————

“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 think as you grow older your Christmas list gets smaller and the things you really want for the holidays can’t be bought.”

=

(via hefuckin)

—–

Merry Christmas. Well. It’s scary how true this quote is.

Christmas sometimes seems simpler when thinking about the past. But it most likely wasn’t. It is just when young your list was long filled with things you wanted and the list was, well, a clear cut black & white list.

Today? Beyond the fact an ‘adult list’ is shorter … it sometimes seems like Christmas has descended into a trashy, crass, excessive, shallow <or hollow>, lighted plastic capitalistic driven spectacle. From a broader perspective Christmas has become a ‘retail event’ from which a lot of people step back from the joy of giving and assess the economy <not happiness>.

Yet. From a purely economic perspective Christmas spending is an inefficient way to drive growth. In 1993 an economist named Joel Waldfogel described what he called the “deadweight loss of Christmas” which is the concept of the fact that everybody pays too much for what nobody wants.

Anyway. But when you get past all that cynical pragmatic crap you see lots of the things you really want for the holidays which can’t be bought. The raw, non corporate branded, humane, caring and kind things.

————–

Dorey Walker: I don’t think that there’s any harm in not believing in a figure that many do acknowledge to be a fiction.

Kris Kringle: Oh, but there is. I’m not just a whimsical figure who wears a charming suit and affects a jolly demeanor. You know, I… I… I’m a symbol. I’m a symbol of the human ability to be able to suppress the selfish and hateful tendencies that rule the major part of our lives. If… you can’t believe, if you can’t accept anything on faith, then you’re doomed for a life dominated by doubt.”

Miracle on 34th Street – 1947

—————

Let’s call them ‘the little big things.’

I reflect on this thought knowing that gifts have never mattered to me even when I was really young. But that doesn’t mean I ‘got’ Christmas. I imagine, at my best, it was just an event where you were able to develop thoughtful lists which expressed something beyond simply ‘giving a gift.’ This elevated me above Scrooge status, but never really elevated me to an ‘understanding what Christmas was really all about’ status.

Today? Well. As usual. I am a work in progress. But I do see my list shrinking and I seem to get closer to one thing. One idea. Hope.

I think many people may treat the event & time as a gift giving occasion or a time to gather or even a time to reflect … but I am beginning to think Christmas offers a glimmer of ‘what could be’ more than anything else. Sometimes it may simply be a small glimmer but it is …well … a glimmer.

A small piece of hope for the future.

A small spotlight on when hope appeared in the past year or so.

And while context matters, in that whatever is happening in the world around us, I tend to think regardless of the context as we get older our lists get smaller because we get closer to the one thing that really matters. This also means that the closer you get to that one thing the less important all the other things become.

Oh. I also began to realize that if I am only to give one gift to the people I know it is to insure they see Hope even if it is for but one minute. This is not to suggest I believe I can make anyone actually believe in Hope.

You cannot.

However, I do believe you can show that Hope is there … possible … and attainable <in some form or fashion>.

It can be found in taking one minute to show a young employee that the best version of whatever they can be is attainable.

It can be found in taking one minute to tell a good friend that the dark<er> bridge they are walking on does have an end <and there is good solid ground with some grass & trees on it to stand on>.

It can be found in taking one minute to hand that homeless person you have seen for the last 11 months standing there at the corner a $10 bill instead of a $1 bill <and say ‘I hope it gets better’ … uhm … when do you think is the last time they have heard a stranger say they have hope for them??>.

None of those things have really cost me a thing, and I have given one little gift that I doubt was on their list of ‘what I want this Christmas.’

Just think about it.

Ok. Beyond Hope and believing and speaking of big … and small … let me shift to “the big man”. Santa Claus himself.

It’s a small thing … but believing in Santa Claus is important. It creates a smallish type hope that good resides and visits everyone. And, yes, the best example of this is “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.” And, yet, there continue to be millions who not only doubt Santa Claus … they deny his existence. They are called Santa deniers <and it is called Santa Denial>.

Silly people.

I say that because a writer recently took on Santa denial quite well. And this writer offers us a great reminder why we should believe in Santa Claus:

=

Addressing Santa Denial:

Santa-denial has existed for far too long and I cannot understand how Santa deniers are allowed to promote their views. Why are these people tolerated in today’s modern media?  Science has long shown that Santa Claus is real, and those who claim otherwise are invariably in the pocket of the big toy companies, who don’t want people thinking they can get free playthings and so will pay for their products.

