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

“You can always find an excuse to not stand up for your principles.

But if you don’t risk anything, it doesn’t matter as much.”

Jeff Flake

=========

“Laws and principles are not for the times when there is no temptation: they are for such moments as this, when body and soul rise in mutiny against their rigour … If at my convenience I might break them, what would be their worth?”

Charlotte Brontë

=====

“Great ambition is the passion of a great character. Those endowed with it may perform very good or very bad acts. All depends on the principals which direct them.”

 Napoleon Bonaparte

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

Well. While I am not so sure Life really offers us nonstop, limitless opportunities to move forward and make progress toward things we want or like <albeit it does offer us a lot> … what it does do is offer us a relentlessly tantalizing smorgasbord of opportunities to take the easy way out, appealing short cuts and opportunities to circumvent rules & regulations <while no one is looking>.

My point is that Life pretty much says “there is always an easier way and choice if you are willing to set aside your principles just this one time.”

And Life relentlessly whispers this in your ear … moment … after … moment. Relentlessly.

I mention this to everyone because if Life really does this moment after moment <and it really does>, you would be tempted to find an excuse to not stand up for your principles on occasion.

Ah.

“On occasion.”

That sounds so … well … harmless. It was back in September 2010 I wrote “slippery slopes & “just once” where I said this:

It is incredibly easy to compromise … in business and in life.

“Just this once” you say to yourself when you are tired. Whatever the decision or action we are discussing, to you, in the moment … it is mentally “an exception”. And before you know it <after some “just this onces“> you have edged on to that slippery slope.

I think the most interesting thing to think about is this whole idea of principles and slippery slopes. It is interesting because most people think of principles a steadfast, unshakeable and solid. We never think of them as slippery.  And, yet, seemingly harmless momentary exceptions are actually extremely harmful moments in which each exception makes the next exception even easier to do.

In other words. You end up finding an easy excuse to not stand up for your principles.

Part of the problem is that the whole concept of principles has become an incredibly twisted concept in today’s world. In fact, “principles”, in today’s world, can often get placed in that heinous slot with ‘political correctness.’ What I mean by that is the meaning of the word, and phrase, has been subverted into a negative space from its intended space which is, and should be, a positive one.

It seems odd but principles and principled actions are a tricky topic.

Tricky in that while a principles ‘are statements denoting fact or generality which are universally or widely considered to be true and fundamental’ they, in fact, have a great range of meaning. While ‘principles’ most often refers to the elementary, or fundamental, basic proposition of some system or of conduct, it can also be tied to some specific designation, i.e., religion, government, business, education, etc. as well as some specific values <of which could be shared or not shared>.

It would be much nicer if we actually referred to ‘principled behavior’ as an axiom. While axiom is a derivative of ‘principle’ it is more tightly tied to ‘one agreed upon as the basis of truth … a truth so self evident as to be indisputable’.  Principles, in theory, are an axiom unfortunately, in practice; they are more a theorem <a proposition>. I offer this philosophical mumbo jumbo to make the point that principles is a trickier topic an idea than one would think.

I do believe the internet has made this topic trickier in that civil discourse has devolved to such a state that if you were to offer your ‘principles’ to an audience there will inevitably be a negative nasty, and often cruel, backlash suggesting that what you would consider principles are … well … bad.

Principles fall into the horrible trap of “small minds discuss people; average minds discuss events; great minds discuss ideas.” And, yeah, the deterioration of discourse in general aids Life in whispering in your ear that maybe, just maybe, just this once you should find an excuse to not stand up for your principles. This often happens in a twisted way in which we focus labels of “evil thinking” toward  people who do not think like us, or have similar principles, which then seems to provide an open license to anyone who wants to vent  with extreme behavior.

I make that point because … well … all of this makes the moments you really do find an excuse to not stand up for your principles extremely important.  They are important because your principles are your means of integrating what you know, knowledge, and what you feel <moral> which enables you to assess value of individual decisions and choices. In other words, the value assessment provides the signpost for doing what is right or doing what is wrong.

In other words … your principles are applied to Life to organize and control the path of your Life <and as a larger sense … of society>.

In other words … principles affect all systems of law in effect today and, in effect, provide us with the signposts for guidance even above the law.

In other words … principles permit you to focus on what is in my best interest without doing so at the expense of the best interest of society as a whole.

Yeah.

All that sounds good.

But if you have some strong principles you will inevitably worry that if you live by your principles … doing what you believe is right and the right thing to do … in what you perceive is a ‘dog eat dog’ world … you will get chewed up.

You worry that doing the right thing and having principles will actually hinder them in their journey toward their ambition.

Think about what I just wrote.

I suggest you do so because we older folk spend a shitload of time ranting about the altruism focus of the young … that they want to ‘do good’ but don’t want to ‘do work.’

We are missing the point.

In fact, we may be missing something we should be paying attention to.

Most of these young people simply don’t want to compromise their principles. They are not being dreamers nor are they being Pollyannaish with a perspective to the world, in fact they are possibly seeing the world better than we old folk are.

They want to work.

They want to run businesses.

They want to be productive and be part of some company where they can be part of a them doing and making something.

They just don’t want to compromise their principles.

I use the young to make an example but everyone walks this line.

The line?

Your good gets tugged toward the side of bad.

And, yes, the bad gets tugged toward the side of good.

Anyway.

This was a semi-sad post for me to write.

Sad in that it seems like we have forgotten the power of principles … and I sometimes think we believe the system is driving our behavior, and our selective stance with regard to our principles in the moment,  and success.

Sad in that I think we forget the system shouldn’t dictate our use of principles, nor should Life, but rather it is the people who build and make up the system and, therefore, they dictate the definition of principled behavior.

Sad in that I think sometimes we older folk appear to cynically view the system as ‘it is what it is … deal with it … do what you need to do … or you will lose.’

Sad in the younger people view the system as ‘it is what it is … I don’t like it … I will not compromise’ … and they are electing to try and avoid it … and many of us older folk are ignoring them as naïve.

Sad in that … well … how is any of this I just noted, in any way, a successful formula for the future?

Look.

Life makes dealing with your principles a constant struggle. The real point is that you can fulfill your ambition & maintain your principles, you just have to decide to not find an excuse to not stand up for your principles.

To be clear … we can all find an excuse to not stand up for our principles.

To be clear … we can actually stand up for our principles and still sometimes find we are standing up for the wrong things and in the wrong way.

To be clear … this will not be a one-time choice. It will be an ongoing calculation throughout your entire Life, a decision that must be revisited repeatedly, week after week, moment after moment as new decisions unfold.

I say that because in business, even if you gaze into the ‘principle crystal ball’, it is never a one time choice nor is it an unchanging choice. Business is ever changing and the leaders of a business are constantly being challenged and responding in an ever changing way in which your principles are tested in a variety of sometimes seemingly innocuous ways.

Business has a nasty habit of challenging a leader’s character almost more than it does his/her skills.

Business has a nasty habit of challenging your own character almost more than it does your skills.

Therefore, principles and principled behavior needs to constantly be assessed … and judged. In other words. Events demand to be met head on.

In the end, all I can do is leave you with one thought — I am not sure there is a worse feeling than looking back and wishing you had been more principled. Period.

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

“Do you admire men of principle?

That would depend, I suppose, upon what set of principles you’re speaking of.”

Well.

Don’t you find that principles inject an almost moribund inflexibility in the people who subscribe to them?”

The Hollow Men

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

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

“You know the Greeks didn’t write obituaries, they only asked one question after a man died, ‘Did he have passion?’”

movie quote from Serendipity

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

One morning I woke up thinking that if I ever came across my own obituary I, well, wouldn’t bother with it. it’s a sobering thought. the majority of my career, and life, I have helped people make money who didn’t actually need more money, found people who needed me who actually didn’t really need anybody like me and the best things I did well were things that those same people could pay someone else to do.

Well. And then I thought about the movie “Serendipity”. Wow. That was a transition, huh?

