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

“You know, when I sit in meetings and things are very tense and people take things extremely seriously and they invest a lot of their ego, I sometimes think to myself, ‘Come on, you know, there’s life and there’s death and there is love.’

And all of that ego business is nonsense compared to that.”

–

Christine Lagarde

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

“Meetings are indispensable when you don’t want to do anything.“

–

John Kenneth Galbraith

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

Meeting plans.

Plans as in walking into a meeting with a plan in mind <sometimes an agenda and sometimes a meeting strategy>.

I have been in a number lately that made me think I needed to write about meetings and as I mapped out some of my thoughts I thought I would google ‘meeting plans.’

Holy shit.

There is a shitload of incredibly bad advice online with regard to business meetings, managing meetings and what you should do when meetings start going bad. What makes all of this already bad advice even worse is the truth  that meetings rarely goes as planned. Ok. Not ‘rarely’ … let’s say ‘never.’ So if you are going to judge your meeting against some master plan you’ve developed, some agenda and desired objectives you may as well go home now and start drinking.

Now.

That isn’t to say you shouldn’t have a plan. Or have an agenda. Or even some specific objectives for a meeting. There are clearly some basics everyone should do <or it would be considered business malpractice> with regard to any business meeting:

    Have a clear idea of why you want to have the meeting.

    Define an objective for the meeting.

    Develop an agenda, even if it’s loose and only in your head.

    Have an idea of what you want to get out of the meeting.

    Know the critical things you want to say, communicate, or ask.

But, that said, the best meetings don’t follow the plan they become a little more dynamic moving beyond the simple construct of “how it was supposed to go.’

Here is a business truth.

Good meetings, more often than not, are like herding squirrels.

On the other hand.

Bad meetings, more often than not, are like herding dead people.

Yeah. Not a lot of people talk about it but meetings that tightly follow an agenda and do not foster a little bit of heated/passionate discussion & debate are more likely to be a bad meeting than a good meeting <either that or bad unthinking people were in the meeting>.

In good meetings people have very different views about the topic. They offer a lot of ideas. Sure. The ideas can be all over the place but … well … ideas are ideas and involvement is good. this means that often a good meeting organically grows & shrinks … and let me tell you … I have never seen a meeting plan or agenda which said “grow here” and “shrink here.”

Now.

The other thing that affects meeting plans is meeting pacing. A meeting can lull you into complacency, it’s moving along smoothly and then, uh oh, somehow some shit appeared and hit the only fan in the room. Ok. Maybe not ‘shit’ but the meeting obviously shifts – gears & direction. I would note here that good meetings rarely move along in one gear. They shift gears. Oh. And they shift lanes.

Yeah.

This is certainly a point in which the meeting can become dangerous and, yes, it can certainly become an emotional/ego mind field and, yes, it is bad if it becomes a demolition derby <I called this ‘managing meeting pivots‘ in my meeting trap post>. But even with all of that … it doesn’t mean the meeting has ‘gone wrong.’

Or that anyone has done anything wrong in the ‘planning.’ It just means that the meeting has some life <which is good … and beats the alternative>.

Anyway.

Good meetings tend to have two things <even if the plan goes awry>:

1. Closure

It doesn’t have to be closure on whatever it is the meeting was about.

It doesn’t even have to be closure on a ‘list of things to do.’ You just need some closure on something. A good meeting just needs some type of closure on something so that everyone can walk away feeling like something was accomplished.

This is value confirmation. If there is no closure there is no value <and you won’t care about part 2 of what I am going to say — the story>. By the way, ‘another meeting’ is not closure. In fact … that, in and of itself, confirms lack of closure. Never agree to another meeting unless it follows “okay, we agreed to do this, this and this … and we will have another meeting on this & this.”

Never walk away from a meeting without some closure on something. Never.

2. The story.

No one should misconstrue this thought as “developing a story for the meeting” in your planning <because you should avoid wasting energy thinking about that … with some rare exceptions>. This is … well … what’s the story from the meeting.

This is also more important than a shitload of people think it is.

Thinking about it while you are in the meeting <or at least being aware of it> means you will decide to not argue & fight &correct every single thing in a meeting.

Thinking about it means you will decide to ‘never interrupt the enemy when they are making a mistake” <Napoleon>.

Thinking about it means you prioritize what is important as it is being discussed in the here & now <and not because you thought it was going to be important before the meeting>.

Thinking about it means you recognize that a meeting is less memorable just because you had some ‘closure items’ … and more memorable for something else.

Closure items confirm value in a meeting.

The story creates the memory/take away.

Think of this as if the press were covering the meeting — what would be the headline and story the next day. Don’t laugh at this thought. Meetings live on way beyond the time everyone gets up and leaves. The better you are at defining the story the better your meetings will be perceived <and talked about>.

Now.

What is the best thing about these two particular ideas? They adapt to the meeting, they are not defined in some meeting plan.

Look.

All meetings have a plan and almost all meetings have their plan fall apart.

And when it does start falling apart the initial feeling is most often a sick, sinking feeling. You know that you are not the only one sitting there going ‘what is going on … and … we’re not making any progress.’

The good news? You are not the only one feeling it.

The bad news? You are most likely partially responsible for the debacle.