But the evidence is beyond any reasonable doubt, and the arguments of the Santa deniers have been repeatedly debunked. But, just to refresh your memory, here are some of the more typical ones and why they’re wrong:

===

If Santa has a workshop at the north pole, why has nobody ever seen it?

Santa’s workshop is located in a very snowy region that very few people can access, so it’s unlikely that many people would get to see it. It would theoretically be possible to view it from above, via an aircraft or satellite in a polar orbit, but what would Santa’s workshop look like from this perspective? A snow-covered building on a background of ice and snow? That’s basically just blank whiteness. And infrared scans can be tricky with snow. It’s a fallacy to assume that something isn’t there because you haven’t seen it. You can’t see oxygen either, but try denying that it exists and see how far you get.

=

How can a human survive prolonged periods in sub-zero conditions?

Santa has several features and properties clearly adapted for cold weather survival. His large girth and dense beard and hair are obviously meant for insulation, in the manner of polar bears. Of course, enduring below-freezing temperatures for months on end requires a lot of calories for a warm-blooded mammal, hence Santa needs to get through millions of mince pies and glasses of milk in one evening; he’s building up resources for another frosty year.

How is it possible for a sleigh with millions of toys in it, pulled by reindeer, to fly?

Admittedly, the whole “flying reindeer” thing does seem very far-fetched, and this is a fair accusation. Investigations suggest that the flying reindeer image is a distortion of the truth, in that reindeer are native to the Arctic so Santa may well keep reindeer on his premises and perhaps they did pull his sleigh originally. But there is substantial evidence now to suggest that Santa powers his sled with the energy obtained from a precisely controlled quantum singularity.

Basically, Santa has access to a small black hole, which he uses to perform his duties. It’s likely that a miniature black hole struck Earth at some point in the past (don’t worry, this wouldn’t have been as disastrous as many think). Some argue that it came down in the arctic regions, hence its discoverer (Santa Claus) built his workshop on top of it. A black hole singularity can provide a lot of power, so this is the most likely explanation for the energy consumption of a busy workshop.

Once a year, Santa fits the singularity to his vehicle and uses it to travel the world. Black holes have exotic properties that allow them to distort space and gravity, so traveling with millions of toys in a confined space won’t be as impractical as it would be under normal spacetime rules.

=

It’s impossible to visit every child on Earth in a single night!

You’d think so, but remember the singularity mentioned above? They distort time too. The time period might feel like months for Santa in his own personal gravity well, but it’s mere minutes to anyone observing from the outside.

So, regardless, How can Santa keep track of every child being naughty or nice? As uncomfortable to realize as it may be, Santa’s approach hasn’t always been the most rational. It is traditional for every child to send Santa a gift list they have written themselves, so in the old days Santa was able to use the questionable science of handwriting analysis to determine who had less-than-pleasant personality traits (along with some educated guesswork based on the list itself; a child who asks for live scorpions or chainsaws is likely to have suspect motivations).

However, with the arrival of the internet and surveillance culture, it’s relatively easy to keep track of everyone. Especially if you’re a powerful industrialist like Santa.

=====

Why does Santa deliver toys and items with the branding of corporations?

Outsourcing!

Duh.

Plus, most children these days ask for specific items made by corporations, who jealously protect their copyrights by legal means. So either Santa sources the toy from the original makers, or the child goes without.

Is that what you want, Santa deniers? Children waking up empty-handed on Christmas morning? Despicable!

===

Why are there so many Santas in shops and grottos?

Those aren’t all Santa. They’re men in costumes. How gullible are you?

===

<note: If you still deny there is someone called Santa Claus … well … you have no soul>

<source: a delightful writer named Dean Burnett >

————

And, everyone, please have a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays.

—

“Now to escape involves not just running away, but arriving somewhere.”

===

Bernhard Schlink

————————

“Be still. Stillness reveals the secrets of eternity.”

====

Lao Tzu

——————-

I could be a real jerk and say that people should stand their ground more often rather than flee <run away>.

But I won’t.

I won’t because all of us have run away from something at some point in our lives.

Yeah.

Pick your poison but we have run away from it.

However.

