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

Pope Francis saying No to An Economy of Exclusion

—-

Human beings are themselves considered consumer goods to be used and then discarded. We have created a “throw away” culture which is now spreading. It is no longer simply about exploitation and oppression, but something new. Exclusion ultimately has to do with what it means to be a part of the society in which we live; those excluded are no longer society’s underside or its fringes or its disenfranchised – they are no longer even a part of it. The excluded are not the “exploited” but the outcast, the “leftovers”.

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

This is about jobs., working, productivity and meaning. I will begin by leveraging off the opening quote and discuss exclusion & inclusion.

Exclusion in work is working in a detached way. You are not really being exploited you are just scraps in the business world. The ones doing the “mindless work.” Unfortunately, disengagement numbers suggest a shitload of people feel like they are in this category.

Inclusion in work, to me, is meaning or finding ‘joy in the task.’

In 1949 Harry F Harlow, Professor of Psychology at the University of Wisconsin, outlined an alternative  … something he called ‘intrinsic motivation’: “The performance of the task provided intrinsic reward. The joy of the task was its own reward.”

Beyond motivation this idea is also linked to productivity. Inclusion matters because economic knowledge exists in bits & pieces within an organization scattered amongst systems, process & people. This means value creation is often a dynamic discovery process, not a more static system driven process. In other words. The more workers are included in the discovery process the more dynamic the value creation.

Contribution.

Meaning at work truly comes down to one thing – contribution. What I mean by that is, if the response to your job/doing (the stimulus) is “I have contributed” <with tangible proof or intangible reward>, you will have meaning. Now. Meaning can come to you in a variety of degrees – all powerful in their own way, but in totality is most likely attaining the highest order of contribution.

The most basic is “I” have just become better. This is an internalization of personal improvement suggesting “I am not stagnant, I am growing.” The second phase is if you view that your ‘growth’ has contributed to the people most important to you – your team, tribe or department. The third phase is to the organization itself. Something you have done, like a pebble in a pond sending out ripples, has contributed to the larger success of the organization & business. It makes one part of the ‘productivity enterprise’ so one doesn’t feel inconsequential even if the enterprise is massive. Lastly, is society or community or global. Your little contribution was part of a big contribution positively affecting someone, or some-ones, outside the selling aspect of your business.

Progress.

Simplistically, we all want to get better. Better at being a person, our skills, socially, professionally, for our kids, morally, etc. Therefore. The progress measurement is most likely, at its simplest, “better today than I was yesterday, better tomorrow than I am today.” I am not a motivation expert, but if I set up a feedback loop to show this to a worker <doesn’t have to be daily but maybe weekly at minimum> then a worker sees progress tied to ‘contribution’ <value & meaning increase with this alignment>.

To be clear. This is different than milestones, sprints & any measured activity. While those things can be useful to get things done, they do not insure meaningful progress. They are completion checkmarks and meaning needs progress checkmarks.

Decision utility.

To me decision utility, especially when it comes to workplace productivity, is a mix of doing & thinking. Most people focus on the doing aspect of decision utility, but I believe everyone likes to ‘think’ in terms of ‘my thoughts matter’ <the harsher version is “I know I’m not stupid and having my thinking contribute to what I do and we do proves I am not”>.

That said. It was Clotaire Rapaille who pointed out in America our heroes are athletes, entrepreneurs, police officers, firefighters, and soldiers – all people who take action. We may respect thinkers, but we don’t celebrate them nearly as much as we do our ‘doers’. As Rapaille said: the American Culture Code for work is WHO YOU ARE. We often seek so much meaning in our jobs, if our job feels meaningless, then “who we are” is meaningless as well <at least in some dimension>.  If we feel inspired by our job, if we believe that we are doing something worthwhile in our work, that belief bolsters our sense of identity in that we feel like we have some grander Purpose.

Our work ethic is so strong because at the unconscious level, we believe that if we work hard and improve our professional standing, we become better people <note: that’s not particularly healthy but its good to recognize it>.

I bring in work ethic because this is where game theory plays a role (Jason Fox speaks of game theory as a way of viewing employee motivation). As a reminder, I see decision utility as in thinking & doing. Thinking as in ‘solving a complex issue/problem AND doing something about it.” I first began discussing game theory in 2010 when crafting critical thinking games for children. The fact kids like thinking & game theory ratchets up complexity of problems sequentially as one is solved. Critical thinking at its most basic level is trial & error. However. Game theory also ‘dials down’ complexity to insure one doesn’t get too frustrated with failure. A child gets rewarded for failed attempts as well as successful attempts. In other words, you get value off of decision utility where marginal units are rewarded with higher value <and standard units get rewarded despite failed attempts>. I envision workers would respond just as positively to this activity – a combination of thinking and doing to create some progress.

Lastly, with regard to decision utility, let me lean into ‘marginal units‘ and the economic concept of marginalism. The fact that prices don’t correspond to the total value of all goods in existence, but rather the marginal unit (the value of the next unit>. I am not a behavior expert, but I would suggest meaning in work would seem to be of more value to the worker if they were constantly being rewarded for the marginal unit and not just the costs of doing.

Lastly.

Values.

I was tempted to call this ethics, but I tend to believe work is more meaningful when it feel substantive of values (to increase value) and virtue (which is a feeling outcome of doing things with value substance).

“Striving to meet the deepest moral needs of the person also has important and beneficial repercussions at the level of economics. The economy needs ethics in order to function correctly — not any ethics whatsoever, but an ethics which is people-centred.”

Vatican (encyclical Caritas in Veritate)

Values is, well, the good stuff that infuses all the doing and thinking. As I have said numerous times before, winning the right way creates the highest satisfaction possible <versus just winning>. People feel ‘fuller progress’ if they know they did it ethically, within the rules/laws & with a sense of dignity. I could suggest this values orieneted work feeds the moral soul, but I will not. I will just say we sleep better at night when we do it this way.

Anyway.

Self management permits the internal to be maximized on an individual basis permitting the whole, the business itself, to intervene with regard to eternal problems. This matters because the most basic economic problem is allocation – how the business can allocate its scare resources so as to best serve the interests of the business as a whole. Business should seek to maximize its people resources, minds & bodies, t maximize its inherent other scarce resources.

This leads me to systems & processes (often called best practices) which are based on restrictive assumptions to create an equilibrium between inputs & outputs for efficiencies.

If the individual is empowered to maximize their productive (on all measures listed above) the internal maximization of resources naturally occurs so that the organization itself can assess external challenges which may demand resources. This ying & yang insures maximum use of people, process & resources.

So. Here is what I think.

We are a doing people. People inherently enjoy thinking & doing and when it is visible <showing progress> we actually derive meaning. As a corollary, When our doing doesn’t seem to offer value, or meaning, it strikes at us emotionally – in a negative way. Our soul is in doing. We find our way by saying “let’s go to work” on something. This includes even pursing the seemingly impossible. Because in the end we are dreamers. We do because we dream and dream big, i.e., give us an impossible assignment and let us go do it.

For in the end, for all the culture code speak and thoughts about what makes us happy, People are pretty simple. We like making the impossible possible. And that is what makes People, well, People. At the heart of dreams and making the impossible possible is, well, doing. In the end I struggle to find a better meaningful value than “doing a dream.”

————

“Consent yourself to be an organ of your highest thought, and lo! suddenly you put all men in your debt, and are the fountain of an energy that goes pulsing on with waves of benefit to the borders of society, to the circumference of things.”

—

Emerson

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

Let me tell you what’s on my mind as we head into 2020.

I worry the world is getting stupider on a daily basis. Ok. Not really. I imagine we are actually getting smarter every day, yet, the overarching public narrative just seems stupider every day. It’s just that it sometimes feels like smartness is whispering and dumbness is shouting. All of this dumbing down seems to center around complexity & simplicity. The world is complex and we have become convinced simplicity is the key to, well, everything. The truth is almost all hope, and possibilities, resides in managing complexity (if not the complicated) and fear (including lack of risk) thrives on simplicity. Within the wretched hollow in between resides much of the current narrative, and thinking, conflict. I would also suggest success, pursuit of happiness and societal health resides in how the conflict is conducted, and won, within that wretched hollow.

Which leads me to my hope for 2020. We should have more hope and possibilities than we could ever imagine. And, yet, instead, we seem to have more fear infringing upon the possibilities.

The answer to this challenge, at least to me, resides in some intellectual aspects, i.e., what is going on in with our attitudes that affect our heads, how we think and how we approach these things. So let me share what I believe would help us moving forward in 2020 to improve upon our hope and possibilities.

Issue one. over-simplification

Suffice it to say we have devolved into a society of sound bites and over simplification.

In business it seems to be all about simplicity.

In everyday Life it is ‘summarize it for me’ or ‘it’s simple <insert some explanation here>.’

In the end I can’t figure out if should be pointing the finger at us or them.

• Them because they think we are not capable of understanding some form of complexity and therefore they only offer up simplified versions of what needs to be communicated.
• Us because we either <a> demand a sound bite under the guise of ‘we only have time for the headline’ or <b> we only latch on to the fragment of the whole which we believe summarizes the whole.

Therefore I will point the finger at all of us and them.