Inevitably someone, maybe even you, will choose to change some dynamic in the meeting … maybe switch it up a little, switch gears or switch topics. And by altering the flow of the meeting the agenda, the plan, either adapts or gets destroyed … or worse … ignores the realities taking place in a meeting and constricts it. And maybe it is that last point that makes some rigid meeting plan of action/engagement so silly. A plan lives in some speculative reality, the meeting itself depicts reality.

I can tell you which should win.

I admit.

It drives me crazy when someone says ‘well, that didn’t go as we planned did it?’ You need to be flexible with regard to your meeting plans as well as flexible with your methods within the meeting itself.

Truth. 99% of good meetings don’t go as planned. Period.

======

“be stubborn about your goals but flexible about your methods.” the best advice I’ve ever received.

——

(via youarewortheverything)

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

Meetings.

Rules.

Protocol.

The way things are done.

Bla bla bla bla.

Business is challenging enough without having to stick with ‘methods of what is right & wrong’ most of which are actually just simply things you ‘like or dislike.’ I say that because having the luxury of interacting with dozens of different businesses I sometimes have the opportunity to see something somewhere which reminds me that … well … I should remind someone else of something. And I just spoke with 3 young business owners yesterday about their new business.

This one has to do with meetings and managing the interaction between team members in a meeting. There are some basic business meeting truths everyone learns to accept <whether business people like the truth or not>. Suffice it to say that any time there are a bunch of people, and senior experienced people, in a business meeting you can count on it always being a maze of challenges and objectives interspersed with a nice dose of conflict of thinking & ideas.  Knowing that … most of us invest gobs of energy developing an agenda and pounding it into everyone’s head that we need to follow the agenda and say what we all agreed to say.

Generally speaking? … what a waste of good energy.

Suffice it to say the agenda, the plan, rarely survives after the initial engagement and, while the construct of the original plan of attack may remain, what happens within that construct becomes an ongoing series of mini battles of ideas, words and facts. That means, in the reality of meetings, that sometimes a lot of things said or done in a meeting are a means to an end.  And while the ‘means’ feel painful in the moment, well, in the end it was the right call.

The right decision or the right action. This is a surprisingly difficult lesson for a shitload of business people <uhm … it took me far too long to grasp it>.

Well. It is actually more difficult for older business people than younger business people. Younger business people inevitably have less rules and more worries about being & looking smart. On the other hand … older business people have more rules and, sometimes oddly, use them at the sacrifice of looking as smart as they could be.

Anyway.

This isn’t about older more experienced business people versus younger business people … this is about business meetings and management of moments and what I talked about with some business owners who didn’t really have any rules other than doing their best. And that is where talking with younger businesses is truly a joy for me. They rarely discuss status quo and rules and almost always ask me to talk about “in a meeting I want to do the right thing so how is the best way to do it.”

There are so many things that it would most likely take a Michener length book to discuss them all but I just discussed two yesterday so those are the ones I am highlighting:

• Leveraging the pronoun

You learn really early on in new business that different people see different things in meetings and most senior experienced people are smart. You also learn that younger less experienced people usually know some nuance or thought that can contribute to the discussion. This means you have a shitload of people who can contribute. This also means that inevitably in any good meeting discussions will create moments where someone wants to interject a thought. And, uh oh, they are not sure it’s a ’we’ thought or an “I” thought <we all agree versus just an interesting thought that may not align exactly with what the ‘we’ believes or wants>.

I always tell young business people … the worst thing is actually to say nothing.

Ok.

The worst thing is to say something stupid. But let’s assume it is not something stupid and it is simply a “not sure it is an I or a we thought.”

Regardless. Any good business wants someone to speak up even if they aren’t sure it fits into the “we” façade.

So you go out of your way to teach what most people call ‘leveraging the pronoun.’  You teach people to use their pronoun selectively. And experienced business people pay attention to the pronoun. The “we believes” are obvious. They are the things you have discussed beforehand or they are some basic company principles which underpin what you do and what you believe. The “I’s” are a little more difficult. Ok. A LOT more difficult.

Shit is happening in a meeting and you have something to say. You rack your brain … ‘does everyone believe this … does everyone agree … is this just my opinion … ???? <a bunch of yack, yack, yacking going on in your head>.’

I always tell young business people, in this situation, open your thought with an I. Just use “I” and share the thought. And, most importantly, don’t worry about whether the rest of your team agrees or not ... just focus on making the point as smartly and articulate as you can.

The onus is on your other team members to box it in as an “I” or convert it to a “we.”

“Well, I partially agree with Bruce and that thought … it suggests something we have discussed … “

Or

“He is correct … and …”

Or whatever you want to do and say. But as I just sat with three young business owners who think exponentially differently with several incredibly sharp employees … I was unequivocal that in their meetings situations will inevitably arise in which someone can accelerate progress or block downward turns and in either case you don’t want someone sitting on their hands trying to figure out whether everyone agrees or not.

Shift the onus onto the other members in the meeting. The other employees shouldn’t get pissed when someone does it … or scratch their head in confusion … they need to focus on leveraging the pronoun in the direction you want.

I know.

I think I just shared something kind of basic but sometimes I believe we forget to remind people of that type of shit. But when you do remind your team it frees up thinking in meetings and showcases how freely a business can navigate the strength of any business – the “I/we” dynamic. People like to know your business permits “I” to stand up and speak their mind just as much as they like, typically as a conclusion, that “we” can agree on a next step/recommendation/ POV.

