solve the dividing thoughts of America and Americans. His role in this tragic comedy was to give voice to it.

It is now up to others to see it and solve it.

I end as I opened … when one participates in making the future happen, even a small part of the future that is when one who was a shadow can come to life. But for that, one has to drink blood, including one’s own.”

Participate in the future.

Remember.

That I was yesterday, this I am today and what I will be tomorrow is up to me.

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

“Thoroughly unprepared, we take the step into the afternoon of life. Worse still, we take this step with the false presupposition that our truths and our ideals will serve us as hitherto.  But we cannot live the afternoon of life according to the program of life’s morning, for what was great in the morning will be little at evening and what in the morning was true, at evening will have become a lie.”

—

Carl Gustav Jung

=====

“If the world were merely seductive, that would be easy.

If it were merely challenging, that would be no problem.

But I arise in the morning torn between a desire to improve the world and a desire to enjoy the world.

This makes it hard to plan the day.”

–

e.b. white

=====

“I’ve always liked the time before dawn because there’s no one around to remind me who I’m supposed to be so it’s easier to remember who I am.”

―

Brian Andreas

=======

Plans.

Plans and planning are tricky things.

I tend to believe I could write a Life version of this and a Business version of this.

Today is Life.

I have written about ‘hard to plan a day’ before, this time I write more about scrapping plans and how difficult we make it to do so rather than discussing actually deciding what plan to have.

Let me begin with intentions.

We wake up.

We decide to head off to change, or impact, the world in any way we choose to. Yes, we may not ‘define’ our decision as impacting — it may simply be under the guise of ‘good shit to do today’, and because of this it also means, unfortunately, we do have a tendency to think of daily plans as ‘doing tangible things’ rather than possibly judging our plan completion under some heading like ‘teaching someone how to do things with grace & dignity & compassion.” I will note, by the way, that sounds like a frickin’ good plan.

Regardless. Let me approach scrapping plans in a curious way.

Curiosity is one of the three things I tell young people is the secret to success <the other two are resiliency and character>. I tell young people this because most older people just don’t seem to have time, or make the time, to be actively curious. Most older people, having inserted themselves into the daily grind and the ‘conserving institutions’ of which we call everyday Life, are less interested in curiosity and more interested in stability.

====

“Society, community , family are all conserving institutions.

They try to maintain stability, and to prevent, or at least slow down change. But organizations are organized with the intent to destabilize.

Because its function is to put knowledge to work – on tools, processes and products; on work; on knowledge itself – it must be organized for constant change.”

Peter Drucker

====

I say all of that because it means ‘improving the world’ often translates into swimming against the natural tide of ‘conserving institutions.’ I would be remiss if I did not point out swimming against that tide is not easy. And therefore makes it even tougher to scrap the plans for the day.

That said. Not scrapping plans for the day has a bigger repercussion to an individual.

I think the ripple effect for most of us is that we find ourselves waking up each day thinking ‘wow … I would love to improve the world somehow today’ <either consciously or subconsciously> and yet we end the day seemingly not even having nudged Life in a positive <improving> direction. In a weird, and unhealthy way, we have failed. Frankly, this struggle increases a feeling of negativity which can easily consume your life if you are not careful.

Between society encouraging things that don’t feel right for you, a ‘conserving’ environment, unhappy friends, media generating anxiety rating point by rating point by convincing us the world is going to end or intrusive trolls on social media, it can seem overwhelming negative as you view all of this versus what you felt when you first woke up in the morning.

Maybe that is why I love, and included, the Andreas quote: we wake up in the morning knowing ‘who I am’ without anyone trying to tell us otherwise. ‘

It is an odd, uncomfortable, struggle we face in scrapping plans.

In our heart of hearts I believe most people want to help others and make things better in their lives <and others>, but it is difficult to make a priority.

Especially if we even have inkling that we have some desire to enjoy the world that day.