Here is a Truth everyone really knows <albeit hesitant to admit>. Most things are just not that simple. An effect can have multiple causes and a cause can have multiple effects. I say this despite the fact naturally we would like all the dominoes to line up one after another and when one falls the next naturally is impacted and falls.

Well. Life and things don’t really work that way. Maybe in a controlled test environment but in real Life events are typically bombarded from a variety of directions and while not all ’causes’ are created equal <some can impact more than others> most things are too complex to be simplified into ‘one thing.’

Over simplifying simply means ignoring complexities.

Over simplifying simply means being consciously, or choicefully, ignorant.

Over simplifying … well … just doesn’t work in the long run.

Heuristically this simplistic bullshit (often fortune cookie wisdom) eases you through the moment only to have to doubly <or exponentially> invest energy later on.

Simply? Over simplification just doesn’t work.

Instead of dumbing things down to some simplistic sound bite we need to raise the level of general understanding & knowledge to the level of complexity of the ideas & systems and <frankly> the world in which we live within. Life isn’t simple so what makes us think over simplifying will offer solutions?

Anyway.

Factually, seconds of involvement <sound bites> versus minutes of involvement <deeper complex discussion> has a direct relationship to degrees of real knowledge.  i.e., seconds leads to shallow knowledge or let’s call it ‘less knowledgeable’ and minutes lead to something deeper.

Yes. This suggests our love of over simplification is a direct result of our ongoing belief there is not enough time to do everything we want to do (not understanding). This is crazy. Nuts in fact. Oversimplification only gives us the appearance of effective time management and certainly doesn’t translate into effective progress. Why? Oversimplification under assesses complexity, rarely demystifies uncertainty and is not particularly helpful in reconcepting & rethinking that which is (which is kind of a version of ‘future-proofing’ your Life).

Look. What I am suggesting is difficult and uncertain work, but certainly more satisfying and inspiring when we solve and recreate. This means less The Secret and more real thinking. Less positive attitude inspiration and more hard work behavior aspiration.

Neither hope nor possibilities can be resolved in a sound bite. They are simple sounding concepts with deeper complex workings. The fate of hope and possibilities lies in balance if we don’t invest in the hard work of ‘non over simplification.’

Maybe worse <pragmatically>? We won’t solve any of the problems <because most problems cannot be solved in simplicity and certainly not in over simplification>.

This leads me to #2.

Issue two. being intellectually insightful is about hard work.

Let me begin by suggesting that good ideas cannot be decided by number of tweet votes in favor of.

Life and ideas is not American idol. We are not all judges <and probably shouldn’t be on American idol either>.

Good ideas are rarely popular. This really means that being intellectually insightful requires more than a surface ‘this is what I think’ tweet popular vote. If we really want to do what needs to be done to maximize hope and possibilities, we have to hunker down and work hard. Work hard in that we need to reassemble the present (knowledge) & rethink things by using all aspects including economic thought and philosophy and the past … all of which means dealing with ambiguity and contradiction.

And, yes, that is hard work. But it is the kind of work that hones the intellectual insightfulness we need.

Instead of dumbing things down we need to be raising the level of general understanding to the level of complexity of the systems in which we are embedded and which are embedded in us.

And while you may balk at something like ‘intellectual insightfulness’ as too far reaching, suffice it to say, we just need to be smarter, less ignorant, more enlightened <open to additional thoughts> and more involved in the difficult and uncertain work of demystification and reconcepting ideas and systems in which we live in and, well, just plain rethinking shit.

• Simply talking about world-changing ideas will not simply make the world change. Changing the world takes work, really really hard work.
• Simply having a positive attitude ain’t gonna work. Hard work will work. And in this case I mean hard thinking
• Simply ‘doing’ aint gonna cut it. We need to be smarter. And whether you think about thinking this way or not, it ain’t about staring off into space doing nothing, thinking is a blue collar job. It’s about work.

Issue three. innovation is not <just> technology.

Innovation is the lifeblood of not only business but society & Life. It is the path to bettering lives. Period. Therefore, it demands we ‘consent to the highest thought. That said. For some reason we seem to be associating innovation with technology and just technology.

This type of thinking is lazy, not consenting to the highest thought.

This type of thinking leads us to possibly believe technology innovations will eventually solve all problems and maximize everyone’s Life as some point.

It’s a very dangerous idea because in reality of we focus just on technology as the solution we are actually preventing the real change we need.

It’s a very dangerous idea because it completely removes the human aspect.

Minds need to innovate too. Thinking and attitudes need to evolve and innovate.

New thought systems, economic systems and systems in which people live eat and breath all need to evolve and, yes, that happens through innovation <whether technology is involved or not>.

Technology is simply a path that runs parallel to culture <or society> and each needs to be run at the same pace <or at least be run side by side on occasion>.

A truth is that technology outpacing society simply exacerbates the flaws and limits of the slower runner. If a problem is endemic to a system, then we run the risk that technology simply amplifies the problems. Technology and culture are entangled. Technology and people are entangled.

Technologies may enable new ways of doing things (not just doing but thinking) and this effects culture. I would suggest we flip that equation and say if we want to maximize technological innovation we should innovate cultural/society structure and seek to augment it, to maximize its potential, through technological innovation.

At the moment it seems like we respond to technology rather than proactively drive technology.

Technology has certainly dramatically improved the overall quality of life. The paradox is that the system we have now may make amazing new technology possible, but at same time is creating such cultural conflict that maximizing technology ‘what could be’ seems impossible.

We need to innovate the systems in which technology exists: economically, culturally and philosophically.

So. 2020.

Look. Hope and possibilities abound in today’s world, but they are rarely just given … they need to be earned and they demand consenting to our highest level of thought.

I don’t believe simplicity is bad.

I don’t believe being optimistic or having a positive attitude is bad.

I don’t believe that if you don’t spend years to understand the complexities of a specific issue and have the ability to offer solutions you don’t deserve to engage in the subjet ct.

But we seem trapped at the extremes.

On one side too often we seem verbose and excessively caught up in complexity and nuance …for complexity and nuance’s sake. At minimum this costs us the opportunity of possibilities within a complex world and at its worst it makes the complex seem impossible to navigate, i.e., we lose hope for something better.

On the other side too often we oversimplify/simplify into Gladwellian bullshit or infotainment like sound bites simply for simplicity sake. At minimum a lack of knowledge suggests lack of participation or involvement; at maximum it suggests intellectual laziness and inbetween resides a comfortable simplicity of fear.

We cannot be lazy moving forward. We cannot afford to be lazy thinkers. For in this type of laziness lurks ignorance and it is ignorance we should fear — not any ideological argument or technological innovation which inserts itself into our daily lives, but ignorance.

And maybe that would be my hope of a cultural resolution for the new year. Avoid lazy thinking.

——-

“Consent yourself to be an organ of your highest thought, and lo! suddenly you put all men in your debt, and are the fountain of an energy that goes pulsing on with waves of benefit to the borders of society, to the circumference of things.”

———

No predictions for 2020 just a desire we all “consent yourself to be of your highest thought.”

---

postscript: some of this was written in my 2013 end of year post. I believed some thoughts were even more relevant for 2020 than they were in 2013.

==========

“I prefer physical exhaustion over mental fatigue any day.”

—-

Clotilde Hesme

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

“There is a construct in computer programming called ‘the infinite loop’ which enables a computer to do what no other physical machine can do – to operate in perpetuity without tiring.

In the same way it doesn’t know exhaustion, it doesn’t know when it’s wrong and it can keep doing the wrong thing over and over without tiring.”

—–

John Maeda

=========

Well. Employee engagement is the key to maximizing productivity potential. Period. We can gussy up engagement with respect, safety, collaboration, etc, but business is about business and engagement has to do with the business of doing business well.

To be clear. I think of engagement on three levels:

• first is vision. Employees engage better, & have more interest to do so, when they not only know where the business is going, but are engaged with the vision
• second is how you go about doing business. Employees engage better, and have more interest in doing so, when they are rested, when they feel ‘psychological safety’, when they believe they are contributing (meaning) and when they get to do what they do with dignity & integrity
• third is energy. Employees engage better, and have more interest to do so, when they aren’t exhausted (mentally or physically) and are fresh.

You will find an infinite number of articles on the first and second. Heck. Even I have written about them. To me, the third is one of the least discussed and most overlooked aspect of engagement.

What do I mean? We talk about business transformation and ‘agile’ and constant innovation and relentless focus on the customer and, well, it all sounds exhausting. Add in when experts suggest leading an organization is like running a race (its actually nothing like it) and, shit, even I start feeling exhausted. Let’s be clear. Exhaustion and business is bad.

So. That said. Leading a business is more like managing the health of a body in which you do want some exercise and you do want some healthy eating and you do want to insure proper amount of sleep. Suggesting you want to run a business like you are in some marathon is silly and misguided. It is just as misguided to think about an organization like a machine with gears and moving parts and keeping it well-oiled and full of gas and shit like that.

So let’s talk about organizational exhaustion.

If you stay away from silly metaphors about what an organization is, or is not, simplistically you are trying to insure your organization is putting forth a proper amount of effort against the efforts you want it, and need it, to be working against. This is a daily, weekly, monthly and annual leadership objective. Different leaders have different styles working against this objective, but, simplistically, that is the objective.

Now. HOW you meet this objective typically takes some experience.