Of course, I am sure I don’t need to say this <but I will anyway>, there must be balance in a meeting. It cannot be a constant “I/we” conflict, but, just for the sake of statistics let’s say that the 80/20 rule works well — 80% we and 20% I is probably the most extreme mix you want to have. Keep the “I’s” below 20 and you should be good.

Next thing you learn very early in business <and should go out of your way to teach young business people>.

• Managing the pivot

Every business meeting will demand a pivot or two. It happens. The flow of the meeting has simply gone off course, or worse, it is going in a direction which will inevitably put you in a bad spot.

So you pivot.

Oh. Unfortunately … pivots are difficult. Depending on the situation they can be impossibly difficult.

I tell people to just assume 80% of all pivots will be clumsy & awkward. The 20% elegant pivots are beautiful to watch and often so stylish they appear easy <and everyone should be able to do them> … but they are not. They are hard.

I tell all young business people to not worry about the pivot. Yeah. Of course think about it before you do it … but … getting stuck not pivoting because you aren’t sure how to do it just, more often than not, prolongs the pain in the meeting. The more important thing is managing the pivot.

I tell people to just clean it up if they want … just don’t point out how messy it was. But … what is even better? Just move on. Just like a running back in football if they make a sharp pivot they plant and accelerate. Suffice it to say the faster you accelerate out of a pivot the better off you are when it is all said & done.

By the way. That is a hard business lesson to learn. The natural instinct is to linger on the pivot and clean it up … make it look and feel less clumsy or awkward. The difficulty is that in doing so the focus remains on the wrong thing … that the pivot was clunky. Instead … if you accelerate out of the pivot 99% of the time no one invests any energy thinking back on the pivot itself … they focus on the ‘why the pivot got everyone to a good place.’

Once again … this is much more difficult than many people think.

Oh. Also.

The whole ‘awkward pivot’ thing. As I told these young business owners, when they do their post-meeting analysis they should reflect on pivots with the intent to see if there was a less awkward way <always seeking the elegant of course> but not to invest a shitload of energy reflecting. Hind sight is always 20/20 but you learn pretty quickly replicating that exact situation & context is minuscule therefore you will most likely never run into that exact same situation again.

Sure. Reflect a little.

Sure. Get bummed out it looked clumsy & awkward.

Sure. Let some people bitch & moan about how awkward & clumsy it was.

But, in the end, spend more time discussing how the pivot was managed … because, as I stated earlier, the only thing you really know for sure is that 80% of future pivots will be clumsy & awkward so rather than try and make them less clumsy & awkward it is probably a more effective use of your time to discuss how to manage it.

Anyway.

Business meetings are tough. They are tough for anyone at any experience level. I will admit that working with younger business owners and entrepreneurs when discussing new business and business meetings is fun. They are less likely to worry about rules and how things are done and all the crap that most of us older folk worry about with regard to meeting protocols. More often than not their mantra is respect for the idea & thinking & thoughts as more important than respect for a title & experience & business. Maybe it is because at that age they feel bulletproof <and we older folk forget that after being shot so many times>. But it actually seems like they have an innate understanding that the tide rises higher on the latter if they deliver on the former.

They also seem to have an innate understanding that in today’s world there is a higher value on collaboration & collaborative team thinking <even if it happens in a meeting and even if it contains some disagreement or back & forth in a meeting within team members> because it permits people to not only gain a glimpse of culture and teamwork but showcases thinking <assuming the back & forth leads to some value>. And, maybe most importantly, they seem to have a sense of fearlessness in meetings. Just in talking with these business owners as they discussed what I was telling them you could feel how it created a sense of fearlessness and freedom that no matter what mistakes they made within a meeting they could manage it.

Look.

I have always balked at ‘meeting rules’ and gravitated toward ‘meeting principles’ or ‘effective meeting tactics.’ Rules, to me, in a business meeting inherently constrict a lot of the freedom which inevitably makes for a good adaptable meeting.

……….. waitbutwhy intelligence and truth ……..

Rules constrict the methods <which can vary depending on the context and the situation> which inevitably you need to attain your objective.

I firmly believe if a business is going to demand any meeting protocol it should be built around ‘thoughtful freedom.’ By the way, none of this comes at the expense of respect for anyone in the room. Whatever is said and done should always remain respectful.

Regardless. I maybe think this way because I never ever cared if anyone in any meeting disagreed with me … at any level or title and on my team or from the ‘other side’ … if they had a good idea or a fresh view on what was being discussed … or I was wrong.

Shit.

I have been wrong so many times I am impervious to my wrongness. But, as a quasi successful business person, what I have come to realize is that as long as my rightness outweighs my wrongness I can keep my title, keep my responsibility and keep the respect of the teams around me as well as any business people I interact with.

And you know what? Young business people & owners get that. These guys did I just spoke with. And when they embrace it and do it well? Wow. Man. I would pay for a ticket to that show. That is good stuff.

==

“Once upon a time, there was a woman who discovered that she had turned into the wrong person.”

Anne Tyler

==

So.

Accountability is a surprisingly tough concept. Huh? Accountability is easy to grasp, even likable in concept, but incredibly difficult to implement.