** note: The closing scene of Serendipity probably ranks in my top 5 “best use of music in a movie scene” rankings. It is absolutely the perfect use of Nick Drake’s Northern Sky.

My opening quote is actually when John Cusack’s buddy at the end of the movie says “The Greeks didn’t write obituaries. They only asked one question after a man died: Did he have passion?”

I loved it.

But me, being me, had to Google whether Greeks truly did write obituaries or not (because I found that thought to be fascinating and I wanted to be sure it want just some movie writer writing it).

Well.

It turns out that they did and didn’t. This is the philosophy of Aristippus of Cyrene (c. 435-356 B.C.) and

his grandson who were founders of the Cyrenaics.  They were Greeks. But their philosophy didn’t represent all Greeks. So it was Greek but not all Greeks.

Regardless.

Back to obituaries and passion and, frankly, what if passion is missing in our life and what does that mean if anything meaningful at all.

In my mind passion rarely spontaneously ignites, it develops slowly and purposefully (despite what writers & poets and whomever want you to believe). It is not borne from nothing but rather from something. Because of that I believe you feel it most when you take time to consider the things in life (actions) that have meaning to you.  Oh. I also believe that passion does not seek you out rather you discover passion thru a pursuit of things that are interesting to you.

Maybe the Greeks were on to something when they discussed respecting the cultivation of personal passion as important to living life to its fullest.

I guess this mean that accomplishment is empty if you reach a goal on technical skills alone.

Think about that.

And let’s think about this … and I will use my passion of teaching the next generation as an example.

If education is taught by rote, there is no passion only technical skill. So even if they “succeed”, where succeed is measured by making some grade, they have not accomplished anything because they have no passion.

Oh my.

That summarizes a lot of my thinking on education and the existing education system.

Ok.

But.

Back to obituaries.

And self-retrospection again as an example.

So if I were to die today would I be content with what my obituary will read?

I’m not sure that I can say yes at this moment. Oops. I lied. No.  I wouldn’t be.

What’s missing?

I guess that’s the question that I’m going to have to answer at some point.

I imagine the answer resides somewhere in-between some unidentified-to-date issue in my past (forgiveness for what I may have done) or if the answer lies in the future (what I have yet to achieve).

And, yes, they are two edges of the same sword.

All I know for sure is that my obituary would be incomplete as of today.

But the value in thinking about it a bit now is once we all measure the words of our “today” obituary we begin to assess where do we go from here.

Sometimes we do things we can’t take back. And that’s that. What you have done is who you are (today).

But what you have done is not who you will be.

In my case it has been nearly 3,150 weeks. Uhm. And a traditional life is around 400 weeks. Whew. I better get going if I want to complete my obituary .

My point there, beyond the fact we don’t really have a shitload of time in a typical lifetime, is an obituary is not about what you can undo from what is done and moving on. Why? You don’t undo.

That, my friends, is a big thought if you are thinking in obituary terms.

Because a lot of people want to go back and fix or ‘undo.’

Once again.

You can’t.

That said. Obituaries are written when they are written and that means they are written with “what is” as the case and point.

My point? Unburden yourself from the past.

The good, the bad, the indifferent … none matter.

Write your obituary from today on.

Yeah.

The past cannot be changed, forgotten, edited, or erased. The truth is you can only accept it. Accept it and get to building what you want.

Here is a thought.

Maybe everyone should write your obituary after you read this post.

You may not like what you read.

You may only like parts of what you read.

Who cares?

You are alive.

You still have time to do something else that can get written.

So. Write the obituary you want beginning today.

=======

“We cling to our fairy tales until the price for believing in them becomes too high.”

Ransom Riggs

====

“The best way to expose our ignorance is to hold on to biased ideas and opinions, because we fear giving the upper hand to the other side.”

Charles F. Glassman

====

Business is a tricky combination of adapting and consistency.

Suffice it to say discerning what to keep and build some consistency, and what to change or adapt, is, well, the key to creating a successful business.

Letting go of shit is difficult. We all know that.

But. Knowing when to hold on to something is just as difficult.

Simplistically:

<1> many organizations are burdened with older employees who tend to hold on based on their experience, and

<2> many organizations are burdened with younger employees who tend to let go of existing ideas and opinions based on their lack of experience.

Both sides are stubborn, fearing to give the other the upper hand.

And that is where business really needs to get its shit together. This whole ‘upper hand’ thing.

Because success isn’t about compromise it is more often about good ideas winning no matter where and when and who they come from.

When someone or a generation feels like they have the power, or run the risk of losing power, they do stupid things. Obviously, the business pays the price, not the person doing the stupid things. That is why adapting and selecting what to be consistent about should be about anything but power. It should be about creating a culture & organization in which old & new is debated and ‘the good of the organization & business’ decides what to hold on to and what to let go of.

Far too often the power structure in a business <and this can be one individual wielding an inordinate amount of power or an age group/cohort fighting for their space> holds the ‘fairy tale’ success formula, uhm, until the price for believing them becomes too high.

Sigh.

Unfortunately that moment is often too late to ‘fix’ what has gone wrong.

Regardless. A business’ success, and flaws, is typically driven by a couple attitudinal things  <a> a general feeling that you could be doing better and <b> the virtue of the participants.

Doing better.

There is gobs of pressure put on a business both internally and externally. Internally <be successful or be fired> and externally <the market is brutal on any business which does not show growth>. Even if the business has been steadily improving someone will be hammering away on either how terrible things are or how much better it can, and should, be.

Virtue of participants.

A business, in order to function efficiently and effectively, is dependent upon the virtue of the participants. A lack of virtue engenders wasteful transactions, wasteful actions and breeds an overall monitoring cost which can paralyze an organization from any movement or adaptation.

Both of those things I just shared are power. They both have the power to do good, and bad, for a business. What I mean is that the price for believing, disproportionately, in doing better is virtue-driven – that can make the price too high to meet simple ‘doing better’ objectives.

Power, ultimately, resides in, and will always, identifying what should remain consistent and when & where to adapt. All of that is organizationally driven and not individually driven. And yet … it is the individual who must assess all actions & behavior with the intent to always seek when ‘the price in believing something becomes too high.’

In the end I would simply note that the strongest most powerful thing you can do for a business is to understand that doing better with virtue can work.

This is not a fairy tale.

Just know there are no shortcuts and it isn’t easy — you have to work for it.

You have to find ways <just having it as objective will not work>. You have to somehow do something, sometimes anything on occasion, all the while keeping your head on straight and go do something that saves … well … the business <which is kind of like saving the world>.

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

“No enterprise can exist for itself alone.

It ministers to some great need, it performs some great service, not for itself, but for others…or failing therein, it ceases to be profitable and ceases to exist.”

Calvin Coolidge

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

“Let’s be honest. There’s not a business anywhere that is without problems. Business is complicated and imperfect. Every business everywhere is staffed with imperfect human beings and exists by providing a product or service to other imperfect human beings.”

Bob Parsons

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

Originally posted in 2017

Let me take a minute and discuss “fraternite” in business.

Just a reminder but “fraternite” is one of the  French values of Liberté, Fraternité and Egalité (“liberty, equality, fraternity/brotherhood” the national motto of France).

Anyway. Business. Inevitably a great organization exhibits both efficient AND effective progress. What typically creates that combination is part discipline, part structure (systems), part leadership, all glued together by “fraternité”. That ‘glue’ is most often discussed in the American business world as ‘a vision’ or maybe ‘a purpose’ or even ‘culture.’ We do so because we Americans hate any kind of lack of specificity. But the truth is that the most common bond of a great organization is a more nebulous concept, i.e., one of “fraternité”.

Or.

“Any man aspires to liberty, to equality, but he cannot achieve it without the assistance of other men, without fraternity.”

Napoleon

Oddly enough, while this sounds like relatively common sense, I kind of feel like business itself needs a revolution to overturn the current thinking to accommodate what should be common sense.