What do I mean? I assume most leaders do not inherently know exactly how to pace an organization. Pacing an organization takes some experience and some practice, some mistakes and some successes and then you zero in on how to do it well <or just keep getting better at it>.

Using me as an example. I liked a hard charging group when I got to a team/group management level. And I, personally, would be ecstatic if I didn’t have to sleep and I could go 24/7. In the beginning, that was my vision for my groups.

By the way, in general, good intentions/bad idea.

But what that meant was that I probably learned this lesson, pacing and applying effort appropriately, too slowly <and I most likely will have a bunch of past team members chuckling painfully in agreement>. Going hard charging all the time is not sustainable — you just have a constantly exhausted group. Effective hard charging doesn’t mean 24/7 it means picking your moments and going hard.

That said, in desiring to have hard charging organizations there are certainly some lessons learned to limit needless organizational exhaustion. Here are a couple I learned along the way:

• I had to be consistent.

It doesn’t get discussed often enough, but expectations go both ways. As a leader setting clear expectations is certainly expected <and I will mention that in my second learning>, but it really helps an organization if you establish clearly what people can expect of you – behaviorally and attitudinally.

Words surely matter.

Setting expectations surely matter.

Actions surely matter.

But consistency matters above all.

No leader is perfect and no leader will make the perfect decisions, let alone good decisions, all the time. Therefore it becomes incredibly important to just be consistent. Your organization, and specifically people, will become better accustomed to where you will be really really good and where you may be slightly off <and they will naturally accommodate both>. In other words your consistency actually offers your employees some direction for what they should do. Your best people will assess situations and know where you are consistently most likely right on, know the things you consistently overlook and know where you consistently leave some spaces for them to ‘do their thing.’

• Keep some strong threads of consistency.

Threads of consistency permit an organization to not have to think about some things. There were some really simple tactical things that I could control.

• What do you mean <clarity in articulation>
• Where are we going <set a visible North Star>
• What do you want me to do <pragmatic expectations>

If you could keep these three things solid and not have people milling about talking amongst themselves on these three questions, you were staying ahead of the game. It permits your organization to progress and not be stagnant. It permits your organization  to not invest unnecessary energy against those things and apply energy against doing shit.

Of course, a leader doesn’t have to do these things.

Of course, a leader doesn’t do these things at their own peril.

The peril? Exhaustion. frustration. Waste energy. Not doing these things has an expense to an organization and mostly that is defined by two things – time & energy. I would point out that both of those things are not infinite resources to an organization. I point it out because if they are finite than you better have them available to you when you actually need them. And that is why I chose to not use an organization as a race metaphor at the beginning, but rather an organization as a body metaphor.

Look.

As a leader of larger organization you can hide your misjudgments or poor decisions in a variety of creative ways; mostly by shifting resources from one group to another or have another department assume some different responsibilities or by shifting some people into the work gaps or to buttress the best people who are flagging with some support.

But that is also not sustainable.

The organization gets exhausted doing all that maneuvering, in addition, they get exhausted by you doing that.

I will admit that I got better at this as I moved up in responsibility. And, I will admit, I partially got better at it simply because I had more moving parts, departments and groups to manage. That is because I loved working 24/7 and I thrived with the energy of solving problems and, well, just energy. In a larger organization there is always something going on, some project or problem or initiative somewhere within an organization that needs attention or needs a little ‘push.’ This naturally permitted me to let one part of the organization ‘rest’ while another part of the organization ‘ran.’

Oh. Think about that a second or two if you will.

What I just suggested is an organization as a well-rounded circle, or the classical myth of a ‘well rounded person’, is simply a myth. In fact the idea of it creates a false, and sometimes dangerous in terms of expectations, narrative in our heads.  As an organization learns and thinks and gains experience it does not expand smoothly but, rather, raggedly. Day after day, despite the fact it may feel like business is a grind or it may even feel too fast <or too slow>  an organization is constantly running toward some thought and experience, or, leaping from danger or something  disagreeable or some problem or some success and suffice it to say it is anything but balanced. And it is certainly not creating any smooth well rounded growth.

My main point?

There is no such thing as a well-rounded person and there is no such thing as a well rounded organization. A leader may certainly aspire to create a well-rounded organization but, even at your best, the organization at any given point in time is some shape other than a circle.

The good news is that this means organizations also naturally get excited to explore the edged forays into interesting things and, in parallel, get snagged on the ragged edges of unexplored thoughts or even second guesses with regard to the lack of smoothness in what is happening in departments, groups and efforts … as well as thoughts and growth.

Yes.

I will point out that this is why an organization can feel slightly uncomfortable on occasion as employees, departments and groups wrestle with this discomfort, as well as dealing with the ragged edges constantly poking at everyone, but I will also point out that is why the things I mentioned earlier become even more important –the consistency, the clarity and the lack of chaos.

I will also point out that his kind of ‘uncomfortable’ is okay. To a leader it is actually a sign that things are going okay and the organization is not stagnant <and good leaders know how to point out good non-stagnancy to calm uncomfortable>.

All that said. I can unequivocally state that no organization is successful when needlessly exhausted. They can be tired at the end of the day, but exhaustion is a symptom not of ‘a good day’s work’, rather, unnecessary mental stress trying to get things going, understand what to do and what to say and kibitzing over why it is so hard to get what seems like normal shit done.

When an organization is running well, whether the 350 million, 350 or the 35 recognize it, there are many days when the 1, the leader, leaves the office exhausted. And the one is exhausted despite the fact that 349,999,900 people, 341 people or 34 people went to sleep that day feeling pretty good about their day and their needs & wants & hopes took one step forward that day and they are a good tired … not needlessly exhausted.

Oh. Despite the fact the one went to bed exhausted, that one will arise the next day fresh because the organization is ready to go again the next day and not organizationally exhausted (the one – leader – draws energy from a fresh organization).

I will end by pointing out that an exhausted group, an exhausted department or an exhausted organization is the sign of poor leadership. And, most importantly, it is a precursor to signs of inefficiencies and declines in measured productivity.

====

“If truth be told, the easy road is nothing more than an armchair in clever disguise. And if you look around, it seems that there are a whole lot of people in the furniture business.”

―

Craig D. Lounsbrough

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

“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.

But small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it.

Beware of false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves …”

————–

Berean Study Bible

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

So. I tend to believe most of us learn, fairly early in our careers, that bad ideas do not die on their own. In fact … as you gain more experience you actually find that bad ideas can often be incredibly hard to kill –they may actually have more than nine lives.

At exactly the same time most of us also learn that good ideas rarely are seen as the greatest thing since sliced bread and embraced as a good idea as soon as they are presented.

Think about that for a second. Bad ideas are incredibly hard to kill and good ideas can be incredibly hard to bring to life.

Well. That’s pretty fucked up. And, yet, despite learning this I still believe most of us are surprised when we find a bad idea still breathing and a good idea is breathing its last breath.

Shit. Even I forget this lesson despite having seen some of the most bad ideas in the world live despite my best efforts and some of the goodest of ideas die despite my best efforts.

I seem to keep forgetting it despite the fact the world is filled with some incredibly absurdly bad factually incomprehensible, or defensible, ideas.

Forgetting this is dangerous.

It creates a Life & business world strewn with bad ideas which can quite easily lead to a complacency that bad ideas will exist no matter what we do, or worse, complacency when faced with a bad idea because we believe it is fruitless to fight it.

I will not spend a lot of time on complacency, but suffice it to say it is a sneaky little bastard especially when it comes to bad ideas. But the bigger issue is that, for several reasons, we tend to let our guard down when faced with a bad idea.

Reason 1: The difference between a really bad idea and a ‘shrug your shoulders a little’ bad idea can often be indiscernible.

We have a bad habit of dismissing bad in its initial stages as just “bad.” This lets a hardier & sturdier bad idea off the hook. It is quite possible most of us just hope it smothers itself in its badness and just goes away but more often than not … it does not. And, yet, time and time again we make an initial assessment of “bad, maybe & good” and mostly dismiss ‘bad’ and move on.

I could suggest that not all bad ideas are created equal, but it is probably better advice to simply treat all bad ideas as equally bad. Don’t waste your time discerning the difference; just assume a bad idea will be a motherfucker to kill.

Reason 2: Bad ideas have an innate knack to normalize their being.

Once you let a bad idea off the hook when it is initially introduced it has a nasty habit of slipping into the general conversation as “possibility.” In other words because it didn’t die before it could draw its first breath it somehow becomes normalized as some viable breathing idea.

Yeah. Normalizing is a word that is being tossed round a lot lately.

As a corollary that all bad ideas can look quite similar <bad ideas> we have a tendency to simply normalize them <as ideas that may not be as good as some other ideas>. Bad is a fucking big bucket to normalize as simply “another idea to consider.”

It gets worse at that point.

“Outsider” ideas take on some personality that almost adds viability even though it is still a bad fucking idea. It’s like all bad ideas wear black and blend into any crowd … and almost become cool by doing so. Yeah. Just ponder that for a second. How many bad ideas get a label of “cool idea”, but it’s actually a bad idea. Once a bad idea falls into the “cool thing to consider” category it becomes an aggravating difficult challenge for the actual good idea.

Anyway. A moment back to complacency.

Reason 3: Complacent is a squooshy word and concept.