Where we get running away wrong <90+% of the time> is that we just flee with no destination or ‘somewhere’ in mind. We simply run ‘away.’ And in doing so we run … well … nowhere in particular. We end up ‘away’, but no closer to arriving at some meaningful destination.

I will never advocate not running away. I simply suggest that if you do run away you should actually attempt to arrive somewhere.

This distinction may actually be the difference between panic and thoughtful retreat.

It may also be the difference between lack of clarity and clarity in a stressful situation.

It may also be the difference between successful people and less successful people.

That said. I will admit.

Maybe 80% of the time we run away we should remain and be still. Because stillness, more often than not, reveals the secret to survival. Survival in the moment, but it also reveals knowledge you can use for eternity. Running away deprives you of that knowledge. However, while I flippantly tossed out the 80% number, I will warn you that the 20% of the times you SHOULD run away look an awful lot like the 80% of the times you should stay and remain still.

Therein lies Life’s dilemma with regard to fleeing. Stillness can give you extraordinary knowledge and could just as well kill you.

So lies the coin flips in Life.

Regardless.

Here is the real reason why running away to somewhere matters.

If you run to nowhere you are … well … nowhere <from a personal growth standpoint>.

If you run to somewhere you grow a little, and inevitably you return taller.

=====

“I will come back to you, I swear I will;

And you will know me still.

I shall be only a little taller

Than when I went.”

Edna St. Vincent Millay

=====

Look. We all run away from shit.

It can be fear … it can be pain … it can be a person .. it can simply be the unknown … but we all run away. Accept that. And at the same time make a conscious effort to insure you arrive somewhere when you run. That is the trick to running away.

―

“You know, sometimes in life you can get kinda stuck and you feel like you should have changed chapters by now, but you can’t.”

==

Wish I Was Here <Aidan>

——————-

So. There are ruts … and then there is just being stuck. They are significantly different.

………………………………….. RUT

Getting in a rut is sliding down the slippery slope of the everyday grind of Life.

You simply fall into a space where day in and day out you are checking shit off your list and justifying the relatively unsatisfying Life space you are in by showing everyone, and yourself, the list of things you have checked off.

Getting stuck is a more frustrating Life situation.

This is where you know you are not where you want to be and doing things you don’t really want to do and … well … you are stuck. You have shit on your list or at least one important thing on your list, which you want to do, but day in and day out you look at your list and that little nasty shit of a thing never gets checked. And, what is worse, you know you are stuck usually in two ways:

Your own head.

In your mind you may not recognize it for a while … but then it hits you … I am not moving. I am stuck.

This sucks.

Others around you.

You may not recognize it for a while because you feel like you are moving, and you may actually be moving, but then it hits you … everyone else is moving faster. Life, which often looks blurry in the midst of all the shit you want to do, now looks clearer but everyone around you looks blurry. They are moving and you are not. You are stuck.

This sucks.

Suffice it to say … getting stuck sucks.

And getting stuck happens all the time with everyone.

You have most of your shit together.

You know what you want.

You know what it takes to get what you want.

You probably even know the path to getting what you want.

And, even with all that, you are stuck.

Yup.

That sucks.

But here is the worst aspect of being “stuck.”

More often than not when you get stuck you will find that you are, well, between who you are and who you want to be.

You know there is a better version of you, but you are stuck being the current version of you. It may not be a bad version, it may not even be a sucky version, you just know there is a better version.

That sucks.

Anyway.

Ruts are actually relatively easy to get out of. Ruts, more often than not, occur because you permit them to happen … so you just have to stop permitting it to happen.

Getting stuck is usually really difficult to get out of. Stuck, more often than not, occurs DESPITE the fact you are doing whatever you can to not permit it to happen.

If you google “get unstuck” you will get over 200,000 results in .48 seconds. The majority of those results are about ‘changing attitudes’ or ‘simple techniques to get unstuck’ or even ‘breaking habitual patterns.’

Most likely none of this online shit will help you. Mostly because the advice is more about getting out of a rut and not about getting unstuck.

But I would also suggest there ain’t a shitload of advice because … well … getting unstuck is difficult, there are no ‘simple techniques’ and your ‘stuck’ is most likely contextual & situational.

Being stuck is frustrating. Sometimes even maddening. And sometimes it makes you angry. Yeah. It sucks.

I don’t have some secret to share about how to get unstuck. All I know is that it sucks, it feels sucky, and you have to sometimes suck it up and be creative in your pursuit of what you want to get unstuck.