What do I mean? Current business is kind of in a wacky spot. It talks a lot about vision and purpose and culture as if they are “things” — like maybe a lighthouse anyone can see as they bob around the chaotic sea of business life to find a way home. By the way, I would argue that is a very individualistic thought — “I can find my way home” type thought – and not really a team thought <but that could quite easily be debated>.

Regardless. Fraternity is more like “everyone not only knowing what they need to do to keep the ship afloat but actually pitching in whether needed or not because they love the ship itself.” That may sound like some wacky nuance, but I have to warn people that revolutions can kind of gain some momentum off of some fairly wacky things on occasion. By the way, this thought is a more nebulous “I feel this way” aspect of organizational culture and, as noted many times, if it cannot be measured or indexed or scored.

** note: most older leaders into today’s business just don’t like that kind of shit – things they cannot measure or score.

Anyway. Not to beat this metaphor to death, but I do believe we need a semi-revolution in the way business organizations are created and run and managed. I think we may need that revolution because “fraternité” as a core principle just ain’t the way business is run today. And, yes, it should be viewed as a “core” principle because … uhm … when discipline falls apart, when structure falls apart, when leadership falls apart what keeps you on the battlefield and fighting is … yeah … “fraternité.” Yeah, yeah, yeah. A lot of people talk about a “community” or “company team” or some other nice sounding platitude which sounds a lot like “fraternité”, but its mostly lip service. Its lip service because fraternité is a ‘collective’ thought and most businesses reward and incentivize individuals.

Anyway. On a bigger organizational level I worry about how an idea like this is getting suffocated by generational issues <younger people desire something and older people think they know the best> and maybe an outcome-is-the-only-thing-that-matters worldview versus a belief business should incorporate altruistic aspects. Both of those conflicts are HUGE issues. I have written about in 1200+ word thought pieces on both of these but, on the former, the best piece I can share is from Corporate Rebels “Cut The Crap: The Made-Up Nonsense About Generations At Work” which states all people want meaning at work (regardless of age or generational label).

I actually believe we need some revolutionary thinking on the latter. To me we have a bunch of people who look at business and turn away to non-profit because … well … I fear that they only believe they can change the world through more altruistic pursuits and not traditional business. And, yes, they are important and good pursuits but, from a larger perspective, business drives the world. Business makes shit that makes lives easier and healthier and impacts the home and life in ways that it is difficult to imagine let alone outline in a few words <and the business office/working groups creates behavioral cues which ripple out into culture>.

Somehow … someway … we need to insert the ‘believers of principles and principled behavior’ into the business world with all of their ambition and hope and remind them, empower them and enable them that they can change the world.

That they can make the world a better place. They can make society and people and lives better. And they can do it in and through business, not just altruistic career opportunities. If we do that, and do that well, I tend to believe we will build more organizations driven at its core by a sense of “fraternité” rather than a bunch of documents setting out some guiding or shared values, vision and purpose which everyone says “okay … let’s do that.”

What I do know is that … well … read the following quote:

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

“I have found no greater satisfaction than achieving success through honest dealing and strict adherence to the view that, for you to gain, those you deal with should gain as well.”

Alan Greenspan

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

I do believe we need to be drawing some lines in business. And I don’t mean company handbook type lines or even some well-crafted ‘lines’ in “how we conduct our business” or “who we are” but maybe they are more lines with regard to some unwritten principles.

I say that because when you can gather a group of people together who share a strong set of principles they will walk straight into a hail of bullets to not only survive, but to get good shit done.

==========

“Morality, like art, means drawing a line someplace.

Oscar Wilde

===========

Now. Business absolutely makes dealing with your principles a constant struggle. It can kind of suffocate your principles in between the pragmatic aspects of getting shit done <discipline & structure> and how that shit is designed to meet specific objectives/results and the faux burden of some vision or grander purpose which “you know is important to us therefore it should be important to you”, i.e., extrinsic importance not intrinsic importance. Frankly, when suffocated by these bookends you don’t have a lot of elbow room for any type of true, intangible, unsolicited camaraderie.

The fraternité is more forced than natural. Obviously, when it is not natural it is not as strong.

In the end.

Fraternité in business. I believe we have forgotten this. And while I do believe many of us have forgotten how to draw lines with regard to our principles I tend to believe business, in general, has simply decided to just draw lines <in a box in fact> and say “there you go”, i.e., there are your principles and rules for camaraderie.

That is kind of whack.

Look. I can honestly tell you that being a senior leader in a business and organization you like <you do not have to love> may be one of the greatest experiences anyone can ever have. What makes that experience truly great is when you are fortunate enough to foster something intangible, something that really cannot be measured, and something which doesn’t earn you some performance bonus at the end of the year … it is when you stumble upon the sense of fraternité.

I am sure some organizational guru will send me a link to “steps to build a fraternité organization” and … well … good for them. I tend to believe this is one of those intangible things that is created less by some “how to” guide or some formula and more by simple good intentions combined with some good discipline, construct and leadership. To steal another word from the motto, by creating a fraternité organization you inevitably create liberté for the organization to be the best version of what it can be.

This is what I thought about today and “liberty, equality, fraternity <brotherhood>”. With that I imagine I should end with where I began … no enterprise can exist for itself alone. That is the foundation for a fraternité organization. Ponder.

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

“When we first met … you asked me a question to which I gave a stupid answer, you asked me whether I wanted to live and I said “Yes.“

Actually, Miss Page, I want more, much more. I want to create, to make something big out of something little.”

Boris Lermontov

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

Ah.

Maybe I am cynical.

Maybe I am simply becoming a curmudgeon.

Maybe I am actually right on this topic.

I think pop psychology makes us lazy with regard to how we view life. We are encouraged to ‘be positive’ and ‘live life to its fullest’ and be happy we are alive. Pretty much nice sounding pabulum. And pretty much useless advice.

I am not suggesting we should all be pessimistic, but all the positive thinking shit establishes some fairly unrealistic expectations.

Which leads me to what you should expect.

It is also sometimes suggested that Life is big & full, therefore, living it fills up so much space and time that if you do just that, live it,  you should be satisfied because, what the hell, there isn’t a whole lot more room for anything else because it is so big & full just by living it. This seems to suggest that simply living life, and making it through life, is some achievement in and of itself. I will not argue that simply surviving can be a skill, but that’s kind of like at the bottom of the Maslow expectation in Life pyramid.

Well.

Maybe we shouldn’t look at Life, in itself, as something so big & full that there isn’t room for anything else.

Maybe Life is littler than we think. Little moments. Little experiences. Little people. Little lies. Little truths. Little color. Little things that make up what we call our current Life.

Maybe we should want more.

No. No maybe. We should want more … much more.

We should want to create. Create something. And I don’t mean make something, but rather create, fashion, something big out of something little.

This is probably the one place in our sometimes self indulgent world where I wish more of us actually weren’t comfortable with what we have … and wanted more.

Instead of settling we want more.

Instead of settling for what is we want more of what could be.

From our little space in the universe we shouldn’t settle for little but seek some big impact or contribution.

Oh. About “little.” The truth is most of Life is made up of little things. Therefore, if you don’t do anything else but live it, well, in the end i imagine you live a little life. That may sound harsh so let me soften it a bit. If you don’t do anything but live Life, the Life you live will not be as big as it could be <that’s kind of like optimizing its potential>. That said. I’m fairly sure no one wants to purposefully live a little Life so maybe we should desire to make something big out of something little.

Maybe we should embrace the thought we are all architects of our own lives.

Maybe we should purposefully seek to build something big.

Maybe the pursuit of “what could be” is Purpose in and of itself.

Maybe ‘much more’ isn’t things but rather doing things that make little big.

Maybe, just maybe, you should want more … much more.

===

“Sometimes one just gets tired of fleeing.

The world’s very small when you don’t have anywhere to go.”

Carlos Ruiz Zafon

———

Fujhi, poudes; escapa , non.