I tried googling complacency with bad ideas and got only 514000 results. Uhm. But looking within the top 8 results … the office, west point, teen life, politics, religion and a general one … there were none with regard to bad ideas.

This suggests complacency strikes everyone at different times in our lives. But in no place could I find anyone discussing how complacency in our thinking as in how everyone can see a bad idea as a bad idea and therefore we can relax <become complacent> because … well … bad ideas just get thrown away because they are bad.

Complacency is squooshy.

Let’s face it. No one wants to invest energy chasing after some bad idea to be sure it is dead. Sure. The most experienced of us absolutely circle back after the original bad idea has been killed to make sure it is really dead. But we don’t circle around it and hover over it to see if it is really dead … we just check in on it. Basically we have better things to do than stick around to smother the sonuvabitch to be sure it is dead. But, in the harsh spotlight of truth, this is plain & simple complacency.

I have been burned by bad ideas so many times I have come to sometimes think of bad ideas as tsunamis. They begin as a small shaking of the earth miles down under the surface of the ocean completely unseen. In this metaphor you may have actually been in the frickin’ meeting where it was declared  bad idea and even been there when it got discarded, but you just were not aware of the earth moving way way down under your feet.

From there the bad idea can gain some incredible momentum only to build into some huge wave which can wash over even the strongest criticism at a later date <let alone drown a shitload of good ideas>. Suffice it to say … it can drive you crazy.

I think we have all been in this situation at work.

Once a bad idea has some momentum they are next to impossible to kill.

I sometimes believe this is because <a> some people pretend a second rate idea is first rate and <b> a shitload of people cannot see the difference between a second rate idea and a first rate.

==========

“What’s terrible is to pretend that second-rate is first-rate.”

Doris Lessing,

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

But I actually believe it is because we give bad ideas a free pass. What I mean by that is we take a good idea and start running the ‘idea to implementation’ gauntlet defending it and selling it and sharing it all with the end goal in mind. All the while, as we focus on the good, we don’t notice <or maybe it is just a nagging aggravation along the way> that the bad idea is also in the ‘idea to implementation’ gauntlet, but getting a free ride because it isn’t really being sold … it just keeps appearing along the way as “the alternative idea to the good one” <note: if you ever hear this phrase your bad idea/bullshit antennae should be on high alert>.

While you were focused on the good and paying attention to something else the bad idea has gained “a voice”. That voice can be a person or it can simply be some “myth” associated with it. And when that happens you can find yourself hearing about a bad idea in some hallway from someone who really knows nothing about it and, uhm, they speak of its myth in some positive way. Suffice it to say the moment that happens … you are fucked. The bad idea is not only alive and breathing; it is healthy <in almost mythical proportions>.

Ok. So rather than bitch about bad ideas let me make a suggestion to everyone.

Life, and business, is one big mosh pit of shit. The shit is made up of stuff to do, responsibilities, everyday commitments and responsibilities … as well as ideas. This mosh pit is a big dark gloomy cloud of stuff swirling around.

Now. The ideas shit is a little different. What I mean by that is 99% of ideas do not just happen <good and bad ones> like most of the other stuff in the mosh pit.

Ideas need some ‘oomph’ to get thru the mosh pit. They need to navigate a narrow winding path through the big mosh pit of shit from the moment they are introduced to the moment in which it reaches a point where the idea shifts to some action. As noted earlier, in most cases, the path usually has two ideas jostling each other along this path … a good idea and a bad idea.

===========

“Our minds are a battle ground between good and bad ideas; we are whatever side wins the battle”

Bangambiki Habyarimana

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

I imagine my real point is that bad ideas do not die simply because they are bad. You cannot be silent, you cannot ignore them, you cannot be complacent and you cannot simply champion the good idea. You actually have to fight bad ideas.

It may be aggravating to do so.

It may take more energy than you want to.

It may even get a little absurd in how often you feel like you have put a knife through its heart and you still find it alive and kicking not long after. But if you want good ideas to win you have to accept the burden of the fight. And this fight has a number of rounds and takes place over an extended period of time.

Here is what I know about fighting bad ideas. I now assume they never die. I believe they simply end up in second place to a good idea that competed better.

That last sentence may be one of the best pieces of advice I have ever given to the business world.

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

“It’s not what you actually do in life that you regret just the opportunities that pass you by. It’s even in what you choose to do the opportunities you do not let pass by. In those moments it is sometimes only that you are not courageous or brave but rather you have simply exchanged one fear for another. Afraid for what we were about to do and how you will do versus the fear of what we might not do.”

—–

Craig Johnson

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

“The cave you fear to enter holds the treasure you seek.”

Joseph Campbell

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

It recently occurred to me that at the end of 2014 someone had asked me to explain that year and I said “it was the year of fear.”  It matters here in 2019 because I think its reckoning time. Why? If 2014 was a year of fear so was 2015, 2016 (one candidate ran almost solely on stoking fear), 2017, 2018 and, frankly, 2019. It is not difficult to imagine, if one sits back, to think “that much fear mongering is just not sustainable.”

Let me remind you a bit about 2014 just so you can see what I think was the point where fear became a ‘thing.’

Now. It would have been easy to suggest it was a year of anger or intense negativity or a seemingly relentless crisis and end up all the way to an overall anger at society.

I could have begun with beheadings, disease, terror attacks, missing airliners, police brutality, and the threat of world war spanning Russia or North Korea or the Middle East or … well … within America itself.

I could have listed the Ebola outbreak in Western Africa, Russia’s annexation of Crimea, the ongoing turmoil in Ukraine or even the emergence of the Isis.

Instead, I think of how we, the people, responded to all these ‘things’ <events>. All you had to do is look around America and, well, see fear and anxiety <mixed in with what could appear like anger, but it truly is only fear & anxiety>.

Let me highlight the response to the Ebola outbreak. Millions of people worked themselves into a panic over a disease that has claimed the lives of fewer Americans that year than some random exploding air bag.

Why did it seem so bad? One word: “exogenous.” Exogenous events are events impossible to predict.

Let me be clear. Most events are unpredictable and, yet, there is no lack of people predicting shit. There are a shitload of ‘experts’ who espouse their brilliance on ‘I predicted’ or ‘how could we not have seen the consequences when we did <or didn’t do> this??!!??”

Its bullshit. Everyone who ‘predicted’ either:

<a> has a resume filled with predictions that never came to fruition therefore their one successful prediction is an anomaly, or

<b> their ‘prediction’ or hindsight brilliance has some other prediction attached to it <a consequence> which is false.

For example.

• Those who predicted ‘the rise of ISIS because <insert whatever brilliant criticism of Obama here>” usually also attached ‘terrorism coming to the United States!’ <when ISIS is mostly dedicated to killing other Muslims>. The net? Domestic white nationalism terrorism is actually the larger issue in the US.
• Those who predicted “Russia invading Ukraine/Crimea as a reflection of weak America” also predict World War 3. The net? No world war.

Suffice it to say that predictions are shit. And people who claim predictive events are shit holes.

The world is strewn with exogenous events … events impossible to predict.

And the world is also strewn with assholes with access to media <who loves to put these assholes onscreen> who love to treat exogenous events as rational predictable events <and therefore someone can be blamed>. And the world is strewn with everyday schmucks <people> who love to believe exogenous events are anything but exogenous.

Regardless. All that really matters is that things that are impossible to predict create fear among normal everyday people.

We like to think the world is predictable <despite the fact they know that their own lives include a strong thread of unpredictability> and get absurdly indignant when uncovering rational reasons <something to blame> for seemingly irrational events.

Trump doesn’t help.

News media doesn’t help.

Someone wrote somewhere that news today is like a:

… group of kids playing soccer: there is no strategy, just a raw, run, get it response. All running after all of those balls, irrespective of origin, and just trying to shoot. Plays happen in bursts, with no resolution.

It seems like the news network’s purpose is to let you know that something is on fire and that we need to burn someone at the stake for starting the fire <but there was no arsonist … it was just lightning>.

I say that … but … we cannot blame media. Shit. I cannot even blame Trump. It is us … the people.

Sure.  The media are surely bound to have a role in exaggerating common misperceptions and Trump has  massive role in stoking fear thru absurd lies, but, here is the deal … the fact that this happens everywhere shows we can’t lay the blame entirely with the media/Trump; it’s a much broader, attitudinal ‘people’ global issue.

The issue is us, the people, and how we remember information, how vivid demonstrations/metaphors are retained in our heads, regardless of whether they are describing something that is an exception rather than the rule.

We also suffer from what psychologists call ‘emotional innumeracy.’ This is where we focus more on what is worrying us more than trying to get the right answers, i.e., concern leading to our misperceptions as much as our misperceptions creating our concern.

Commenter on Ignorance article:

We may be ignorant on proportions and statistics but we know and can trust what our eyes see

Example we don’t have to be told immigration is out of control and all the rest of it

This comment reflects how most people respond to facts & information and proves the point I am making. People cannot trust what they see in terms of statistics & experts because they filter what they see through what they think.

Look. There are two accepted approaches in the quest for knowledge – the deductive and the inductive.

The danger of inductive method is that we can be led to a false conclusion even if we begin with the correct assumptions. It actually makes more sense to deduce — challenge and modify and assumption repeatedly until you find truth. Unfortunately in everyday life most people do the opposite — develop a set of rules based on personal experience <and beliefs> and then apply them to other experiences.