Oh. The other thing to keep in mind.

The opening quote says you feel like you should have changed chapters by now, but you can’t.”

Remember.

The “can’t” is just for now.

You may beat your head against some wall for awhile but eventually people who get stuck get unstuck.

That is because, unlike the whole rut situation, you are aware of what is <frustratingly> happening and you want more and you know what you want <and being stuck ain’t it>.

Trust me.

Getting unstuck rarely happens as fast as you want it to, but, I will say that people who get stuck, well, 99% of the time figure out how to get unstuck. So while getting stuck sucks, the majority of us know how to get unstuck.

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

“liberty, equality, fraternity.“

——-

 “liberty and justice for all.”

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

So. I just spoke with a good friend in France and we ended up discussing politics. Ok. Not politics, per se, but rather how politics is conducted and how the ones trying to get elected tell everyone not to be confused on the issues … then proceed to tell everyone shit that confuses the real issues <and us> … and then people who are, in general, confused about what the people they are voting for really stand on some issues as they duel each other with tactics <but smear each other with overarching lies>. 

That is par for the course in every election these days.

Someone can be called racist … and they are not.

Someone can be claimed to “let anyone across the border” and they have no plans to do that.

Someone can be called a liar … and they actually stretch the truth less than the one making the claim.

Someone can … well … let’s just say … excepting an ardent, focused, few … for the everyday schmuck it can be really quite confusing.

Unfortunately, all the confusion does is mask the truly important decision.

For France it is the doctrine of ‘liberty, equality, fraternity.’

For USA … despite Thomas Jefferson and other’s temptation to head down the same path … we settled on the doctrine of liberty and justice for all.

Yet. It never seems like we talk about this enough.

Politics seem to revolve around what I, as a business person, would call tactics. Immigration, health, jobs, security, etc. Yeah. Important shit, but tactics to meet the objective. And all this talk about the tactics truly seems to confuse us, the voters & citizens, about the overarching objective.

And politicians shamelessly use and stretch the meaning of tactics to morph them into something that the objective demands when, in reality, it does no such thing.

That may be the most heinous thing a politician does these days.

We should almost demand each of them to put up the objective — what the country, the ‘one nation’ <not “under God” … just ‘one nation’> stands for and demand that every time they make some ludicrous claim or offer some distorted thought about past country behavior that they explain to us how it meets the objective. In other words. Tie all the tactics to the grander idea that all the people really believe in.

Uhm. Oh yeah. Just a quick reminder to my American readers on the whole “under God” aside I just offered.

The US founding fathers centered everything, Constitution and Bill of Rights, on one core idea — liberty and justice for all. While some important stuff surrounds that core, they are the trappings of what makes up the core.

I say that because our founding fathers did not write the pledge of allegiance. Nor did the pledge we all stood up and speak in our childhood schoolrooms originally include “under God” <even though the original was created by an ordained minister in 1892>. It was only in the spring of 1954, after US Congress had voted with some controversy, to insert the phrase into the Pledge of Allegiance — partly as a cold war tactic against “godless” communism.

——————–

The original Pledge read as follows:

‘I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.’ He considered placing the word, ‘equality,’ in his Pledge, but knew that the state superintendents of education on his committee were against equality for women and African Americans.

[ * ‘to’ added in October, 1892 ]

—————–

All Americans should remember that core of the pledge of allegiance is the ‘republic for which it stands,’ which, I could argue, is the concise phrase for One Nation – an ‘’executive summary’ if you will of the One Nation which the Civil War was fought to prove. The pledge unequivocally states that to make that One Nation idea viable we must specify that it is indivisible. This is a word, and a thought, used by Jefferson, other founding fathers, Daniel Webster, Lincoln and almost every visionary leader the country has ever had throughout speeches & writing.

No one should be confused by what the core of the country doctrine is … nor what the Founding Fathers desired … liberty & justice for all … one nation … indivisible.

<and shame on any politician who suggests otherwise>

Anyway. About the only thing I am sure of during an election is that there will be rampant confusion among those who are actually voting and unrelenting adamant fervor of what everyone should not be confused about <tactics>.

As a nation France stands square on the doctrine of ‘liberty, equality, fraternity.’ Until someone comes along and says “no, that’s not right, lets change it to bla bla bla …” that is what makes France ‘One Nation’.