<flee, you may; escape, you cannot.>

——————

So. This is a business and personal Life thought about fleeing. Or. Running away from something.

Which leads me to flee, you may; escape, you cannot.

 Escapa , non

In today’s world fleeing anything, in life or business, is tough. While it may seem like a great big expansive world, the shit that we have a tendency to flee either has some special ray gun that shrinks the world or it is so much faster than we are that it can appear before us no matter where we flee.

That said.

First. Business.

There’s a lot of navel-gazing when it comes to business. I mention navel gazing because I often think navel gazing is simply a business version of fleeing. It often feels like we’re having too many conversations about things that don’t matter and not enough about things that do, in other words, fleeing the shit that matters.

I don’t really understand why because most businesses are a incredibly smart, resourceful, creative groups of people and they should be spending their precious attention, energy, and innovative idea skills solving meaningful problems.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t engage in thoughtful circumspect conversations about shit, but the shit we discuss should be the shit that matters.

It often feels like business people flee the stuff that matters only to run toward the shit that doesn’t.

I get frustrated because it often feels like we flee the hard stuff and use the easy stuff as an easy target.

I mostly get frustrated because even if a business organization does this … well … escapa , non.

You cannot flee. You cannot escape the stuff that matters.

Second. Personal.

Well. There are maybe three significant aspects of fleeing in a personal sense – fleeing someone, fleeing something and fleeing oneself.

Let’s begin with … fleeing someone

“We both wanted to know each other’s secrets, and we both wanted the other person to go first.

This is something that happens quite a bit, which is why you so often see children and adults staring at one another in nervous silence.”

Lemony Snicket

Someone always has to go first.

And someone always has to go.

There is always a graceful option when fleeing. It is just difficult to see … and do. Most of us stumble our way thru fleeing someone. We sometimes stare at the other hoping they go first. We maybe go without saying anything <and the other people have no clue if you have flown … or why>. We may simply go saying all the wrong things.

It happens quite a bit.

Suffice it to say you cannot flee someone in your life, you can only disengage.

If you try and flee, well, escapa, non. You never escape. You have simply delayed the inevitable.

Next … fleeing something … or ‘things’ <in today’s world>.

Whew. This is a tough one.

Raise your hand if you have a smartphone <about 90% of you between 12 and 54 just raised your hand>. Over 90% of us have some handheld technology which permits texting, calling or emailing on a whim. Huge changes in technology and in society in recent years have blurred many of the old, familiar, reassuring boundaries.

Uhm.

Without boundaries where does on flee?

Where does work stop and life begin?

Where does my time stop and your time begin?

In the past the boundaries were very clear. I imagine my point here is that there is an interesting clash between what we, almost all of us, innately desire – boundaries – and change. We desire one thing almost desperately and yet find ourselves fighting the opportunity to do it.

This maybe a case of ‘be careful what you wish for.’

But. What is winning is the desire for boundless freedom of doing. All demographics are embracing their nomad desires … the ability to live what has traditional been done in the physical home in what is now a boundary-less intangible walking around home.

The only boundaries are actually some aura shell around yourself. By the way, no one can see this boundary but yourself. This means you are screwed. You may think with this invisible force field around you that you may be able to flee the things swirling around you … sometimes by thinking it is as simple as ‘turning your smartphone off’ … uhm … escapa , non.

Things are better and faster and more resilient and, well, more <as in sheer quantity> than you. Fleeing simply means you will get smothered from behind. You may as well stand there and face ‘things’ and strengthen your own personal boundaries. You can never escape things but you certainly can deflect things if you stand there and see them coming.

Lastly … fleeing yourself

“People are running, running, but there is no place in the world to which they can flee to escape themselves.

Ultimately, each one must face himself. “

Paramahansa Yogananda

It almost seems like today’s world the self help people and brand marketing and the futuristic blowhards all encourage us to think there is something wrong with us. That we aren’t ‘enough’ or passionate or focused or … well … we are lacking in some form or fashion.

Add in the fact that today’s complex issues facing us have no clear right or wrong answers.

Some who feel a strong need for boundaries will look to the past for guidance and try to build strong solid boundaries. Others with a higher tolerance for ambiguity may develop a personal set of flexible boundaries.

The truth is Life has become a contentious blend of flexible and inflexible boundaries. Individuals and societies will try to organize all their own personal chaos with boundaries with some intent to keep out all the external chaos only to find a couple things:

a. Keeping any boundary in place is very very difficult because too much is changing too fast for boundaries to hold for long.

b. Building your own boundary means you have to face yourself … uhm … the same self that society & all the experts … is suggesting doesn’t have its shit together. More often than not we either struggle to know what type of boundary we should build or decide we need to flee our own boundary on occasion because it all becomes ‘too much’ inside what we built.

Escapa , non. Whether inside some finite space boundary or wandering aimlessly outside the boundary in some seemingly infinite space — fleeing yourself just doesn’t work.

Mostly because where you are, well, you are there.

We may not always like what we see when we look in the mirror, but I can guarantee one thing – external critics will ALWAYS find something they don’t like.

Fuck ‘em.

Don’t flee them, just ignore them. And don’t flee yourself just remember that perfection is mostly found in glorious imperfections. Yeah. Don’t flee your imperfections, they make you who you are.

Whew.

I used too many words.

Maybe I could have just said this instead of all the other crap I wrote, here is all I know about fleeing.

You cannot escape whatever you are fleeing.

Period.

No debate.

Doesn’t matter what it is or where you are.

Mainly because whatever you think you are fleeing doesn’t reside only in the place you are running from. Those things you elect to flee are the things that most often live in a variety of different places & spaces. In other words, the world is a very small place when you have no place to go.

Anyway. Sometimes … okay … most times … it is much better if you suck it up and stand there rather than flee. Even if it is painful, I actually think you feel better about yourself.

“Maybe you can afford to wait.

Maybe for you there’s a tomorrow.

Maybe for you there’s one thousand tomorrows, or three thousand, or ten, so much time you can bathe in it, roll around it, let it slide like coins through your fingers.

So much time you can waste it.

But for some of us there’s only today.

And the truth is, you never really know. “

Lauren Oliver

Most importantly.

Fleeing means not facing today, and … well … the truth is you never really know if today may be ‘it.’. Finis.

Lastly.

On the whole small world and fleeing thing. It used to be fairly black and white. The world was the world and escaping was escaping. You had clear boundaries here there and everywhere.

Now they are nowhere.

The world is both big and small.

Lots of room to wander and explore and run — just nowhere to flee.

So. Remember every time you think of fleeing … escapa, non.

=====

“If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up people together to collect wood and don’t assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea.”

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

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

“The problem today is not lack of proper resources, but lack of proper distribution.”

Mahatma Gandhi

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

We gussy up organizational discussions with teams, networks, communities, but, at the core of every business organization is “distribution” — distribution of people, resources, ideas, skills, talent, energy, time, etc.

Unfortunately, hierarchy isn’t particularly conducive to effective, let alone efficient, distribution of any of these things. Most organizations don’t ‘distribute’ these things, they allocate them. The organic distribution of anything is an anathema to a business.

That said.

Here’s what I’m thinking.

Can technology, specifically algorithms, instead of forcing team collaboration (or ‘network teams’) extract skills/talents so friction is decreased and potential (company and individual) be optimized?

First. Extracting is a derivative of cross functional.

Cross functional teams is not a new idea. Toffler called it “poly malleable” organizations in 1970.

The issue is the idea is excellent in concept, a bitch in practice. Business has become contortion artists in applying “collaboration” in organizations (kind of their answer to cross functional and malleable).

Personally, when individuals interact in groups, I do not believe long-term commitment is necessary to build a real team, therefore, extracting talents can be situational and be quite effective.

“Collaboration is a cultural construct, but also a coordinative one.”

Mike Walsh

However. Just as collaboration needs to be consciously coordinated, so would extracting talents & skills. My thought is rather than have some person (who may, or may not be, effective at assessing submerged, non obvious, skills & talents) coordinate, why not have algorithms monitor activity & behavior and pluck out submerged potential as needed?