In addition. We tend to view events, even global events in which we have no set of experiences nor have any dimensionalized real perspective, through rules of our own personal experience. Let’s add in an uncomfortable truth that most times we don’t care unless we believe it will affect us.

For example. In August 2014 ISIS became a household word striking fear into Americans that with their long reach global organization they would terrorize America.

Why? Despite the fact Isis took control of Raqqa that January the world wasn’t interested until they beheaded an American journalist in August. All the while ISIS went ahead killing other Muslims.

And our fear became spread over a variety of fronts mainly because while the corporate al-Qaeda had been confronted and squeezed, it had become a franchise <ISIS or al-Qaeda on the Arabian peninsula or al-Shabaab in Somalia> & more nimble, violent and capable of planning around local defenses. Even more importantly, it became unpredictable, yet, a number of very vocal people (mostly politicians) started predicting things.

Simply. The events and words forced everyone into a liminal space. Which means, simply, we fear what we do not understand.

We understood Bin Laden. We understood a Taliban stronghold <dedicated to US terrorism>.  Once that went away we lost our basis of understanding <and the unknown created a disproportionate fear>.

But this isn’t about ISIS. This is about fear and how we people respond to fear.

Because in our fear we want to assess blame or seek to have someone destroy what we do not understand.

Another 2014 example? In March a civilian passenger plane disappears without trace when Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 vanishes. Yup. It happened. A big passenger plane with lots of people just disappeared … and then it stayed disappeared. Our fear resorted to blame <as if people sought to be incompetent and kill hundreds of people> all the way to absurd conspiracies and speculation.

In May polio made a global comeback. But America has a vaccine for polio <and I think it was impossible to tie it to a conspiracy or some incompetence of Barack Obama> so Americans didn’t care and we had no fear.

In July Israel and Palestine basically went to war <exchanging a shitload of rockets>. But because Israel has an army and Palestine does not … Israel won.

Well.  We think they did because something else newsworthy appeared for TV and all of a sudden no one was talking about Gaza anymore.

So I imagine I should admit I have no clue how it ended.

And we had no fear in America other than some absurd fear that it had something to do with diminished American impact upon global affairs.

Then. In October we started screaming Ebola can kill you and is going to kill you. By November we realized Ebola wasn’t going to kill you and didn’t <and maybe the CDC really knew what they were doing>.

Anyway.

I recap some stories to point out how fear dictated our view of the world in 2014. And you know what? I could have recapped almost the exact same things, with different storylines, for each year since. And here we are in 2019 with a President shouting at the top of his lungs that fear has a home within the borders of the USA and that actually we should be fearful.

Let’s be clear.

While USA has issues, 99% of the 340million people wake up, are relatively healthy, a shitload of them go to work , are productive, interact with people around them in a courteous way, go home a little tired but to a home they are relatively happy with, talk with some friends and, in general, have not much to fear.

So there you have it:

You can make a lot of something from nothing.  Even the search for nothing or the threat of nothing, if the people allow fear to play a role.

2014 was hardly reason to be blanketed in fear, and yet, we were. The same for 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019.

In general every year we constantly made something from nothing.

I believe we are at our time of reckoning. I believe we are at the point where, well, we are exhausted and almost everyone realizes that all those fears we have had over all these years, well, never came to anything. I believe it’s actually the moment where more people stop acting like ignorant scaredy cats and focus more on rational thinking than emotional thinking.

Sure.  In the minds of most people <everywhere> the idea that certainty & predictability, and sticking to your personal attitudes & beliefs, is better than uncertainty and compromise.

Yes. It has become easier and easier for a person to find some media outlet <television, radio, or Internet> they agree with. And it is a natural human tendency to find ‘your people’ <people who share the same philosophical view>.

To be clear … we are fairly simple as people in what we want and like:

• want to know for sure whether something’s right or wrong, and
• tend to follow or bond with those who agree with our ideas, and
• through confirmation bias, ignore or attack things that contradict our personal beliefs <or experiences>.

These are normal human reactions.  We all do it.

In addition.  We naturally tap into emotions and emotional responses are much faster than intellectual ones.  And traditionally once we let emotions take total control we lose the ability to think rationally. But I think in a time of reckoning, even in the face of loudmouthed predictors of fear & doom, people are so emotionally exhausted that the ‘time of rational’ is upon us.

Look. In any ideology there are ‘fundamentalists’ on both extremes with the majority of people spread about on a continuum. The many in the middle <who tend to view multiple aspects of a single idea> mostly calmly discuss different points of view. All the while extreme point-of-views <and the ‘partial truth’ advocates> are LOUDLY INSISTING THEY ARE CORRECT.

In the time of reckoning I believe a lot of people will just shut out the loud asshats seeking rational explanations and rational narratives for the future.

Some people may associate this with authenticity or ‘being genuine.’ I do not. I think this is about elevating rational in the discourse. Period.

I believe it is Rational’s moment in time because most people are tired of all aspects of fear:

• Fear of wanting some reason <and not finding simplicity in a complex world>.
• Fear of the unpredictable.
• Fear of the exception being the ‘rule.’
• Fear that it is bad & getting worse.

Which leads me to my finishing thought and my message to people:

“Nothing is ever as good or as bad as it seems.”

• Nothing is ever as good as it seems.

This may sound pessimistic and while there are certainly lots of good things in life & in the world it’s important to remember that if something seems too good to be true; it usually is.

This is the insidious side of fear. Fear that it will not stay ‘good.’ and constantly seeking out things & people to blame for it ‘not being as good as it used to be.’

Stop. Just fucking stop it.

It most likely wasn’t as good as you thought it was <particularly because when we look at things in the rear view mirror they always seem to look better than they really were>.  We shouldn’t be dictated by a fear of ‘losing good.’ Just be careful and maintain some perspective.

• Nothing is ever as bad as it seems

When it seems bad it is incredibly easy to exaggerate the severity of the situation <in our own perceptions as well as by asshats trying to influence our thinking>. Most times it is not as bad as it seems and it will not become as bad as you imagine.  Sure. There are ‘we are in deep shit’ moments and events. But most of the time it is just not as serious as we think. And most times it will not have as serious repercussions as you imagine.

Both of these are about perspective. Fear makes us lose perspective.  Lose the fear … gain perspective.

Look. 2014 thru 2019 was not as bad as we feared.  In fact. Most of what we feared never happened.

What a waste of energy.

And who is to blame?

Us. The people. No one else.

Not the government. Not the media. Not the president. Not some incompetent greedy business leader.

Not anyone but us. The people.

Fear can only happen if we allow it to happen.

I believe it is our time of reckoning where we get tired of fear and, well, I’m hoping the outcome is we create a string of years of unfear.

I believe it is a time for rational words, thinking and thoughts stepped to the forefront. I know a shitload of people will shove this up my ass – “rational doesn’t get people excited” or “emotional engages.” You know what? Context matters. For 5 years we have constantly been told to fear something. Shake the fucking etch a sketch. Share some rational thinking in an engaging way and, well, I am willing to bet a lot of money a lot of people are in the market for something other than fear.

Ponder.

Regardless of whether you agree with my solutions I think most people agree we are at a moment of reckoning. If you do, well, then rethink my solution because the moment is important.

===========

“I quote others only to better express myself.” 

Michel de Montaigne <The Complete Essays>

==========

So <part 1>. This is about me and how often I use quotes as well as my attitude on using quotes and, I imagine, me in business <because I like to use quotes in presentations and in teaching>.

So <part 2>. Ok. I imagine this is actually not about me, but quotes in general.

Regardless. I use quotes all the time. And I take solace in the fact that Montaigne did also. As he, I use quotes all the time because, well, they say it better than anything could ever say. They do help me express myself.

I also use quotes to make a larger point. In today’s world it seems like there is a deep naive thread that some things have never been thought about before, never been discussed before and, even more importantly, have never happened before.

99% of the time someone really smart has thought about the same thing someone today is pontificating about as “the new disaster of the day.”

Which leads me to the fact I use quotes because it is the quote that often makes me think of what to write.

I would imagine over 95% of what I write begins with, or from, a quote.

Uhm. Basically that means 95%+ of the time I do not have an original thought. Yup. Someone else has the original thought and I simply think about it and share something.

Yikes. Does that mean I am unoriginal?

Shit. I’m not sure I should care.

<by the way … I am not sure anyone should care about being unoriginal>

I’m not in the business of original thought. I am in the business of sharing thinking.

That’s the way I look at it.

If I get lucky and am actually original on something that’s simply a bonus. An unexpected bonus.

But I am fairly realistic in that I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer and there have been a shitload of ‘sharp knives’ who have figured out how to say something in a wonderful collection of words and syllables and metaphors which I can only envy … so I use them.

In addition … I imagine this is simply an extension of who I am as a person. A renovator and not a builder. Or what Pareto <an Italian sociologist> called the Speculator and the Rentier.

The Speculator is constantly preoccupied with the possibilities of new combinations.

Rentiers are more conservers of the routine … he also calls them Stockholders.

While I am not sure I agree life is as simple as he suggests, I do agree different people think different ways … and inevitably they have different skill sets <despite the fact many business people would like to think they are good at everything>.