Being accountable can be … well … gut wrenching on occasion.

And while I am tempted to write about this in a business environment … my stomach couldn’t take it today <accountability in today’s business world is stuck in the sludge at the bottom of the business moral barrel>. Instead I will talk about it within an everyday Life perspective. Personal in that while we face the day to day grind we sometimes miss out on the little accountability aspects of life that make us slip down the slope of ‘less than I wanted to be as a person.’

It happens in such small missed accountability increments that you get a little surprised when one day you look in the mirror and see you not only haven’t turned out to the be there person you meant to be, or wanted to be, you have actually turned into the wrong person. What a semi-miserable moment when you ask yourself … ‘are you pleased with what you see?’ … and the answer is … <sigh> … no. I say semi miserable because while pretty much anything you have done up to this point cannot be undone … you can certainly start doing what you want to do to begin the path to a ‘yes’ answer.

Ok. But let’s get back to the here & now and accountability.

Life doesn’t make accountability easy. Life demands constant relentless accountable moments. It is a constant day to day, moment to moment, challenge. You cannot relax for one moment.

Therefore. You have to constantly hold yourself accountable.

I know … I know … it doesn’t sound fair. You are kind of hoping Life would be more about putting yourself on the right path and assuming that if you keep putting one foot in front of the other you will just keep on down that path … and you can start looking at other things.

But you can’t. You have to constantly hold yourself accountable. I don’t have any ‘how to’ advice to offer mostly because I believe most of us know what accountability is and what it takes to be accountable.

I imagine I wrote about this because when I saw the quote I used to open this post it made me think about the constant attention accountability demands. It is the constant aggressive nature of Life itself in seeking the little moments you are not focusing on accountability … and making you pay for them. And the fact that accountability is tricky because it is not just your actions for which you may have to pay the consequences for … but also your inaction.

Yup. You are also accountable for the things you don’t do.

Accountability is really all about assuming responsibility.

Responsibility for not only being in the right place at the right time and doing the right things … but responsibility for when you are in the wrong place at the wrong time and do the wrong thing … as well as responsibility for not being ‘in place’ at all.

Shit. Accountability is tough. It is a harsh judge & jury.

All that said.

Why does this matter?

Why did I even write this post?

“… who discovered that she had turned into the wrong person.”

Turning into the wrong person is the price to be paid for not constantly holding yourself accountable.

Just ponder that thought.

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

Telling teens they are stupid is, well, stupid. To be clear. We may not actually verbally tell teens they are stupid but we older folk have no qualms treating them like they are stupid … which … uhm … is actually telling them we think they are stupid.

Yeah.

One of the biggest problems adults have with regard to the generation gap is … well … themselves.

Adults.

Teens are not the problem in the generation gap. Shit. Young people are not the problem with any generation gap.

I do not care if we are speaking about teens, or young people in the workplace, the problem remains the same … we older folk tend to treat young people like they are stupid <but go home each night easing our minds by saying to ourselves “but I never told them they were stupid”> .

Now.

We can be clever in how we do so and sometimes we can even be fairly good at masking it … but you know what?

Young people are pretty frickin’ smart and young people are pretty frickin’ insightful and young people are pretty frickin’ aware of what is going on around them … and they can tell we think they are stupid even if the words coming out of our mouths sound something like “good idea … something we should be thinking about” <thought bubble above older person saying it says “how naïve, that’s stupid, ok, act like you actually care so they don’t think you think they are stupid …“>.

I am a little unsure of why we older people treat teenagers like they are stupid.

Do we feel it is a rite of passage that they must go thru? <like joining a fraternity or sorority?>.

Is it for self-esteem? <the more stupid we make them feel the smarter that we feel?>.

Is it out of fear? <that we will look stupid to them … or they will be smarter than us?>

Is it simply the inability to let go of the past? <”if they could only learn how and what we learned … – insert a nostalgic ‘sigh’ here …”>

All I know is that teens are not stupid.

Far from it.

As I wrote in my Beautiful Brains article the teen brain is capable of the same smart decision making as an adult … yes, as smart, it is just that their brain lining has not completely formed and therefore there is some sensory overload they have to navigate that older brains do not.

But.

This is not stupidity.

Look.

Here is what I know.

Tearing the young down serves no real purpose. In fact … I would like to point out that building up the young can serve a real purpose.

====

In 1968, psychologist Robert Rosenthal walked in to a primary school class and told the teacher that he would be conducting a Harvard aptitude test on all of the students to find out which ones were bloomers or spurters (anticipating that these students were brighter and showed more potential than the rest). By the end of the year, sure enough these students went on to have not only higher grades but also did better on their IQ tests, so what was the catch?

Rosenthal later revealed that the ‘Harvard’ tests conducted were completely bogus and the children dubbed bloomers and spurters were in fact chosen at random! Because the teachers had been given the notion that these children were brighter than the rest, they ended up engaging and challenging them more often seeing their mistakes as a learning experience and setting higher goals.

This confirmed the teachers suspicion that they were in fact much brighter than the rest.