Second. Technology as a force for positive ‘human’ progress.

The pace of technological progress is accelerating, bringing significant opportunities to create value providing opportunities to reinvent the way we live, work, and organize.

Far too often, when speaking of people, we speak of this acceleration in bad terms – loss of focus, distraction, non productivity – while, with organizations/business we tend to speak of it in glowing terms – faster revenue growth, improve profit margins & innovation.  There is no reason technology cannot accelerate people potential if not optimize an organization by having technology augment people.

Harnessing algorithmic capabilities, computing capacity and data should enable human competencies (beyond their obvious role) and a new generation of system level innovation & productivity.

Third. People are not wholes, but rather a sum of parts.

Sum of parts? Let’s call it ‘the potential within Fragmentary interests’. I was tempted to discuss this as “distribution revolution of interest and knowledge.” It’s a deeper dimension to Drucker’s knowledge worker in that each knowledge worker contains fragments of knowledge – some fragments bigger, and more well developed than others, but fragments. Therefore potential doesn’t reside in optimizing one skill or fragment of knowledge but rather optimizing the fragmented interests residing in each individual.

—–

“The key to individual parts coming together to create an emergent whole is coordination, and that means a sharing of information between parts in the system.”

Gideon Rosenblatt

—–

Now. interestingly the technology exists (in some form) and it called ‘Digital twin’.

Therefore we would be seeking to optimize our digital twin. I will note this thought may also be a derivative of ‘semantic web’ but I am focused on algorithms with this idea.

fourth. Meaningfulness distribution

I hesitate to suggest distributing meaningfulness (it sounds to productivity purposeful) but at the core of this thought is what I stated in Distribution Revolution  that all transactions are dependent upon distribution. And while it may sound harsh a business makes transactions with its employees – one of which is quite possibly “I will give you opportunities to optimize your potential & you will find meaningfulness in the process.”

Regardless. Transaction aside, is there a way to better enable meaning in traditional organizations – which tends to distance people from any meaning in work.

Meaning. No one defines meaning better than Alain de Botton (The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work): “meaning is simply ‘making someone or something better.’” it is all about contributing to helping in some way (in small, grande or venti dimension).

I would argue that when humans are at the center of the molecule of all business activity, all connections gain value (even with digital & work) and the person gains intrinsic self-value because, well, everything augments them & their potential. That is scaling potential & meaningfulness.

“Your business is only as strong as your least scalable component.”

Mike Walsh

(part 1). I say that because we often say powerful forces are changing the business world but we rarely speak about how the powerful forces of people within an organization can radically change the business itself. Because of connectedness the loci of productivity and dynamism resides in movements in people, information and idea within a company. This is like a value chain which evolves based on the context of the need which reshapes to amplify the potential & knowledge of the team. Using algorithms thru the entire organization focuses skills, talents and people based on the situation at hand. These forces may morph in some unexpected ways and combining ideas & skills to create even greater impacts than we expected. And while we may discuss ‘greater impact’ in terms of productivity & return, the largest impact will be found in meaningfulness.

Think about it this way – company value chains become more knowledge-intensive and reliant on multi-skill labor.

Look.

(part 2). I think we are all beginning to realize we are all contributing to the blurring of life and work. Realizing that distractions and attention isn’t what is around us about what is within us.

At the same time realizing that festina lente matters. Not suggesting this is easy and we will not get it right but the more we practice it, the more an algorithm does it, the better we will all get at it.

But do we quit at the first failure?

People are rediscovering they matter in a business system that has talked about how people matter, but has actually done everything it can to squeeze out natural untidiness and compel conformity under the guise of efficiency. Yeah. people have always grumbled about this but hierarchy has naturally sucked the life out of believing real change, and empowerment, can occur. Now. as a recent article just stated “hierarchy is just a shape.” In general, I agree. But it does ignore that organization, construct, in and of itself, encourages stasis. But what if algorithms stimulated activity from within and discouraged stasis? That is my question.

With the concept outlined, let me highlight would I would see as four potential positive consequences:

Consequence 1: individual potential

Individual potential is always a tricky thing. Many times it is trial & error in an environment in which ‘stepping out of your specific responsibility zone’ is rarely encouraged and often high risk. This is unfortunate because if a system existed in which secondary, tertiary and even quaternary talent could be not only utilized but even exercised to become stronger, all individual skills improve.

Introverts tend to be hesitant to offer and extroverts tend to offer on the wrong things.

If an algorithm could tap into the potential mines of talent that exited on an ad hoc basis then every individual’s potential gets tapped. If that happens their productivity (mental or output) gets maximized.

Consequence 2: individual meaning

Here is the weird thing. Even though I am speaking of algorithms I am also speaking of community. Introverts or extroverts. Wallflowers or the bombastic. Getting everyone engaged is tricky. Yet. Everyone wants to be part of a community and everyone finds happiness part of a tribe/community. It is the getting in and getting engaged which is a very individual type decision. Work is no different. In fact. I could argue that work is not defined by some milestone attained or some project completion but rather “community is about a series of small choices and everyday actions.” Within those small interactions will be found that larger individual meaning.

Look.

Everyone wants to contribute. Everyone wants to do something to benefit others (“what I do has value to others”). Everyone wants to do both using whatever (all) skills available. Simplistically, if a business can trigger individual contribution it will enhance individual meaning.

Consequence 3: organizational potential

Strip away culture, shareholder value or whatever metric you want to discuss, business is dependent upon maximizing its resources. Think about it from a health perspective. If employees show up every day (no sick days), healthy and happy (health & happiness or linked), you maximize productivity on 2 dimensions – time productivity and individual responsibility productivity. Therefore, if you expand productivity beyond an individual’s responsibility and seek to tap into additional skills/abilities beyond their own specific responsibility you have the opportunity to expand organizational productivity in another dimension. Its possibly a different version of collaborative productivity. This one is collaboration not of people but of talent/ability fragments (via people). Its coalescing type collaboration. If you look at ability as resources it is possible an algorithm maximizes all organizational resources.

Consequence 4: organizational hiring

Assume consequence 1 thru 3 is true. You would no longer hire off a specific role but rather with an eye toward what combination of primary, secondary, tertiary & quaternary skills the leaving person has subtracted or, conversely, gaps the organization needs to fill if a role opens up.

Hire not for an individual role but rather organizational contribution made up of multiple roles.

Conclusion.

Oddly, my greatest defense of using algorithms to enhance organization potential may be found in the objective, the desired outcome, rather than in its more dubious companion – the algorithm itself.

The outcome?

As Don Cornelius said, ‘It is always a pleasure to find something that matters.’

What if algorithms helped find out what matters to people (skills) and optimized them?

What if all people were optimized (or, simply more & better utilized)?

What if all people skills were activated in a business?

The answers are obvious. More productivity. More individual meaning. And, arguably, more happy people and business.

Here is what I know.

Creativity is always what gives business, & brands, traction in the marketplace and is what insures businesses progress. If a business can maximize its creativity, it will always progress. Progress, rather than growth, should always be the objective a business.

Notice that nowhere in that paragraph did I mention meaningfulness, productivity, technology or purpose. I didn’t have to because if algorithms can tap into submerged skills people, and the organization, will inevitably be more creative in thinking & in solutions – which equals progress. And, bottom line, any algorithm that can do that is worth its weight in gold.

===========

“Making a product is just an activity, making a profit on a product is the achievement.”

Amit Kalantri

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

Author’s note:

I originally published this in 2018 and decided to repost given all the discussion about supply chain issues and inflation/inflated costs. While I believe it is fair to discuss inflation in a variety of ways, I believe it is business & economic malpractice to discuss inflated costs (to the consumer) without discussing how distribution issues effect costs. What I mean by that is even the smallest changes in distribution costs can make overall costs increase additively/multiplicative. Regardless. As I open this piece, “everything is about distribution.” Call it supply chain issues if you would like, but it is just good ole distribution.