Me? It is absolutely, clearly, in my DNA to be “constantly preoccupied with possibilities of new combinations.”

Anyway. Maybe that is why I use quotes so often. And I will continue to use them until I am sure I have something original to say I will use quotes.

“[A] quotation is a handy thing to have about, saving one the trouble of thinking for oneself, always a laborious business.”

A.A. Milne

Now. I will be honest. I am absolutely positively sure I misuse quotes all the time. So how do I sleep at night knowing that I do so?

Well.

You get to see the quote.

You get to think about the quote.

You get to interpret the quote as you see fit.

You get to see how I interpreted the quote … and agree or disagree.

In the end I imagine that is all I can ask for when I use a quote.

Thinking. Not ‘enlightened’ thinking <that would be slightly pretentious … don’t you think?>. Just thinking.

I tend to think when I use a quote I hope it makes the reader think. Thinking is a means to an end. Thinking begets enlightened. I don’t believe anyone ‘enlightens’, but rather inspires being enlightened.

<note: as you can probably tell I often spend a lot of time trying to explain enlighten conflict to people as well as get a lot f shit about ‘so you are enlightened’ … of which I typically sigh … and say ‘I may be one of the most unenlightened people you will ever meet … but I am certainly a work in progress in terms of trying to become enlightened>

Anyway. I also imagine that I try and use some more obscure quotes and words so in the ‘unexpected’ or ‘new unseen words’ I hope you think anew.

Ok. But quotes themselves.

Well. I admit … I dislike … well … no. Hate. Hate when a quote is used to make a point for which it wasn’t really stated to make a point for.

Many people flippantly use quotes to make a point. Ignoring the context. Often slightly changing the quote. Usually using the part they want and selectively ignoring other parts. Ok. I bet I do it on occasion. And I simply take solace in the fact that maybe all that matters is that we think.

Here is what I know for sure.

Professional writers are professional for a reason, i.e., they know how to put words together in ways that emote.

Amateur writers, while certainly not as good as professional writers, can stumble upon a wonderful moment of clarity in which they put together words in a way that emote.

I seek those moments of words. For in those moments, using other’s words, you step into a world of unimaginable thought.

That, my friends, is my paradise. A world of thought.

I can only hope that on occasion I show you that world. That is why I use quotes.

And because I am fairly sure I cannot do it with my own words. That is why I can live, quite well thank you, being unoriginal.

This I am today … I was yesterday … and will most likely be tomorrow.

Ah. That was  paraphrase of a Louis L’Amour quote <one of my favorites>:

“Everyone has it within his power to say, ‘This I am today; that I will be tomorrow.”

Louis L’Amour

====

… my grandfather taught me … “… the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.”

—

Stephen Covey’s grandson

====

Well. This is about focus and decisions (because if you focus on the wrong decision you are in trouble).

Anyway. When I saw “… the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing” this morning I was reminded how much most of us, young & old, in business suck at this. Yet, it sounds so frickin’ simple … how could we all suck so much at this?

A couple thoughts on that:

– We get distracted.

– The main thing we select is not really the main thing.

Let’s be clear. The ‘main thing’ is the relationship between “what I elect to, or should, focus on” and actual ‘focus’, i.e., the decision and the commitment to the decision. If you get either side of this relationship wrong you may as well accept ‘non success.’

Let me explain the two things.

Distraction.

While what I am now going to say sounds contrary to popular belief — I am not sure life and business is any more distracting now than it was years ago. The props may have changed but, in my view, distractions are distractions and all distractions of any size, quantity or quality are persistent sonuvabitches. In addition. It is this view, the traditionally historical strength of distractions to distract us, that drives my belief that anyone of any age sucks at the main thing remaining the main thing. Distractions test our commitment – at any age. And, frankly, I could argue that if you are so easily distracted than it CAN’T be your ‘main thing’ <but I won’t>.

For young people everything is typically incredibly overwhelming as it is, therefore, distractions can be a coping mechanism, i.e., relief from the overwhelming or a bad way of coping with overwhelming.

For older people, regardless of experience, it isn’t that things are overwhelming it’s just that you always know that no matter how much you do there is always more to do and that ‘more to do’ will always be there waiting. Therefore we older folk justify the distractions <in our heads> as ‘the main thing may have a deadline but it will not disappear simply because I may elect to ignore it for a minute or two.’

But. Here is the most persistent distraction in business – success in the present.

In a world which is constantly screaming “adapt, adapt, adapt’ it becomes incredibly easy to start following success. And I mean INCREDIBLY EASY. Success is a seductive bastard. And far too often success in the present can look an awful lot like long term success <their costumes look very similar>.

All I can really say is that it is incredibly easy for anyone, at any experience level in business, to get distracted from the ‘main thing.’

Not really the main thing.

Whew. Two aspects of this …

– a main thing based solely on ‘tangible’ <or … let’s say ‘there is a lack of emotional investment regardless of the desire to meet the objective’>

– the main thing is a reflection of a created priority.

First.

Lack of emotional investment.

In business we are infamous for creating tangible milestones and objectives and in doing so we expect people to be emotionally invested in achieving that ‘main thing’ we need to do.

Uhm. In my mind that is like manufacturing passion or happiness <cannot really be done>. Here I suggest a dose of reality to business people: don’t try and manufacture emotional energy and accept some things just as they are. I can have milestones, objectives and success criteria, but they don’t have to be ‘the main thing we need to do.’ These are simply shit that needs to be done.

If something doesn’t have a purpose beyond some number objective it is extremely difficult to have genuine emotional investment. I would actually suggest without emotional investment it really cannot be a ‘main thing.’

Second.

Created priorities.

When you don’t know what you want to do or where you really want to go, inevitably, a priority is created to take the place of those things. That is a created priority.

I am not suggesting they aren’t useful and as transition ‘progress behavior motivators’ they can be excellent tools – but let’s not confuse them with ‘a main thing.’ Yet, we do confuse them again and again <and again>. Created main things, if you are not careful, are rabbit holes. You can follow a ‘created main thing’ as persistently & stubbornly as if it is a real main thing and end up in a really really bad place.

Managers in business are infamous for creating ‘main things’ <and rabbit holes>. What these managers don’t realize is that their employees see right thru the created aspect.

This creates issues because while the ‘workers’ become cynical over having to invest energy on some created priority cloaked by some manager in “main thing prioritizing”, when things do not go as planned far too many times managers step back saying things like “I don’t have the right people to implement the important objectives” or the ones with good intentions focus on the wrong things like ‘I need to learn how to motivate my people’ <only to implement some of the wackiest motivational shit you will ever see>. Not often enough do managers look in the mirror at the actual stimulus, or, this ‘main thing’ they’ve identified, and truly challenge whether it really is a ‘main thing’ rather than simply a business objective we need to attain for the good of the business.

Now. All that said. The ‘main thing’ this young man is referencing in the opening quote is his decision, as a Mormon; to go on mission for two years despite the fact he is having a fabulous year as a wide receiver for the Utah football team.

There is emotional investment.

It is not a created priority.

And while an incredibly powerful persistent distraction poked at him <success in the present>, he, well, remembered the main thing is the main thing.

In the end.

I admit. I came to admire Stephen Covey’s thinking late in Life. Maybe I just needed to mature intellectually to get the nuance of what he tried to tell us or maybe I just didn’t understand the ‘main things’ in business well enough. Regardless, in a different, but still good, way than Peter Drucker, Covey thinking makes for better business minds <and behavior>.

I know I certainly don’t have all the answers and that is why I read and think about words from Toffler, Drucker & Covey — more so than Godin and Gladwell. Business thinking, as well as any type of thinking, is hard work. Covey & the best business thinkers make you think … sometimes almost in such a complex nuanced way that it always seems like it is slightly out of your grasp <versus the more modern business thinkers who tend to offer formulas and soundbites>. I could argue that we need to stop seeking answers and continue to persistently ask questions.

Anyway.

The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. A twisted but simply important thing to keep in mind.

——————-

“At the heart of any terror is the fear of losing what we find meaningful.”

=

Mark Z Danielewski

——————————-

vzbzdnyt:

archaic Russian word meaning “to back out of a situation due to fear”

———————

Ok. This is not a philosophical thought, this is simply about terror, fear and losing something meaningful.

This is not about finding meaning in life, this is about losing what is meaningful in the here & now.

This also gave me the opportunity to share one of the unpronounceable words in the Russian language – vzbzdnyt.

In an everyday Life in which we are bombarded with ongoing changes, pressure on what we should change, and a pop culture pounding us with screeching voices of ‘change or be left behind’ it sometimes seems like what is meaningful to us has no value to anyone other than our self.

Therefore we keep on finding ourselves in positions and places where things that are meaningful to us are being grabbed by change and ripped out of our hands. That is why we keep … well … vzbzdnyt. Or at least we try to back out of these situations … out of fear of losing what is meaningful to us.

Let me share what I believe are the two most common situations that we find what is meaningful is threatened to a point where we fear losing it <sometimes almost to a point of terrifying us>:

–       Losing yourself.

This one should create terror in our hearts.

What do I mean?

What is more meaningful in Life than yourself? Your identity? Your honor and dignity … and well … all those things?

Nothing, if not much.

And, yet, day in and day out Life, society, work and anything else you can think of is prying at any chinks in your esteem and tugging at any doubt or question you may have with regard to who you are and what you believe in.