====

When adults expect the young to do well and show intellectual growth, inevitably young people deliver the goods. On the other hand … when adults lower expectations it inevitably provides suitable excuses for ‘less than performance and growth’ and may in fact actually discourage growth in a variety of ways. If we continue treating young people like they are stupid <which is NOT the same as telling them they are stupid> and feeding them propaganda about their stupidity and failings naturally they’re going to start believing all the crap and almost start expecting stupidity like traits.

Older people are not granted some magical power that makes them non-stupid simply because they have become older. They are not some special breed of human that has no failings and no desire to maintain some power & control.

I tell you where teens are truly not stupid.

They do not buy the whole ‘positive thinking’ being shoved down their throats. They see firsthand that positive thinking alone doesn’t get you shit and they give you shit if you try and tell them it does <and is the key to their future success>. Most teens see very quickly that positive thinking is fine in theory, but really only helpful to those with more wealth and access to a decent education. For everyone else it is empty platitudes. They don’t want platitudes they want wisdom that hlps them get where they want to go.

Teens are not stupid.

Not stupid intellectually & smarts-wise nor with regard to Life.

While we think they can only see what is in front of them in the moment they are watching the larger world swirling around them with eyes wide open. They may not be in a rush to get into this crazy looking adult world <would we adults if we looked around?> but they clearly, and smartly, are assessing the world in front of them and around them.

Let me end by saying treating teenagers like they are stupid is … well … stupid.

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

“People have forgotten this truth,” the fox said. “But you mustn’t forget it. You become responsible forever for what you’ve tamed.” 

—–

The Little Prince

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

“I cannot play with you,” the fox replies. “I am not tamed.”

“What does that mean – to tame?” 

“It means to establish ties. To me, you are still nothing more than a little boy who is just like a hundred thousand other little boys. And I have no need of you. And you, on your part, have no need of me. To you, I am nothing more than a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes. But if you tame me, then we shall need each other. To me, you will be unique in all the world. To you, I shall be unique in all the world…please, tame me!”

“I want to, very much,” the Little Prince replied, “but I have not much time. I have friends to discover, and a great many things to understand.” 

“One only understands the things that one tames,” the fox said.

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

Ok.

Some people aren’t going to like the way I am going to discuss Leadership. Some people will not like the implication behind the word “tame” with regard to employees. Those some people should read before they dismiss the thought. t may just offer a different way of thinking about the responsibility of leadership.

Leaders have a tough job in that you manage skills, people, personalities & overall organizational purpose.

We call it managing, but in reality it is taming. You tame the independent wildness and tame the ability & potential so you can understand it, and it can understand itself, so that eventually there is a mutual progress to play the game as well as it can be played.

Please note that nowhere in there have I suggested “blind obedience.” Taming, in this view, is reaching true understanding so that real personal growth occurs.

That said … in that metaphorical expression of leadership … you own what you tame.

I say that because far too often we leaders & managers view management as something we do for the benefit of the organization and, hopefully, the benefit of the people … but we ‘own’ no responsibility for the individual in terms of actions or who they become — and certainly not ‘forever.’

Some of us view ourselves as shapers in some form or fashion but lean back against the belief we only dent the surface of who and what the person is and will become. We view what we do as possibly taming but within the purview of just a chapter in their lives … not an entire story.

In some ways we do this simply as an act of self-survival. The truth is that investing too much personally into your business; the organization and the employees can … well … kill you.

Okay.

Maybe not literally kill you … but figuratively it can become a daily strain on your psychological health. Many of us, out of pragmatism, eye our relationship with employees as a story with a finite end – be it positive, sad, joyful, disappointing or ambiguous – but it is, in reality, just the end of a chapter.

The story keeps going. Ours and theirs.

And while we may represent only a chapter in a larger narrative … well … we own what we tame. This is an inclusive way of leading & managing. You include yourself in someone’s Life and … well … you own what part you tame.

Uhm.

Of course … this can also swing to the opposite more dangerous side – an exclusive leadership side. This is ‘ownership’, not owning, of what you tame. You don’t become part of them you simply offer a voice to them – I sometimes call this ‘pack mentality leadership’.

These are the leaders who say “on my team <or in other words “mine”> forever.” It is possessive in a non productive way.

“Leave and my wrath is upon you.”

That eader’s attitude? “Not want to be tamed by me? you are “un” whatever it is I stand for.” And this is where exclusive leadership truly rears its ugly head.

There is little vision, there is a lot of ‘features’ in the offering <more money, more jobs, more titles, more wins, more whatever> and therefore the incentives do the work and not any persuasive direction or vision. The ‘pack attitude’ is a means to an end and a vision in and of itself.

—-

“Managers tend to use compensation as a crutch.  After all, it is far easier to design an incentive system that will do management’s work than it is to articulate a direction persuasively, develop agreement about goals and problems, and confront difficulties when they arise.”

Michael Beer, Harvard professor of business administration

—–

The features, the actions & behavior of those who belong on this team, are how they speak of unity and teamwork, i.e., “everyone should act this way … but we are the ones who do.”

Or how about this?

“The only important thing is the unification of the people – because the other people don’t mean anything.” <Trump used these words once awhile back> In other words … the only people who truly count are the ones who are in this leader’s team.

Even worse? They use the ‘us versus them’ polarization as a means to suggest “team personality & character” all the while these types of leaders actually do it to create their own power structure. They don’t desire to include anyone else nor do they tend to reach out to others <albeit they make some inclusive noises on occasion> they desire to build a construct where people ask to join <because they should, of course, have to ask> and are not asked to join.