=====

This is about distribution, therefore, it’s about technology, the internet & the transfer of goods & services.

Everything is about distribution. Everything.

Ideas.

Thoughts.

Attitudes.

Things.

Products.

Services.

Monies.

Material.

Data.

Information.

Think of each of these things as containers – containers to be shipped from one place to another. This is different than transactions. Transactions are the outcomes of distribution, i.e., I cannot make a transaction unless it can be distributed.

Now. While anyone can use this new Distribution Revolution world we live in you have to earn the income, revenue & profits, they don’t just come to you, i.e., simply accessing the construct doesn’t mean you will benefit from it. I believe that point is why much of the business world is struggling with what exactly technology is and whether it truly has offered any increased economic productivity. It gets discussed as “just another channel” or a social amplification tool or an efficiency creator or, well, the laundry list of labeling is massive. To me it would make much ore sense if we simply thought of it as a distribution infrastructure change from which people should start thinking about the repercussions to people, organizations & businesses.

Given this view, one would note the internet changed the world in a couple of ways that often don’t get discussed:

• Until the internet came along “everything is connected with everything” was more of a philosophical concept with strings of truth. Now, with the internet, it is truth which we need to conceptually, get a philosophical grip on it.
• Until the internet came along everything was physically distributed now many things can be virtually distributed.

Within this context of these two things, retail discussions, data distribution & digital transformations, are simply smaller battles within the larger Distribution Revolution. We discuss companies as disruptors or legacy businesses all the while neglecting the fact business is always about transactions of value & distribution enables the value items to exchange hands. Business is ultimately about transactions of value, and, distribution is all about enabling the value items (goods & services & payment/$) to change hands as efficiently to as many markets as possible.

Regardless.

Think about the internet as distributing containers – of information, monies, data, goods, services & transactions.

Original container revolution:

The container revolution started by giving businesses a way to distribute existing products faster and cheaper. Over time it allowed business to make and distribute new products and develop new business models. Containerization not only made shipping cheaper & faster it also completely changed the whole structure & mindset of distribution. In 1956 it cost $5.83 a ton to load loose cargo onto a ship in the United States – today it costs around 16 cents a ton (36x less expensive).

The new container revolution:

The internet is doing exactly the same thing. It gives people an alternative way to distribute existing products (physical and nonphysical) and enable businesses to create and distribute new products and develop new business models.

The Container revolution brought trade to previously out of the way places which before had been too costly to distribute. Similarly the internet has made it possible to not only distribute products & services but actual work (outsourcing). The internet can distribute in a variety of ways – physical logistics as well as digitally. This creates an entirely new industry for entrepreneurs to develop products & services which can be distributed anywhere at any time.

Think value on the move.

The essence of distribution is enabling value transactions to happen as cheaply and efficiently as possible beyond simply moving value from here to there, from seller to buyer, the internet actually provides opportunity to add value to the distribution process itself.

FYI. This can also be physical non internet products & services. For example, FedEx/UPS permits you to track your package via the internet. A logistics supplier who distributes nothing they actually create adds value to its own service simply thru distribution transparency.

All that said.

Digital is just a tactic within the revolution. Internet is the enabler of the revolution

What this distribution revolution has done is attack distribution in a variety of ways:

• Digitally unbundling value.

If distribution is value on the move it also means value can be unbundled (which has potential positives AND negatives).

Simplistically value, in the past, was created in a stacked layered way. Value was built layer by layer so that when assessed the value was seamlessly embedded in the total. The inherent strength of this methodology was value was constructed like a building in which parts were dependent on other parts.

In the new distribution revolution, the value is unbundled in a more linear way so that the individual parts can be maximized for its singular value. On a continuum both efficiency (time & investment) and effectiveness (ability to enhance value) can be manipulated on an ongoing basis, therefore, the value components can be constantly adapted to maximize the total value.

Productivity:

Theoretically, possibility of increased productivity occurs in 2 ways:

• Value gets driven up higher, in totality, by maximizing the individual parts with the highest value (this can be contextually different based on unique buying experiences). Productivity gets enhanced by more effective focus on things of highest value.
• Innovation opportunities are identified as discrete parts which can be pursued with the intent to either enhance structural (overall) value creation or intent to pursue a new transactional value creation opportunity (a ‘part’ of the value creation uncovers a new opportunity to produce something new)

• Localized relevance/personalization.

Local, or localized, connectiveness is a powerful aspect of providing value to distribution. People get absorbed, and sometimes overwhelmed, by the global scope of the distribution and localizing is an easy way to make it a little less overwhelming and more, well, personalized. Which leads me to personalization. To be recognized and acknowledged as a unique individual, or a distinct one, within a huge global distribution model, triggers one of the most basic human needs (recognition as an individual). Conversely, this is the underlying belief that while being acknowledged as an individual in a huge distribution world of anonymous impersonal interactions even a little nod to who you are, your identity, your specific needs, elevates basic distribution to personalized.

I would argue this is as far as you need to go (beyond maybe “you bought this so you may be interested in his” type personalization). The latter is acknowledgment you have had a relationship with that distribution but doesn’t overstep any ‘creepy’ boundaries.

Productivity:

We often conflate personalization with customization. Personalization, in general, creates a level of value to the functional & brand value. The productivity opportunity resides in the customization halo of personalization. In other words productivity can be enhanced if the productivity doesn’t simply ”chase” personalization but rather uses the personalization to assess either additional products or innovations which offer complementary products (which you can sell more of at a higher price).

• How does digital transformation fit in?

Digital transformation is a means to an end – an infrastructure decision. It should be viewed as “how can I distribute what needs to be distributed to either enable structural value creation (of what exists) or how it can create new value creation toward corporate vision.”

The value creation insures it meets business objectives and corporate culture (because, remember, digital transformation is dependent upon not mastery or implementation but rather culture – culture at scale means digital simply scales with culture).

In other words, unless you decide what you want to distribute and to whom and when, you cannot effectively implement digital transformation.

Productivity:

Digital transformation, implemented correctly. Offers two productivity opportunities:

• Transactional productivity (sell more of individual products)
• Structural productivity (cross selling of more products at a higher price – or higher profit margin)

• Where does the revolution go? New business models using New old products & services

We need to stop talking about Amazon and retail industry and focus on “how can this new distribution revolution be leveraged to meet our business objective (and what business do I want to create in which the objective can be met thru this distribution revolution>? There are few capacity issues/limitations associated with this distribution revolution so if the distribution helps you meet a viable business objective you know live in a ubiquitous world.

What I mean by this is there is an entire world of existing products & services which can become a new product or service simply by viewing it thru a distribution revolution lens.

Airbnb is simply a hostel-like concept enabled by tech

Uber was the eastern european transportation model but enabled by tech

Old ideas brought to life in a new way as information, value and transactions are exchanged.

Productivity:

There is nothing more profitable than selling more of something you already have and know how to produce efficiently. Theoretically businesses should be able to assess stagnant or dormant brands/products and evaluate whether a new way of distribution would reinvigorate sales & engagement.

Lastly.

• Not the customer Revolution, organizational revolution

I would encourage everyone to think of this Distribution revolution as having an organizational consequence (which will inherently affect customers but it is the deliverer of customer products/service which is impacted most). I would argue this is where the greatest productivity increases will appear.

The main reason we have not seen the expected economic results predicted with technology is lack of alignment between organizational design and technology benefits. One of the largest benefits of an information distribution revolution is the ‘knowledge worker’ (as defined by Alvin Toffler) can now have all the information necessary to make decisions wherever they sit with whatever title they may, or may not, have.

This is where the distribution revolution is easing its way into a distributed decision making & leadership business model. Distributed decision making inherently has economic benefits and increases productivity. The main proof point for this is “The Added Value of Buurtzorg Relative to Other Providers of Home Care: A Quantitative Analysis of Home Care in the Netherlands” (KPMG: Jan 2015).