Shit.

Even if you are not sure of ‘who you are’ you fear losing something meaningful because you may never get it back.

This can be terrifying.

This can induce terror.

While many people smarter than I advocate standing your ground and holding on to yourself as tight as you can … well … I don’t advocate any one solution.

Stand your ground, but, if backing out for fear of losing yourself is the only, and best, path available? Go.

I tend to believe that not losing yourself isn’t about taking pride in HOW you do it, it is taking pride in the fact you actually figured out a WAY to do it.

–      Losing what you know <or what you believe>.

Most of the time this one creates unneeded terror.

Simplistically, it is wrong to think that what you currently believe will ultimately provide meaning, or purpose, for your life.

Yup. Far too often we seek in ‘what we know now’ to define meaning.

Well. Actually … it is living life that really provides the answer <not ‘what I know now’ or any philosophical reflection>.

====

I have rejected the view that life’s purpose can be understood by looking backwards to its origins.

But that doesn’t mean the only alternative is looking forward to its ultimate end.

Just as the restaurant staff are fulfilling their professional purposes in the present simply by doing their job, couldn’t we fulfill life’s purpose in the present simply by living our lives?

Julian Baggini

====

Living Life is all about expanding what you know and, well, that means losing the shit that you no longer believe.

The reason why we find this terrifying? We actually often find something meaningful in … well … oddly … ignorance.

Well. That sounds frighteningly idiotic. But a little ignorance, a little less knowledge, can actually be comforting.

Losing that comfort is scary … even terrifying.

Therefore we hold on to what we currently believe <even if it is ignorance> with tight ragged claws.

This is self inflicted terror.

This is self inflicted fear.

This is misguided identification of what is meaningful.

Anyway.

Life is terrifying if you think about shit too much.

Life is terrifying if you think about the WRONG shit enough.

Sometimes life seems purposeful and meaningful and sometimes it seems pointless, meaningless and even absurd.

Just as terrorists succeed only when they create fear, aspects of Life succeed in creating terror only when they generate fear.

Notice I used ‘create’ and ‘generate.’

In and of themselves <terror> … they are nothing.

Life is meant to be lived and, sure, we will always feel terror when we fear losing something meaningful.

All I think I know is that if you truly identify what is meaningful to you <and not make up meaningless meaningfuls> you will be more likely to be steadfast in the face of fear and not give terror the opportunity to … well … win.

And you will not only win in the here & now … you will win in the then & there.

All I think I know is, well, don’t let fear win.

=====

Originally published September 2015

 ==================

“There is no problem so bad that you cannot make it worse.”

——

Chris Hadfield

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

So.

How often have you seen when all the great minds in the office get together to solve ‘the problem’ and … well … it only gets worse?

Or how about this.

There is no problem … someone comes in and says ‘here is how we can make it better’ <usually said with excessive enthusiasm> and … well … it gets worse.

Now. To be fair.

There is an art & science to managing “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” I say that because we are often quite flippant with regard to suggesting ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.’ What I mean is that some things broken don’t look broken or even kind of broken. Which kind of means that particular thing’s version of ‘ain’t broke’ is actually a kind of slippery inefficient or some version of being slightly outdated or, well, pick a variety of reasons that if you leave it alone you are gonna be out of business in no time.

In other words … broken often is very good at hiding under a ‘not broken’ cape.

Anyway. I wasn’t sure if this was going to be about not being able to leave things alone or mis-managing an organization <and employees>.

So I thought I would discuss both.

–          Not leaving things alone.

To be clear as I begin, in general, I am a tweaker. I never typically left things alone. I have always believed businesses run along a 5 lane highway and you are always speeding up or slowing down or shifting lanes <staying within the vision/strategy guard rails of course>.

Ah. But always moving.

It could easily be argued I never knew how to leave things alone. Now. The advantage of never leaving things alone is that:

<1> you are always paying attention, and

<2> as soon as you recognize things are getting worse because of something you have done … you can course correct and

<3> because you are already moving you are simply shifting and not having to generate energy to get started.

Possibly this suggests that this style of ‘making it worse’ only occurs in lesser degrees. But. Not leaving things alone is only effective if it is not an ‘in & out’ trait. You have to balance tweaking and watching or waiting. You have to be, well, patiently impatient.

You tweak, leave things alone, always have to be prepared to step back in again.

Oh. Also.

Not leaving things alone is an art. It takes touch. What I mean by that is even though I never liked leaving things alone … I did leave them alone. And for some meaningful amount of time … at times.

It’s balance.

Regardless. People who do not have the touch and simply change to put their own thumbprint on something or just to change for change sake … well … they make it worse <on a number of levels>. Number one on almost every list of management things that demotivates employees … is making things worse than they are. In other words, change just for change sake.

–          Mismanaging problems

What to do and how to do it often go out the window during a crisis. In other words, plans always look awesome when they are … well … plans.

First. Plans rarely remain intact once in contact with the actual problem.

Second. It is easy to plan, it’s not so easy to manage and produce within ‘the problem zone.’

Think of this part of the discussion as a good practice player versus a good game player. It’s natural. This is because your emotion mind takes over and the emotions begin to control your thoughts and behaviors. Regardless of emotions or not … suffice it to say you make things worse for typically one of two reasons:

1. You suck at being a manager.
2. You suck at working with stress.

These two things come to life in the office in a number of ways as you make things worse <and demotivate which exponentially increases the ‘worseness’ of any situation>:

–          criticize everyone but yourself

Pointing out someone’s mistake in front of others rarely <never> generates a good response. Some managers think publicly discussing mistakes creates a ‘teaching moment’ for everyone. Well. Not so much.  It just makes everyone feel bad. By the way. Criticize everyone else version 1.5 is where you insincerely criticize yourself in front of others just as a prelude to criticizing others. This <the 1.5 version> may be worse than criticize original. It makes making things worse go to a new level.

–          no follow up

Whew. I could have made this ‘do what you say you are going to do.’ Regardless.

If you ask people to do shit, acknowledge it.

If you say you are going to do something, do it <or at least acknowledge you haven’t>.

No follow up makes things worse. It is okay for things to go nowhere as long as you acknowledge its ‘nowhereness’ because then nowhere actually ends up being some version of ‘well, at least its somewhere.’  Suffice it to say no follow up makes nowhere truly nowhere. Nowhere always makes things worse.

–          unachievable goals or deadlines

Problems or changing things inevitably seems to be an opportunity for a manager or leader to … well … motivate … maybe even attempt to inspire. Things like … ‘aim high!’

Uhm.

No.

Don’t.

Once employees realize they won’t be able to get something done, they’ll think, “what’s the point? … I’m going to fail.” Even worse? They will be hesitant to believe you can actually set goals in the future <by the way, that is really making things worse>. If you are going to break something that appears unbroken, this is not a motivational moment, this is a more pragmatic teaching moment. Get them to believe in what they are doing — not inspire them. Inspirational speeches in these type situations typically just makes things worse.

–          not explaining

I don’t believe everyone needs to know everything all the time. Sometimes leaders need to carry a heavier burden so that the people will actually get the shit done are light enough to … well … get the shit done. But. If you are breaking something that doesn’t look broken just because you know all the reasons why you should be doing it doesn’t mean you should hide those reasons. Explaining management decisions will help employees understand your perspective, they’ll respect you for it and things won’t get worse. Employees ignorant of purpose or reasoning tend to make things worse. And worse? They don’t even do it on purpose.

–          implied threats

Things like ‘we are fucked if you cannot get this done’ statements tend to not be very effective in keeping things from getting worse. At the next level of heightened ‘oh shitedness’ falls the infamous ’do this or else’ attitude often has the opposite effect when it comes to motivation. Suffice it to say threats, implied or … well … plied, makes things worse.

–          not respecting others have to say

This isn’t just listening <although that should be high on everyone’s list … because if you don’t listen you will surely make things worse>. This is more about … well … let’s call it ‘respectful listening.’ You just cannot ignore if an employee takes some initiative to improve something. You have to take a good hard look at the suggestion. Not only is it demotivating if you don’t <which makes things worse> you may also be missing an opportunity to fix something broken that doesn’t appear broken <which inevitably makes things worse if you don’t fix>.

–          micromanaging

Shit. You are already attempting to convince people you are trying to fix something that is not broken … and now you start micromanaging? Well. You may as well do it yourself <because that is what the people are thinking>. Employees need to feel trusted and valued to succeed. Micromanaging does the opposite. Micromanaging makes things worse … not better.

<done with list of things>

Ok. Having shared all that let me say that sucking at being a manager is significantly easier than not sucking as a manager. Realistically you do your best simply to not make things worse as often as possible. Accept this fact <business truth>. You will make things worse on occasion. Throughout your career you are just trying to limit those times and manage them as quickly and effectively as you can.

Lastly. Yes. We all seem to make things worse in business.

<sorry … hate to break the news to all business people>

And while I know that from my experience in the business world I actually have research to support it:

————–

Ever notice how a new employee’s enthusiasm eventually wears off?  In 85% of companies, employees’ morale significantly drops off after their first six months on the job, according to a survey from Harvard Management Research.

How can this be <especially if you are a good manager>? For the most part, enthusiasm is determined by work environment, and it can be fostered or hindered by the manager or leader.