Not baguettes.

Not great coffee.

Not mastering the art of wearing a scarf.

Not even a semi-haughty attitude on occasion.

One nation.

The moment a country ignores that which makes it one and gets confused by what some politician suggests is an important tactic that doesn’t really match up with ‘oneness’ it no longer is a country with a doctrine or a soul. It remains divided by tactics and empty of an objective.

As a business guy. As I read that last sentence, for a business, I hear the tolling of the death knell.

Without oneness a nation is no longer a nation. And a tactic, NO tactic, will never insure oneness … only an idea can.

Outside of America, France is my favorite country in the world. I always think, and wish for them, liberty, honor and lack of confusion … because clarity is the path to oneness.

And be clear … the idea which makes France one is ‘liberty, equality, fraternity.’

And be clear … the idea which makes USA one is liberty and justice for all or, if you would prefer, e pluribus unim (out of many one). Don’t let any tactic or any blowhard promise take your focus off of that. In the end the one thing we should demand of any politician, any leader, is to attain the objective of oneness, of unity, of liberty for all. Absent that we are just talking tactics. And, in business, that’s a fool’s errand and we are not a nation of fools.

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

“I’m always finding humans at their best and worst.

I see their ugly and their beauty, and I wonder how the same thing can be both.”

————–

Death

<in “The Book Thief”>

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

So. This quote is said by Death. Yeah. Death is suggesting he considers humans beautiful, as well as ugly, all the while resting comfortably in his chair awaiting the opportunity to end it all.

I admit.

The thought seems slightly counter-intuitive, but I like thinking the thought that Death is a lot more complicated than we may think.

I like thinking that Death sees us … and assesses us … and maybe even judges us a little … as not one-dimensional things to say ‘thumbs up’ or ‘thumbs down.’

I like thinking of death as not some grim reaper but rather a thoughtful person who has a job to do. One who contemplates the fact that some days will be good and some days just won’t be so fun.

I like thinking of Death One who can see the best and worst … acknowledging that good things can happen to bad people and bad things can happen to good people.

And, I imagine, I like thinking of Death as … well … intelligent and not simply some mindless executioner wandering about seeking his next victim.

For sure this quote reminded me of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s quote about intelligence:

“The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function. One should, for example, be able see that things are hopeless and yet be determined to make them otherwise.”

I believe it was Keats who called this ‘negative capability.’

As he explained <or tried to > “it is when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact & reason.”

In other words, you understand, or least come to grips with, that there is a shitload of inconsistency and uncertainty in Life and, yet, you deal with it and do what you need to do.

<that’s my translation>

The truth in Life is that we really don’t have to be one thing because you’re not another thing – or not be something if you are something <you get it>.

It may seem impossible if you appear to be a contradiction and, yet, be quite a successful, happy, productive bundle of contradictions. I will suggest, no, state, that not only do you not have to be one thing forever, but you can actually be a couple of things now … at the same time … in this time & place.

I sometimes believe individual happiness is found more often than not in our ‘negative capability’ intelligence. In other words … how smartly we can navigate the contradictions in Life as well as the contradiction of what is within who & what we are. If we don’t learn negative capability then we must seem to inevitably seek to isolate being one thing and one thing only as a judge of whether we are living Life well, productively and with focus.

And maybe that is why I believe Death was, and is, intelligent — it has mastered negative capability. Death has embraced the contradiction of being one thing and yet living another seemingly contradictory idea. If Death can see beauty in that which it will inevitably have to end with its own hand surely we can see good in bad … as well as be both bad & good ourselves.

Regardless.

It seems like there is a lesson in here for all of us. And maybe the lesson is, unfortunately, not that simple.

Death looks, on the surface, as one thing … and yet … is most likely something other.

Death does one thing … and yet … most likely thinks many other things.

We view Death as one thing and avoid him … and yet … should we meet him on the street on his way to meet someone other than us … he may greet us with a smile. While Death’s perception challenge  is actually called “affective fallacy” <confusion between what it is and what it does>, this is a challenge we all face in Life.

I imagine, in the end, the lesson is a simple one … sometimes Life just isn’t that simple.

Ok. Ditch the ‘sometimes.’

Life is never that simple.