————

Buurtzorg appears to transcend the usual trade-offs in health and social care: it is cost efficient and yet the ratio of nurses to clients is purposely kept low in the interest of care continuity; it generates a healthy surplus even though it employs a significantly larger than average number of highly-qualified staff remunerated at a higher than average level; it achieves higher than average employee productivity figures without centralised systems of employee control; it achieves higher than average quality of care at a cost level that is below the industry average.

————————

Now. This organizational design actually increases in productivity if more information, and relevant information, is distributed to employees.

This leads me to note simply removing hierarchy isn’t enough. Hierarchy has conditioned the everyday employee to not assume risk and middle management to be, well, anal. In addition current measurement models restrict decision making rather than enhance freedom necessary to make the best decisions at any given point in time. Frankly, most of us are conditioned to be passive and compliant. Successful self-managing companies have very clear structures but, culturally, are constructed with more of a belief in people taking responsibility & being accountable. Applying the Distribution revolution with a distributed decision making organizational model demands a mindset, leadership, culture and the human skills necessary to facilitate a much deeper level of productivity.

Productivity:

Organization change is a means to an end. Change for change sake is wasted energy. Therefore, the distribution revolution leading to organizational revolution needs to have productivity revolution consequences. Internet, to date, has not produced substantive economic growth.

I would argue that is because there has not been an alignment of business & how the internet distributes information, ideas, knowledge & things to date. Some businesses have utilized aspects of technology and distribution opportunities to make some successful economic forays into the marketplace. But I struggle to find a business that has aligned all aspects to maximize economic productivity, enhance value and, well, sell more at the highest price possible.

Conclusion.

Distribution is inherently about the transfer of goods & services. I have simply expanded the definition of ‘goods & services’ based on technology. I believe it is helpful to look at technology as a Distribution Revolution because, as I have been reminded over & over again, technology should be a means to increased economic productivity & enhanced value creation.

When viewed under that microscope it becomes more obvious there is a lack of alignment to best utilize the distribution of goods & services. We will not reap the larger economic benefits until we stop viewing technology as, well, technology and begin viewing it simply as a distribution model from which we align all phases in the distribution from creation to implementation.

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

Thanks to Joost Minnaar (Corporate Rebels) and Wiemer Snijders for some valuable thoughts as well as an older J. Walter Thompson white paper on technology.

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

“What I fear I avoid.

What I fear I pretend does not exist.

What I fear is quietly killing me.

Would there were a festival for my fears, a ritual burning of what is coward in me, what is lost in me.

Let the light in before it is too late. “

 Jeanette Winterson from “The Green Man”

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

“Autumn shows us how beautiful it is to let things go.”

Unknown

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

Well <part 1>.

I just read a an article in one of those local papers you can pick up at Healthy Grocery stores which attempted to discuss how this time of the year <October/November/December> is the season of ‘decay and death’ … and how it was a potent time to connect with the dead <and highlighted several celebrations around the world which do just that>.

This thought was combined with the thought we human folk balk at connecting with death because it … well … seems morbid to do so.

and summer regrets

               getting rid

       of winter wishes

summer and i

=======

Well <part 2>.

I balk at the whole concept of ‘decay & death’ as well as the ‘morbid‘ thought.

Simplistically, seasons remind of us the cycle of Life <not death> and that death, in and of itself a sad event, contains at its very core the very simple concept that without Death, there is no Life. This was immortalized in pop culture by Blood Sweat & Tears in their absolutely fabulous song “and when I die”:

====

And when I die and when I’m dead, dead and gone,
there’ll be one child born and a world to carry on, to carry on.

I’m not scared of dying and I don’t really care.
If it’s peace you find in dying, well, then let the time be near.
If it’s peace you find in dying, when dying time is here,
just bundle up my coffin cause it’s cold way down there,
I hear that’s it’s cold way down there, yeah, crazy cold way down there.
And when I die and when I’m gone,
there’ll be one child born and a world to carry on, to carry on.

====

While each Life is a stepping stone for every future generation each death represents a stepping stone for … well … the future.

I don’t need any Eastern religion wisdom to remind me of this, I think we all know this.

Now, I will admit that connecting with this thought is much much easier for us when we remove any personalized death and accept it as simply a turning of generations. Therefore, one of the reasons we do not celebrate death is because it can get too personal. And if that is a reason it sure as hell is a good one.

But death itself?

While death is something we dislike, facing seasons remain something we must face year in and year out. It is a constant affirmation of the turning of time and that some things we may have gained will most likely be inevitably lost in the natural turn of time.

And, yes, as we near January 1st, I am reminded that Winter is the time of Life’s strategic retreat and conservation of what gives it all life.

It is not death. And it is not decay.

It is Life’s thoughtful way to insure its existence and survival.

It is the time of incubation and rest and restoration for all things to come in the following year.

I could also suggest that winter is a time of reflection and, well, comfort. In winter’s dark nights the stars are at their clearest and we have the opportunity to see them as the sparks of potential and wishes and dreams and Life. Uhm. And dreaming is never a bad thing particularly during the ‘ebb tide of seasonal Life.’

I will not argue that as Life recedes in autumn and rests in winter we do, at least emotionally, get closer to connecting with death, but I do balk at thinking of autumn & winter as ‘things associated with death.’

I would argue it actually does a nice job of reminding us we need to let go of things. and, sure, maybe we connect with ‘the dead’ better at this time because it reminds us to celebrate what we had and embrace letting go.

And that is the thing about winter, it demands to not only be felt but also that you meet it on its terms. Even better Winter demands us to let go of things we most typically hold onto with ragged claws.

You cannot refuse its existence and you cannot ignore what was because what is … is … well … is starkly different. Where Life was once obvious it is now starkly absent.

I would note that all Eastern mysticism and ‘being in touch with the universe’ and the ‘natural ebb of the earth’ and all that stuff, at its core, just suggests that we pay attention. In other words, pay attention to whatever energy seasons give us and more often than not that energy it gives us is … uhm … just good ole fashioned thinking. It gives us the energy to think about our lives, lives lost and lives yet to be lived.

Acknowledgement of all of that increases your overall connection not just with ‘the universe’, but rather to the eternal pattern of life and invests a sense of energy into pretty much everything <yourself and Life>.

And just as Death breaks things down to the bare essence, winter does the same.

And maybe that is the connection.

When things are at their barest, when we are drawn closer to endings rather than beginnings, we inevitably ponder the ‘great perhaps.’

Back in September I wrote this on the first day of Fall:

I think we all seek a great perhaps of “what I know can be”. I think we all know what a better world really looks like. I think we all want to see the beauty that can be found in what is better in everyone.

And maybe it is within Fall and the falling leaves we begin to better grasp that failed plans and failed dreams can beget new plans and new dreams. And maybe it is within Winter where , in ts barest of bare essences, we are forced to begin envisioning what could be in plans and dreams because it is left to us standing in the bare environment around us.

What I do know about all seasons is that they are markers of Time and, poetically speaking, Time is always hungry for many of the things we dearly want to endure and do.

This makes Time both beautiful and doomed. Yeah. Time is beautiful and doomed. And that is where I really believe the whole ‘morbid time of the year’ goes astray.

for it seems all of Fall’s stars

                       have fallen

and often summer and i

run through the last warm days

through the cool grass

       gathering stars caught in people’s dreams

with the intent

           to toss them to Winter

through windows of dawn.

Summer & i

======

We, especially in the West, hunger for time.

Conversely, time itself <to us Western folk> has a hunger and its hunger is for ‘things.’

It is a nasty emptiness waiting to be filled.

Well.

If there is one thing humans are fucking great at, it is filling time and stuffing whatever we can into any emptiness we can find.

Death and dying makes us reflect. It forces us to do so. Just as the bare often starkness of Winter does.

And it makes us reflect on what ‘stuff’ we have crammed into whatever Time we have had.