“Excluding leader types” love the ‘us versus them’ aspect. They love being derided and they love opposition. All these things do is solidify the team’s belief they are different & better & know more than the others. The team becomes what represents what is real & right and the leader controls what is real & right. The leader’s people are truly the only people that count and the leader hasn’t tamed ability but rather attitude.

And here is where the ownership of what you tamed hits a dangerous spot.

This leader has tamed an attitude but feels little ownership of the people themselves. Therefore should the leader decide to move on or get tired of whatever it is they are doing at the moment they feel no remorse in leaving people behind <who still harbor the attitude he/she tamed>.

The pack remains, the pack mentality still seethes, but the pack leader is no longer there.

Anyway.

Let me close with some thoughts.

I think it is a healthy thought for every manager & leader to ponder ‘you own what you tame.’ Leadership and leading is never easy and I have the scars to show to prove it.

I found it naturally tempting to build a quasi-pack mentality in my groups as a younger leader & manager. I was, and have always been, a more aggressive business person – I am not fond of status quo and not particularly fond of ‘the safe road.’

I can absolutely state that as a manager you can feed off of the ‘pack mentality’ attitude. It is exhilarating and almost like a drug … and maybe more dangerous … it can feed into a self-belief aspect that can edge upon arrogance and obliviousness to the greater good.

I don’t think I ever fell off the cliff on this but I certainly got a glimpse of the edge. As I gained more experience I saw the danger in doing so <to my team members, to my organization & to myself> and sought to find some balance.

Just remember.

You can tame your people’s ability & attitude in an inclusive & “unearthing skill & talent” way and they, and you, will benefit at the time and in the future <whether you are still working together or not>.

Just remember.

You own what you tame.

==

“When written in Chinese, the word crisis is composed of two characters. One represents danger, and the other represents opportunity.”

–

John F. Kennedy

==

Ok.

I love this quote.  And a boatload of business management people do <dozens of books written using it>.

Uh oh. But it isn’t true.

Good ole JFK got it wrong <but he is in good company>.

The usual explanation is that the Chinese ideogram for “crisis” is made up of two characters signifying “opportunity” and “danger.” To us folk on this side of the planet this is a great example of the ancient East wisdom. And teachers, pontificators, self help specialists, motivational speakers and anyone who likes to tell people to find lemonade when given a basket of lemons have used this explanation.

The key lesson shared?

“A crisis provides an opportunity for change and growth as well as a danger of regression or stagnation.”

<but that is too long and complete to be a soundbite>

Yup. This is pretty frickin’ deep.

The truth?

1. In Chinese, the term for crisis is wei ji.

2. Native Chinese speakers tend to think the crisis = danger/opportunity connection is complete bullshit.

The Chinese word <not really an ideogram by the way> for crisis, when translated, literally means “dangerous, or precarious, moment.” That’s it.  No ‘opportunity.’  No benefiting.  Just danger. Or … maybe I should focus on the part I like … “a precarious moment.”

Not a bad lesson in itself. Crisis CAN be bad … but in reality is just all about having a precarious moment … that needs to be managed.

Just to be sure I cover all my bases as I tear down all that self-help mumbo jumbo people have absorbed and are putting in use day-to-day.

(through some research)

A mandarin expert breaks down the word and definition and wisdom mumbo-jumbo:

A whole industry of pundits and therapists has grown up around this one grossly inaccurate statement. A casual search of the Web turns up more than a million references to this spurious proverb. It appears, often complete with Chinese characters, on the covers of books, on advertisements for seminars, on expensive courses for “thinking outside of the box,” and practically everywhere one turns in the world of quick-buck business, pop psychology, and orientalist hocus-pocus. This catchy expression (Crisis = Danger + Opportunity) has rapidly become nearly as ubiquitous as The Tao of Pooh and Sun Zi’s Art of War for the Board / Bed / Bath / Whichever Room.

The explication of the Chinese word for crisis as made up of two components signifying danger and opportunity is due partly to wishful thinking, but mainly to a fundamental misunderstanding about how terms are formed in Mandarin and other Sinitic languages.

<that was awesome …>

Next.

While it is true that wēijī does indeed mean “crisis” and that the wēi syllable of wēijī does convey the notion of “danger,” the jī syllable of wēijī most definitely does not signify “opportunity.”

The jī of wēijī, in fact, means something like “incipient moment; crucial point (when something begins or changes).” Thus, a wēijī is indeed a genuine crisis, a dangerous moment, a time when things start to go awry. A wēijī indicates a perilous situation when one should be especially wary. It is not a juncture when one goes looking for advantages and benefits.

As the Mandarin language expert says quite succinctly … “In a crisis, one wants above all to save one’s skin and neck!”

As well as …

“Any would-be guru who advocates opportunism in the face of crisis should be run out of town on a rail, for his / her advice will only compound the danger of the crisis.”

I loved this guy.

A little wordy in his explanation but he was passionate about telling everyone how far off base they were on the whole crisis/opportunity thing. Sorry.  No Eastern wisdom here. In this case the east and the west agreed that a crisis is bad, dangerous and to be wary of and that’s it.

Ok.