We are more than one thing … we are a sum of all our parts … we are part of everyone we have met <and will meet> … and we are, at our core, a reflection of a multi-faceted character containing aspects of all which we desire to be as well as some aspects which we view slightly glumly as ‘the aspects I do not desire to be … but am.’

We either embrace the contradictions or … well … we will most likely suck at dealing with Life and living Life.

Anyway. What I do know is that I wish someone taught “negative capabilities 101” because we should all sign up for that class. It would be a better world if we were all competent in negative capabilities.

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

“When the first living thing existed, I was there waiting.

When the last living thing dies, my job will be finished. I’ll put the chairs on the tables, turn out the lights and lock the universe behind me when I leave.”

Neil Gaiman

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

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

“Tired, tired with nothing, tired with everything, tired with the world’s weight he had never chosen to bear.”
―

F. Scott Fitzgerald

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

Well. I admit. I get in trouble with some of the ‘radical transparency people sometimes because I hesitate to agree that the most effective organization is an organization in which everyone knows everything.

Yes. I do believe every person is capable of leadership.

Yes. I believe every person actually does lead (contextually & situationally).

Yes. I believe if you want to encourage individual leadership within decision making you should, and have to, be as transparent from a leadership perspective as possible.

No. I do not believe you tell everyone everything.

Yes. This is where i get sideways with a lot people.

Here is a truth that many people do not like to hear.

This may sound obvious, but leaders do not always tell the truth.

This may not sound obvious, but leaders do this on purpose because not always telling the truth is sometimes, truthfully, the best & right thing to do. This leader can be in business or in the government or, frankly, any situation.

Now. I am not suggesting they always lie nor am I suggesting they do not know what the truth is <or how to tell it>, but I am suggesting that there are times & situations that we, the everyday schmuck, shouldn’t hear the truth.

Therein lies a leader’s uncomfortable relationship with truth and truth telling.

Leaders are often demanded to manage the narrative <not control it>.

Managing the narrative can be based on a variety of solid rationale points which may piss us every day schmucks off later on <when we inevitably learn the whole truth>, but within the context of how and what is happening the leader has actually done the right, and best, thing by not telling the whole truth.

Sorry.

That is the truth.

Look. Leaders have a shitload of responsibilities, but let me highlight two with regard to truth and truth telling:

– All people.

You lead all people not just one group or one department. You end up being very careful in what words you decide to attach to whatever you want to talk about.

No. This is not political correctness.

This is managing the overall effectiveness of the larger group. If a word, or group of words, disenfranchises a group from the rest of the organization or greater whole not only does the whole suffer but the smaller group can receive undeserved negativity.

All people.

The burden of responsibility that a leader bears is to all, not just parts of all.

– Moderation.

This may seem counter intuitive, but leaders spend much much more time tamping down excitement <to make it realistic> and tamping out fear <to make it less debilitating> then they do creating energy and ferve.

That doesn’t mean that they do not inspire the masses … just that the majority of their relationship with those they lead is more about rational and not emotional – the responsibility to temper emotions and emotional responses.
Moderation.

The burden of responsibility that a leader bears is to mitigate emotional responses.

So. These are responsibilities.

These are actually reflective of behavior intended for the greater good and not to hide something or any nefarious reason. It is solely in the best interest of the greater whole. And, yes, while we everyday schmucks bitch & moan about no one should be making decisions for us or a desire <or right> to being part of the decision … we really do not.

Mostly because while we all think we can be a leader … 99% of us cannot.

To be clear. The obligation to tell the truth is heightened depending on what one is proposing, yet, it always gets balanced by the obligation for the greater good. This is the truth telling balancing act, a high wire act most of the time, every leader walks — every day.

Which leads me to wanting to share a couple more truths. Uncomfortable truths.

Truth 1. Sometimes a leader gets it wrong.

Good intentions or not sometimes what you didn’t say, or even what you did say, will come back and bite you in the ass. And there isn’t shit you can do to explain why you did what you did. People tell you how to do your job. People call you a liar. People call you stupid. People call & tell you … well … a shitload of things that make you feel like shit.

But you know what? You are a leader. You forge on and do better the next time.

But. Let me be clear. Just because you get it wrong doesn’t mean you will automatically tell the whole truth every time from that point on. Leaders always … always … look at what they say in a contextual fashion. I will not tell the whole truth if emotions are running high and will incense to a state of irrational behavior. I will not tell the whole truth if it will drive further despair <when hope is needed>.