Employee motivation experts say the best way to keep employee enthusiasm moving forward is to “first, do no harm.”

—————

Well. That is a motivating thought isn’t it? “Do no harm.” (not really)

Anyway. At a minimum just try and do your best to not do anything that demotivates employees. Or maybe better said … just do your best to not make things worse.

———————–

“Close some doors today. Not because of pride, incapacity or arrogance, but simply because they lead you nowhere.”

Paulo Coelho

——————————

Oh. And if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.

————————————————————————

Addendum:

This last part is something I found online <and I cannot find my source> but wanted to share on this topic.

I did not write this.

But I found parts funny <albeit I don’t wish for some things the writer longs for>.

But it is a fun piece of writing which makes you think about business and why we change some of the shit we do.

————————————————————————–

How often do we wonder why some business changes something we already love.

Sneaker manufacturers are infamous for this kind of crap.

The moment you find a pair you like … they discontinue with next year’s model.

Aggravating.

Microsoft MSFT +2.32% is talking about redoing Windows 8, addressing user complaints that it’s too confusing to use. Some analysts even speculate that the company may bring back the popular “Start” button. PC aficionados who don’t like the touch-screen layout have savaged Windows 8, which makes a PC look like a tablet.  Much like Coca-Cola, KO -0.28% which had to bring back Classic Coke after an uproar surrounding New Coke, Microsoft has had to admit that it got things wrong. And it got things wrong because it never bothered to ask its customers, “Gee, what do you guys think?”

Bring back normal M&M’s.

It would be wonderful if other companies brought back beloved old features that have been retired or massively altered. My wife recently started shopping for a car with a stick shift but found that such vehicles now come with a “continuous variable transmission” system, which makes a car run more like an automatic. It also reduces fuel efficiency by 10%. To her, CVT defeats the whole purpose of owning a stick. The solution is simple: Put things back the way they were. I don’t mean going back to eight-track players, rotary phones or pop-up toasters. But corporations have often cavalierly altered popular products without bothering to ask the public if it would welcome such modifications. These companies should follow Microsoft’s example and consider restoring the features that the public sorely misses. Here are a few examples:

I used to really enjoy 32-ounce bottles of orange juice. Thirty-two ounces of orange juice is exactly enough fluid to get a family of four through breakfast. But 25.8 ounces will not do it. Neither will 23.8 ounces. Two-thirds of the way through breakfast, you always end up being forced to crack open another bottle of juice. It’s unbelievably annoying. It would serve the public well if citrus-fruit bottlers brought back the quart bottle.

I would also love to see blue M&M’s summarily removed from bags of peanut M&M’s. I know they’ve been there since the ’90s, but these parvenu sweets are the confectionary equivalent of a touch screen on a PC. They don’t look right, and they don’t feel right. 

I used to love buying tickets for the theater when you could pay the price listed on the ticket. I didn’t even mind when theaters started adding a $4 service charge per ticket, even though I was buying them online and there was no actual service involved. But I hate paying a $2.50 per ticket “facility fee.” A play has to be performed in a facility, so the facility fee should be part of the ticket price. Being asked to pay a facility fee is like being asked to pay $2.50 for a hot dog and then being charged a 50-cent “bun maintenance fee.” Bring back simple pricing. 

Airplanes used to have room for your legs. They did, really, and you can even see old photos proving it. And they used to have employees who didn’t snarl at you when you asked for a second bag of stale peanuts. Restore those deleted features, please. Banks used to pay 8.5% on six-month certificates of deposit. Now they pay 1%. Could we have the old rates back? We really liked them. 

Hollywood used to make movies starring Robert De Niro and Al Pacino in which they actually emoted, instead of engaging in coarse, over-the-top shtick. Could you bring back films like “Heat” and “The Deer Hunter” and “Godfather II”? And ask Messrs. De Niro and Pacino to stop phoning it in? We’d be beholden to you.

There are many other examples. Remember toilets that flushed not by magic but with a handle? Faucets you could turn on without having to wave your hands spasmodically in front of a kryptonite-powered motion detector? Paper-towel dispensers that could be used without knowing a secret set of rituals handed down by the Knights Templar?

 I would also like to go back to a time when cars did not automatically lock their doors. If I want to lock my door, I will lock it; if I want to keep it open, I will do so. I have always had a deep fear of being trapped in a car with two pit bulls, and finding that the doors have capriciously decided to lock me in forever. Give me back the power to control my own environment.

Ask before you change things. And if it ain’t broke, do not fix it.

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

Originally published May 2014

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

Efficiency by Consent

It was Frederick W. Taylor’s purpose to make the laborer worthy of his hire; to make the hire worthy of the laborer; to make the standard of living and the conditions of working worthy to be called American. The American standard of living implies a wage adequate for proper housing and food and clothing, for proper education and recreation, and for insurance against those contingencies of sickness, accident, unemployment, premature death or superannuation, which fall so heavily upon the working classes. That standard implies hours of labor sufficiently short to permit those who work to perform also their duties as citizens and to share in the enjoyment of life. That standard implies postponement of the working period to an age which enables the child to develop into a rounded man or woman. That standard implies working conditions which are not only consistent with the demands of health and safety, but are also such as may make work for others what it was for Taylor—the greatest of life’s joys.

Louis D Brandeis

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

Business has always been part art & part science. The challenge became when maximizing profitability became an imperative because that is when science was prioritized over the art.

This has been true for quite some time but the dynamics of it have changed over time. As effectiveness or maximizing value (even of employees) has been subjugated to efficiency this business thinking has increasingly had to face increased transparency & business savviness. What the transparency has done has put an increased pressure on being able to articulate effectiveness, or the art, of doing business. that said. Efficiency is always easier to articulate, therefore, the majority erred on the side of efficiency (driving closer & closer to commodity-like) despite talking about ‘brand value’ and the importance of effectiveness & intangible value. Effectiveness, or value, became the sacred haven of the few who could articulate the art & the intangible of business.

Art is making a comeback mostly because people, employees, feel there has to be something more than what exists. Recent studies show something like 87% of employees are disengaged. I would argue that is a reflection of emphasis on efficiency & lack of emphasis on effectiveness (and the vision which tends to encourage intangible investment in a business life>. This art aspect is not just a battle between ROI versus meaning but also between those who have created their success from the ‘science’ and those who believe there must be something better.

The problem is Science has a head start. This science aspect was elevated in late 1910, when Louis Brandeis, a fifty-three-year-old lawyer from Boston, held a meeting at an apartment in New York with a bunch of experts who, at Brandeis’s urging, decided to call what they were experts at “scientific management” (one of the attendees suggested calling it “efficiency”). Management typically revolves around 2 names, Gilbreth who favored worker input & Taylor who thought men were “mules”. Yet, it was Brandeis who advocated industrial democracy, i.e., workers must have a voice in how a business is run. Brandeis insisted that, if workers were to enjoy sufficient leisure to participate in a democratic society, productivity had to be increased but within limits of individual capacity.

This is where we bring in psychologist Abraham Maslow who explored the idea of human motivation. Through his research in 1943, he identified primary needs people must satisfy before moving forward. This became known as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, a five-level pyramid (not developed by him but  a good illustration of the pattern of motivation). To get from one level to the next, one has to master the basics first. Productivity can work in much the same way, according to Tamara Myles, a Certified Professional Organizer (CPO) and author of The Secret to Peak Productivity (AMACOM, February 2014). Inspired by Maslow’s work, Myles created the Peak Productivity Pyramid—an approach to a more productive life.

“[The system makes it] so easy to see the entire roadmap, to identify where you are and where you are headed,” Myles says. “It is, after all, much easier to get where you are going if you have directions, if you have a map.”

All that said. I began with a Brandeis quote to make a point. The point is once business gets on a slippery slope gravity has a nasty habit of taking over. In this case Brandeis had a solid idea from which people inevitably gravitated toward the simplistic, easiest & most tangible aspect of it and then pounded that aspect into its most meaningless definition.

That’s what we do.

Maslow was right in that people desire more than simply being productive. They desire what I call substantive productivity and others call joy of task, meaning & Purpose. But that’s difficult to quantify in the short term, only the long term.

It’s kind of like quantifying brand value. Brand value is a complex idea in which many moving parts, difficult to quantify in isolation, coalesce into a greater value at some indeterminate place & time in the future. It “just is” which is not one of the most comforting things to say in business. Imagine that conversation when it comes to productivity. A bunch of business people would faint.

Regardless. Two things are happening today.

1. Proof of substantive productivity (or an engaged organization focused on effective work not efficient work) is increasing. Businesses will balk (the infamous: good for them but it will not work in my business) but proof is growing and businesses will have to choose between status quo and transformation at their own peril.
2. People are desiring ‘more’ than status quo. And the more, this time, is not money. Efficiency drove employees to say “if I do this, pay me more $” and inevitably they got more money, but not more fulfillment. Having pursued that $ path they are now open to a ‘what could fulfill me’ path.

This means what was old is new again. The business world is revisiting Brandies concept with fresh eyes. It’s quite possible we had to walk the efficiency road in order to know it would not reach the destination we desired but, regardless, effectiveness is having its day. It will not just happen and those of us who are good, or relatively good, at articulating the benefits of the intangible need to bring our A game.