Oh. Maybe what it really forces us to do is reflect upon time. and that is where death truly makes us feel uncomfortable, not any morbid feeling, but rather it’s just that we have been indoctrinated to focus on living, living life to its fullest, not wasting any time, to do lists that never get completed and just doing shit <just do it!>.

Nowhere in that list of shit I just shared does death have a place. In fact. Death represents the exact opposite of everything society & our culture almost demands we think about 24/7.

And when forced to face death, or feel a need to connect, we are much less likely to celebrate but rather assess … assess our ‘doing mantra’ versus ‘stop.’

Look.

Most of us don’t purposefully ignore connecting with death and those who have passed away because of sadness <because if it were we would be more likely to actually do it because the opposite of sadness is reflecting upon the inevitable happiness>, but rather because death and past lives force us to reflect upon our ‘doing accomplishment’ <as well as it forces us to stop … which compounds the feeling of ‘shit, I haven’t done enough and I am not doing anything now’>.

Yeah.

If you can get beyond the ‘doing’ aspect, inherently death is more about sadness <loss of something or someone or time> more so than morbidity. Conquer the sadness and you have conquered death.

And all of this is just not that difficult <if you are willing to actually think about it>.

Several cultures do celebrate the autumnal solstice as the time life & death is closest. I would argue it is less a celebration but rather recognition of that which came before, and that which is dying, so that what will be will come forth.

Generations beget generations just as falls beget springs.

Death begets life.

This doesn’t mean we should celebrate impending death but rather recognize, even in sadness, life & beauty resides in the future.

Fall is of beautiful dying.

Winter is of starkness of death.

Spring is of rebirth from death.

This doesn’t mean you can find beautiful things to enjoy throughout any season.  Seasons simply remind us of the fact time does not stand still and no matter how hard we try and fill up the emptiness time offers us day in and day out … leaves fall, winter comes and spring arises.

I believe it is the Celtic wheel of the year describes this time of the year as Samhain — “the veil between the worlds is thin.” Just as several other cultures, they use his time to reflect upon “that which was.” In my pea like brain it is a celebration of navel gazing. It is an intentional event to purposefully explore the valuable relationship not only between Life and Death but the past and the future.

Listen to the cry of falling leaves,

            but winter breaks the silence

and warms us with words

of how to change it all

      before the Fall completely ends.

So, So

Look.

I don’t believe we do not celebrate death and dying because we think it is morbid. I tend to believe we do not traditionally do so because we, as in Western civilization versus Eastern, don’t celebrate reflection.

We treat reflection more as  a personal thing and not a larger more public event and celebration.

Should we celebrate reflection? Shit. I don’t know. But understanding that seasons can offer us enlightening thoughts about how we actually think about death & Life & holding on & letting go is surely not a bad thing.

As for Fall and Winter? I do not think of death and decay. I actually think of flowers.

Huh?

I credit Mark Strand for making me think Winter is the time to bring flowers into your Life as he describes Winter in his poem called Blizzard of One:

“A time between times, a flowerless funeral. No more than that …”

Mark Strand <Blizzard of One>

Every funeral deserves flowers. Every Winter deserves thoughts of Life. Ponder.

 ========

——————

“Christmas Eve was a night of song that wrapped itself about you like a shawl.

But it warmed more than your body. It warmed your heart … filled it, too, with melody that would last forever.”

~

Bess Streeter Aldrich

=======

On Christmas Eve I am reminded of something I heard last week at a business luncheon.

Someone smiled as he tasted his Christmas dessert special and said “it tastes just like Christmas.” Smart ass me jumped in and said “like a fir tree?” and without hesitating he said “no, family anger and disappointment.”

<he later clarified it tasted like fresh peppermint and cool snow>

He was kidding … okay … half kidding.

Many of us harbor mixed feelings as the holidays proceed and Christmas looms. Its kind of like dysfunctional functional aspects of Thanksgiving family gatherings with the added challenge/angst of having to give gifts.

Me? I love Christmas … particularly Christmas Eve. And I do so despite the fact many of my childhood Christmas Eve memories … well … suck. They certainly were not devoid of gifts, but many times devoid of what makes family and Christmas special — that kind of warmth and comfort and anticipation and laughter that pepper dysfunctional functional family moments.

I imagine we were not the most loving family and therefore Christmas sometimes exacerbated that feeling.

But, you know what? In the end it really didn’t matter.

It didn’t matter because all the while I knew Christmas and Christmas Eve were special it was just I, or we, hadn’t figured out how to tap into it.

But I did, I have, and continue to do so now.

And that is why sometimes I feel sad around this time of the year. Not because of sadness borne of loneliness or years gone by or ‘lost moments in the past’, but rather because I see how easy it is to lose sight of the magic that makes up Christmas and the holidays.

And the magic can come from anywhere at any time.

It can be the anticipation.

It can even be found in the pangs of disappointment in a well-intended gift.

It can be found driving down the road where one house & its yard doesn’t have one inch NOT covered with some light or decoration and the next house with one simple candle lit in a front window.

It can be found in the gathering of friends & family and the empty spaces where a friend or family member used to be.

Christmas is joyful, sad, tears of joy … and regret, excitement & disappointments.

And Christmas Eve.

Oh.

Christmas Eve.

People seem to think Christmas morning is “it” … the apex of the holiday season. I tend to believe it is more Christmas Eve; the moment before the moment that matters and is “it.”.

We build to that day and that moment and all that comes after is the fallout for all that came before.

Look.

Everyone is different. Some stumble into the day, some try and ignore the day, some anticipate the disappointment and some … well … some just anticipate and celebrate the bigness of the day.

That said. What I truly love about Christmas is that little things are big.

Little moments are huge around the holidays. Some people, and sometimes I wish I were one, can take little Christmas lights and make a huge bonfire of light suggesting that they are lighting the way for Santa to visit. It is almost like these people fear being overlooked by Santa and therefore go out of their way to show their appreciation for the spirit that makes up Santa and Christmas and the holidays so that their joy is not overlooked.

Awesome.

The world doesn’t have enough of these people.

Next. Christmas really is no different than anything in Life. When you are born or growing up you always wish you could get a manual telling you what you are supposed to do or what everyone does. No manual exists. You are stuck with learning whatever tradition your family may have and maybe some others as you crisscross lives.

Christmas creates some common ground for all of us. We all face the same dilemmas and the same questions and the same issues … one and all. We all stumble and bumble our way thru the holidays and Christmas – mostly with the best of intentions – yet ultimately more often overcome by the sheer amount of ups & downs that come from the rush up to the ‘big day’ and what happens then.

I will say that sometimes in all the anticipation, and anticipointment, we forget what Christmas is all about. That happens because it is a mixture of all we hate & love. Disaster & discomfort and emotional moments & joy.

Which brings me to this 2015 Christmas commercial about disaster, calamity and sharing. Hyperbole at its best: Sainsbury’s: “Mog’s Christmas Calamity”

Sainsbury’s Christmas commercial is a spectacular film featuring the family accident-prone cat Mog. I think we all watch this and laugh … well … a little painfully because disasters almost always seem to befall Christmas. It is kind of like the holiday version of how the printer in the office always breaks down when you need it most. And maybe that is why hyperbole works so well in Christmas commercials … the day itself takes on disproportionately huge dimensions into our lives, heads, hearts and wallets.

Just think about that on this day … this Christmas Eve. For when you strip away all the hyperbole, the gift giving angst, the anticipation … and Christmas and the holidays are laid bare … it is a beautiful simple thing.

We give gifts to each other for god’s sake.

Tiny ones & big ones … thoughts and things … it doesn’t matter.

We give.

What a gift.

The most spectacular gift humanity has given humans. The ability to give & share. Happy Christmas Eve.

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

“Christmas is not a time or a season but a state of mind. To cherish peace and good will, to be plenteous in mercy, is to have the real spirit of Christmas. If we think on these things, there will be born in us a Savior and over us will shine a star sending its gleam of hope to the world.”

~

Calvin Coolidge