All that said <mostly said to enlighten everyone and piss off a boatload of publishers and book writers> let’s talk about crisis and the opportunities a crisis does actually create. Most of us quickly see the danger in a crisis… and we should … because it is exactly as translated … a precarious moment.  Like its true Chinese definition a crisis is a crucial moment where things begin to go awry.

It is easy to overlook any opportunity within the crisis because, frankly, we are often just trying to survive <in other words … save our skin, neck & ass>.

And what makes this even more difficult is that the opportunity may be well hidden. The danger is always obvious and the most critical in our eye because the crisis creates potential personal harm. So what makes a crisis truly a “precarious moment” is that assuming you are seeking to find that elusive opportunity within the crisis … well … that with danger lurking its not that we forget to look for the opportunity but rather we seek to avoid the danger and the personal harm.

Lets call this for what it is … self preservation.

And that isn’t bad by the way.  Because if you don’t survive the “opportunity” becomes irrelevant. It is natural to avoid danger during a crisis and make that THE priority.  So, no, I am not going to suggest someone become an “opportunity person” when dealing with a crisis.

I believe people who can discover opportunities in a crisis are people who have already successfully managed the ‘precarious moment’ several times in the past. Maybe call it trial by fire.  Maybe call it trial & error.  But suffice it to say you ain’t gonna be seeking opportunities when dealing with your first true crisis.

Yes. Many people say that it was actually a crisis that caused them to make a much-needed change.

Yes. Living through a hard time challenges people to grow in ways that makes them more mature and opens them to new possibilities.

Where I would argue with people on this is that through surviving the crisis they … well … just found a better way to survive. And that’s not being opportunistic.  That is simply survival instinct <compounded by understanding of what makes oneself happiest>.

Look.

Life constantly gives you opportunities … and gives you crisis also <unfortunately> … regardless … you get opportunities not just to take a chance but also just to improve your current state.

Here is the formula (although in this case I am not sure A + B = C).

(A) A crisis is a forced decision making moment (typically survival based).

(B) Decision making moments represent opportunities.

(C) Opportunities typically translate into some type of change.

And everyone, obviously, wants to capitalize on any change (who would choose to have a negative result from a decision?). If someone wants to claim a crisis represents an opportunity go ahead and do so … but please recognize that it is an indirect extended relationship.  And in doing so you could be doing a disservice to people because it ignores what a crisis is truly about – survival.

Ok.

I do believe dealing with a crisis has a lot to do with attitude <which is possibly where many people get confused with this whole opportunity thing>.

A Pollyanna attitude? Nope.

Someone wrote: “Welcoming personal setbacks as rich opportunities for growth can help you survive them. Does that seem like a twisted point of view? After all, problems make us miserable, right? Scott Peck, author of The Road Less Traveled (Touchstone, 2003), considers them a gift — if you look at them in a deeper, less reactive manner. Indeed, they can give us clear perspective.”

Wow.

That is a bunch of bullhockey <bullshit>.

A crisis is just that.  A crisis.  A dangerous moment. A precarious moment.

Should we be seeking opportunities in the middle of a frickin’ crisis? Nope.

We should be seeking survival.

And that is where attitude comes in. Not “lets find the opportunity” or some baloney like that <or find the lemonade out of the lemons> but an attitude capturing a strength of character <I will be strong and overcome> and resiliency <survive>. Afterwards maybe you can look back and discover the opportunities that were an outcome from the crisis (although this has a slightly masochistic point of view in that from pain comes pleasure that kind of creeps me out) but when in a crisis … just deal with it.

Have a good attitude and explore all the possibilities/opportunities … once you have managed the experience itself.

Dealing with a true crisis takes character.  HOW you deal with a crisis says almost as much as what you do to deal with a crisis.  A crisis is a gauntlet. You have to have strength of character.  And strength in resiliency.  Please don’t measure yourself when dealing with a crisis by what opportunity you discovered from the crisis … measure yourself by how you survived.

A crisis.

It is a ‘precarious moment’ … a ‘crucial moment’ … a ‘dangerous moment.’

<East & West agree on this>

Seek to survive the moment. Don’t seek the opportunity for god’s sake. Just try and be aware should an opportunity arise <as you survive>. Leave the ‘opportunistic crisis management approach’ to people who write books and pontificate<but, please do not buy the books and live your life by all their bullshit>.

Oh.

And don’t misuse the Chinese definition of crisis. Because that is where this whole rant started. I am all for seeking opportunities and I have a shitload, too much, experience dealing with crises. But I will be honest … my first response in any crisis is “survival”. Once I can see, or sense, we will survive hen, yeah, I will most likely scan the horizon for some opportunities. But survival first.

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

“Biology gives you a brain. Life turns it into a mind.”

—

Jeffrey Eugenides

===========

Ok.

So I thought I had left the whole right brain left brain discussion behind.

And it reared its ugly head again one more time just the other day. And <distressingly> it was in a business environment, with senior people, discussing people’s strengths & weaknesses.

Look.

This whole right brain, left brain thing about creativity versus ‘logical’ thinking has to stop.

Stop … now <please>.

The truth?

We use our whole brain for thinking. Not halves. And right brain left brain mumbo jumbo is just that … a bunch of mumbo jumbo crap.

Yup.

The whole thing is bullshit.