Enjoyment, these days, can be found less in curiosity and exploring curiosity and more in stability and ‘things went smoothly <as planned>.’

Just like E.B. White suggests, we are not only torn each day by enjoyment and improvement, but as Drucker points out, layered on top of our own dilemma the world around us is conspiring to suppress any improvements or changes we may decide to try and apply that day.

It is a constant battle of ‘us versus them’ on a variety of levels.

Us versus society.

And.

Uhm.

Us versus others.

“…But I arise in the morning torn between a desire to improve the world and a desire to enjoy the world. This makes it hard to plan the day.”

Huh?

What if the one day I choose to enjoy the world and someone needs me <which forces me to scrap my enjoyment plan>?

What if I spend the day helping someone who can never really be helped and I miss out on some personal enjoyment?

Thinking about scrapping plans for the day makes you start thinking about is it better if one just stopped caring for others — I don’t mean entirely just becomes secondary — and how would this effect Life <your own as well as others>.

By the way this ends up being more about ‘unintended consequences’ or ‘indirect influence’ on Life.

This may begin sounding selfish, but it is not.

It relates to an important nuance — serving others to benefit someone else or serving myself to benefit others?

 Does my plan for each day need to be a question of should I help myself or help others?

I think I have an odd perspective on this and it may sound selfish but hear me out.

I tend to believe if you focus on waking up and improving the world by helping others you are focused on the wrong thing. I would suggest if you focus on improving yourself and being better every day, being the best you can be as PART of the world, you will inevitably improve the world and inevitably help others. I know the difficulty in this approach is that you can lose out on the obvious ‘cause & effect’ feedback loop which helps feed our belief in ourselves and fights everyday negativity in that we have tangible proof we did something positive.

It takes some courage to approach it the way I suggest. And it takes a lot of steadfast resilience in the face of a ‘prove you are doing something meaningful’ world.

Here is another thing in my favor with this thought.

All of us pretty much understand that no matter what plans you make, something unexpected is bound to happen — especially if one of your plans to enjoy the day and improve the world is a commitment to curiosity <which implies plans will be scrapped at some point any way>.

The unexpected portion implies plans are relatively useless and, maybe more importantly, scrapping plans is almost standard.

And following that thought it also implies it almost doesn’t matter what you actually do <as in measured tangible output and checks against ‘things done today’> as long as you have created some positive change, some improvement, around you.

————–

“It doesn’t matter what you do,” he said, “so long as you change something from the way it was before you touched it into something that’s like you after you take your hands away.”

Ray Bradbury

————-

Look. Life isn’t easy. Planning isn’t easy.

We all know this.

And my thought on approaching Life every day is tough because its approach accepts that things may not get better by tomorrow, maybe not even next week, but at some point <in the future>. And while I don’t really embrace the whole ‘live in the now’ psychology I do suggest that really the only plan you shouldn’t scrap each day is improving yourself and doing the best you can every single day – kind of like “the now improvement plan”.

It is like improving the pebble being dropped into each day’s Life.

Anyway. Despite all the bullshit in this world the one thing you can control is your own self-improvement. The one thing you can actually DO every day is remain curious and pursue curiosity.

You have to keep that in mind because while your plans are your plans you need to beware that someone will always have tools to destroy them.

————

“Even if you have built your walls higher than the sky, someone will have the tools to destroy them. “

via nothing-to-regreet

————

Lastly.

The plans you like, feel comfortable with, and inevitably start putting in place more often. Let’s call this your personal ‘conserving institution’ for the sake of continuity in this post. The point here is what you feel comfortable knowing & doing. As you get older you will find a desire to do what you like doing and think what you feel comfortable thinking — more & more often.

As a result, you don’t see what I see <or someone else sees>. You see what you like. So you end up seeing information that supports your point of view and your plans become less based on pursing curiosity, but instead on stability & predictability <based on what you already know>.

You get stuck. Stuck knowing what you already know. Stuck making plans you have made before.

Curiosity is a deliberate decision and action <I always get a little vocal when someone says ‘I am naturally curious’ because I tend to believe it is more a decision and not some innate characteristic>. To improve yourself <and hopefully improve the world around you> you have break the existing routine of doing what you do and thinking what you think.

You have to force yourself to not only get a different perspective, but actually try and understand that perspective.

Even if you love your job you need to force yourself to learn new skills that increase your value to others <in business & work>.

You have to force yourself to look for something you would typically never read.

Inevitably you just have to learn to scrap the plan for the day if it means becoming better and I mean proactively, force yourself, scrap the plan rather than have the plan scrapped for you.

So go ahead, scrap the plan for the day.

I believe either you do it or Life will do it.

And maybe that is the biggest point.

Control your destiny or have Life dictate it. That is your choice when it comes to plans and your day<s>.

——

“It’s extremely exciting to know that planets with potentially Earth-like conditions are out there, but learning what they actually are like will require a great deal of fortitude, creativity and hard work.”

=

Gregory Laughlin of the University of California, Santa Cruz

—————-

“Every great advance in science has issued from a new audacity of imagination.”

=

John Dewey

———————

So. Several years ago I saw “Another Earth may be 500 light years away.”

No way.

Ok.

How awesome is that? <answer: awesome>

Then.

And I immediately thought: “inevitably we will show a failure of imagination.”

What do I mean ? Well. I should be excited but instead I am wary of how ‘we the people’ will move forward. In fact I envision no moving forward, no ‘trying to do what it takes to get there’ and no imagination to overcome the cries of ‘why waste money on something like this!”

Anyway. Let me get the ‘another earth’ detail out of the way first.

===

USAToday:

Some 500 light-years away, a little planet basks comfortably in the heat of its sun. It’s probably rocky – as the Earth is – and it’s probably just the right temperature to boast liquid water. In other words, it’s about as close to Earth as any planet we know of.

Unveiled at a recent meeting of the American Astronomical Society, the planet Kepler-438b may be the Earth twin that researchers have long sought. Other planets have made claims to that title, but Kepler-438b is more similar to Earth in both size and in the amount of energy it receives from its star than a celebrated runner-up, several scientists said.

That runner-up, planet Kepler-186f, might be called “a cousin of Earth,” the University of Puerto Rico’s Abel Mendez, keeper of a database of planets outside our solar system, said via email. But 438b and another recently discovered planet are “brother and sister-in-law. We are getting closer.”

Kepler-438b and compatriot planet Kepler-442 b “are the best candidates we have so far for Earth analogues,” said astronomer Willy Torres of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, a co-author of a paper in The Astrophysical Journal describing the new planets. Both were found with the help of NASA’s Kepler spacecraft, which launched into space in 2009.

Kepler 438-b is only 12 percent bigger in diameter than Earth, unlike the large number of “super-Earths” scientists have turned up outside our solar system. It has a 70 percent chance of being rocky, which scientists regard as a requirement for supporting life. And its surface receives roughly 40 percent more energy from its small star than Earth’s surface receives from the sun.

Kepler-438b “could be a perfect twin of Earth. We just don’t know, because we can’t pin down the measurements,” Torres said.

Sadly, Kepler-438b may represent something of an astronomical dead end. It is so far away, and its star so dim, that finding out whether it bears life or even an atmosphere is a daunting challenge, if not impossible.

“Discoveries of worlds like Kepler-438b are simultaneously satisfying and tantalizing,” planet-hunter Gregory Laughlin of the University of California, Santa Cruz, said via email. “It’s extremely exciting to know that planets with potentially Earth-like conditions are out there, but learning what they actually are like will require a great deal of fortitude, creativity and hard work.”

Unlike previously discovered planets outside the solar system, these candidates orbit stars much like our own sun.

“These candidates represent the closest analogues to the Earth-sun system to date,” said Mullally, “and this is what Kepler has been looking for.”