Trust me <you don’t really have to because I will share reasons why you should>. And if you don’t believe me … well … if you ever want to drive a psychologist/psychiatrist/neurologist/any ‘ist’ crazy … bring it up.

With that … a reminder on what his whole thing is. In the right-left mythology … the left brain is logical, ordered, and analytic, and it supports reading, speech, math, and reasoning. In the same myth … the right brain is more oriented towards feelings and emotions, spatial perception, and the arts, and is said to be more creative.

Well.

Interesting myth. And it is just a myth. It is wrong (wrong & wrong … and maybe even wrong again).

And we have actually known for at least 30 years that this characterization is incorrect.

In fact the guy who probably put us all in this mess originally <Mike Gazzaniga who created the study in the 60’s that some pop psychologist used to write some fantasy-like left/right brain business books that became best sellers> who was a pioneer of modern study of brain hemispheric differences immediately tried to put a stop to the craziness as soon as it began with a book chapter titled “Left brain, right brain: A debunking.”

And he did that 25 years ago.

<note: he wrote it because the original crap was begun after he did a brain hemisphere study in the 60’s>

And, yet, there is still plenty of bunk to go around.

Its crazy.

I myself have gnashed my teeth <and sometimes growled> against the “left brain / right brain” myth for years <probably not 25 but a bunch>. It usually is personal <and I believe this is so for most people>. People are always trying to tell me how “right-brained” I am <or left … I get confused>.

Which I always find amusing since whatever I am doing invariably needs whatever the other side of the brain was supposed to be doing.

Plus. I would like to think I am using my whole frickin’ brain.

But.

It mostly aggravates me ,and kind of disturbs me> because it is deliberately misleading.

It has been used to support endless management dialogue telling us that we should liberate ourselves from too much left-brain ‘logical’ thinking and enjoy the fruits of our liberated, right-brained creativity <or vice versa depending on your management belief system>.

Look.

People may be inherently more visual, aural, spatial, sequential, intuitive, rational <or irrational> talented or non-talented … but it ain’t because of anything to do with left versus right brain.

Ok.

If you don’t trust me I pulled this from a medical journal.

A more technical explanation of how the whole thing went haywire:

==

You’ve probably heard this left/ right brain dichotomy before. It goes something like this: the left hemisphere of the brain is logical, deductive, mathematical, etc., while the right hemisphere is artistic, visual and imaginative. The idea stems at least partly from the classic studies of split brain patients performed by Sperry and Gazzaniga in the 1960s.

There are some functional asymmetries in the brain, and it is true that certain regions of both hemispheres are specialized for particular functions. Speech illustrates this, but also shows that nothing is ever so simple when it comes to the brain: in most right-handed people, speech is processed in both hemispheres, but predominantly in the left. In some left-handers, speech is processed either predominantly in the right hemisphere or on both sides.

So the notion that someone is “left-brained” or “right-brained” is absolute nonsense. All complex behaviours and cognitive functions require the integrated actions of multiple brain regions in both hemispheres of the brain. All types of information are probably processed in both the left and right hemispheres (perhaps in different ways, so that the processing carried out on one side of the brain complements, rather than substitutes, that being carried out on the other).

An article was published this week in the venerable (and reliable) psychology journal Psychological Bulletin, which synthesized 67 brain imaging studies of creativity. Among other things, it showed that creativity is not especially a right-brain function. In fact, two of three broad classes of creative thought that have been studied seem not to depend on a single set of brain structures.

What we call “creativity” is so diverse that it can’t be localized in the brain very well.

One might think that this study would put to rest at least part of the left brain/right brain mythology, namely, that the right hemisphere of the brain is more responsible for creative thought than the left.

One would think so, but I wouldn’t count on it.

==

My conclusion?

I put the whole right/left brain thing in the same category as reading a horoscope or reading my own tarot cards. If you give someone a vague positive description in which they can see themselves they will tend to agree with you. And that is dangerous on a number of levels <if people actually believe it>.

Ok.

Here is the main reason I bring this up <beyond the fact it drives me crazy and it is still being seriously discussed in the business world>. It has a detrimental effect on education and how we manage our youth. It is as bad as social profiling when it comes to kids.

Left brain kid.

Right brain kid.

You carry that label and not only does the child begin to see themselves in that label <it is kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy> the adults tag the child with the label. And start treating them that way. And expecting things based on the labeling.

All of a sudden the child is placed on the left, or right, brain treadmill <oops … I meant to say moving sidewalk>.

And then they are left there.

Uh oh.

One day the child wants to jump off the treadmill to hop on the other one for a while … <adults> “whoa … get back on your treadmill … you know that other one is only for the right brainers … and you will be much more successful on the left brain treadmill <sidewalk>.”

That, my friends, reads scary even if it seems just a theory.

And we all know that at some place, at some time, with some children … this is actually happening.

We need to squash this left/right brain myth forever. Now <please … again>.

We use all of our brain.

Brains are ambidextrous.

And even if you, personally, do not want to believe this, well, please … at least teach kids that is is so.

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

“Rabbit’s clever,” said Pooh thoughtfully.
“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit’s clever.”
“And he has Brain.”
“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit has Brain.”
There was a long silence.
“I suppose,” said Pooh, “that that’s why he never understands anything.”

—

Winnie the Pooh

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