These new Earth-sized candidate planets in the water-friendly zone of their stars “are super-exciting,” said Lehigh University astronomer Joshua Pepper.

====

Ok <part 1>.

This is awesome.

I don’t care if it is 500 miles or 500 light years, it is a journey we should seek to take. It is a ‘task’ of which we should partake.

It is a task with an objective, but not the means < today> to attain the objective.

This is where we, the people, typically excel. When we are told it is not possible.

Ok <part 2>.

Now my concerns.

All this ‘another earth’ seems slightly impossible doesn’t it?

Well. Only with the failure of imagination.

The key thought in the words I wrote then:

===

We seem to have become the generation of measurement rather than the generation of imagination.

===

ROI, measurement, practical rewards & output, that is what we ‘do’ these days. This is how we conduct business and … well … lives.

We seem to have forgotten the value of unsought discovery. We seem to have culturally turned our back on imagination and the power of imagination. We seem to not want to risk any money or time without the certainty of “direct return” <that certainty is impossible>.

What if we were to send a ship with dozens of people and create a new civilization?

What if we could start a world from scratch?

Shit.

What if we found another civilization already residing on this ‘other Earth’?

Well. I am afraid we will never even get out of our solar system let alone explore the universe other than telescopes and unmanned probes.

It is because of a lack of imagination that we don’t see that actually exploring the universe would be the greatest journey of all for us as a species. In fact. The comments under that one USAToday article years ago unequivocally reflect a majority of “so what.” Or “why waste our time.”

===

… it simply makes no difference either way.

500 light years is far beyond our practical reach so long as the speed of light is an absolute limit.

While it’s interesting to fantasize about the possibilities in the future the fact is that it is very possible that we will never be able to bridge the incredible vastness of space to other potentially habitable planets.

===

Well. My main answer to this negative view of imagination <it’s not failure … simply the inability to envision ‘what could be’:

————–

“Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality.”

Jules de Gaultier

——————–

Look.

I want to be careful here because I do not want to diminish the individual challenges many people have with regard to paying everyday bills and the day to day pressures of enduring a recession.

But we, as a society as a whole, need to think long term.

What makes civilization great is how we forge through crap like unemployment and recession and day-to-day challenges and get to ‘hope’ and imagination and innovation and find out what is beyond the next horizon.

I would also point out that the reaching for the horizon tends to solve unemployment and recession and the day-to-day hardships thru innovations and overall betterment of Life. I can unhesitatingly say that if America decided to ‘do’ this project, assume responsibility for reaching another Earth … we will succeed. Not by working harder than anyone else, but because we permit hope and imagination to prosper.

Ok. Maybe I am crazy.

But.

If I am, let me be content in my craziness.

——-

“Here’s to the crazy ones.

The rebels. The troublemakers. The ones who see things differently. While some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.”

Short version of an Apple Computer Ad

————-

I am no genius by any stretch of the imagination.

But.

I can recognize the value of imagination.

I can recognize the value of discovery.

I can recognize the value of seeking what is beyond the horizon.

—————–

“Imagination has brought mankind through the dark ages to its present state of civilization.

Imagination led Columbus to discover America. Imagination led Franklin to discover electricity. Imagination has given us the steam engine, the telephone, the talking-machine, and the automobile, for these things had to be dreamed of before they became realities.

So I believe that dreams–daydreams, you know, with your eyes wide open and your brain machinery whizzing–are likely to lead to the betterment of the world.

The imaginative child will become the imaginative man or woman most apt to invent, and therefore to foster, civilization.”

L. Frank Baum

—————————

Imagination fosters civilization.

Imagination fosters all that ‘could be.’

The search for the way to reach ‘another Earth’ is one big prosperous innovation initiative – assuming someone has the kahones to do it.

This could be the rebirth of NASA and science.

Shit.

This is the rebirth of imagination if we choose to make it so.