Truth 2. Even when you get it right … you can never tell anyone why you did it.

You can’t tell people that emotion makes rational people irrational and “I didn’t tell you everything so that emotions could ease”. I stubbornly didn’t say something, agree with something or use a particular word or phrase because, well, I wasn’t sure you would attack some other group of people <take out your emotions on someone>.

You are a leader. You carry the burden of what you did and take solace in the positive outcomes when you do get it right.

That’s it. This topic has been on my mind for quite some time.

Mostly because I believe we should think about this more often as we view our leaders <and see the uncomfortable amount of shit that our leaders get piled on them>. Partially because I believe in an autonomous democratized decision making organization model. Totally because business mostly exists in a hierarchy model and for the most part we need to manage the existence in which we live in.

Now. This is certainly not written to applaud lying. I do not condone blatant lying. But I do believe there is a time and a place to not tell the whole truth.

That is the burden a leader bears.

Now. Far far too many people think they either are a leader, as smart as a leader or could be a leader.

Harsh truth? The majority of people cannot be a <good> leader. And. Not everyone can or should become a leader.

It takes a certain type of skill, lots of character & courage and … well … the ability to say what needs to be said when it needs to be said. Sometimes what needs to be said is the whole truth and sometimes what needs to be said is selective truth.

This is the uncomfortable truth leaders know as … well … truth.

I imagine some o the thoughts I shared today will make some people uncomfortable let alone vehemently disagree with. That’s okay. All I ever ask is you think about it and maybe see this as an uncomfortable truth.

===

another thing I wrote about the Burden of Leadership

===

—

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

=

Charles Darwin

—————————-

Survival. A topic we all care about. This quote should make everyone think about Life as well as with their business. I love this quote mostly because those with ‘brawn’ scoff at those with ‘brains’, and the ‘brains’ scoff at the ‘brawn’, when survival (and that doesn’t have to mean life & death, but rather success or failure) is being played out.

Regardless of the side someone is on, both brawn & brain believe they have the advantage regardless of the situation in terms of survival. But. Chuck (as Darwin was called to his closest friends) suggests you don’t have to be the sharpest knife in the drawer nor do you have to be the strongest tool in the drawer to survive. You just have to be flexible. Responsive to what is happening. Have a willingness to adapt to the situation.

Flexibility is certainly an advantage if you have the desire to succeed at anything you do (ask any coach). We all face times when we have to deal with situations that do not “fit in” to our routine or our ‘comfort zone.’ I say “tough noogies” (not sure exactly what that means, but I bet you get the point).

Adapt or die.

Just ponder. One of the most frustrating things in life is when you have done your best and yet things still go wrong. Or maybe you didn’t get to where you wanted to get to (what you were ultimately aiming for).

You have to be flexible.

You have to adapt.

You have to have the ability to fit into a changed situation … or … to modify your behavior & actions accordingly to fit the changed situation.

And if you don’t? If instead you stubbornly hold on to some things that don’t work, and stubbornly repeat mistakes (because it matches best practices or “what worked in that past“) this inflexibility will cause failure (or simply not reaching what it is you were aiming for which is a derivative of some type of failure). By the way, in other words, continuous behavior along those lines means you will not survive.

Ultimately you have to decide to do things differently to experience different results.

Easy? Nope. It can be uncomfortable. It can be emotionally draining.

We know that when we are asked to change again and again, the physical and psychological reaction, which is actually excessive stimulation to the system, puts our ability to adapt under massive strain. All the change produces stress and carries with it a physical and emotional price tag. The more radical the change — the bigger the price tag.

Excessive stimulation has at least three levels: sensory, cognitive and decisional. To help us function <or survive>, each of us has developed strategies, or destimulation tactics, to lower the level of stimulation when we feel uncomfortably close to the limits of our adaptive range. We use these tactics every day, often unconsciously. Yet. By becoming conscious of them we can increase their effectiveness. By examining our own responses to overstimulation we can learn ways of consciously influencing change. We can begin by influencing small events, then expand our influence to larger patterns of experience. All these mental tactics are designed to detach from the shit … and rise above all that you are today so that you can be the best you can be tomorrow.

To do all of this you need to be aware. You need to not only be prepared to recognize when change needs to occur (typically there is a threshold on where you need to stop fighting the change or risk falling so far behind you cannot catch up or just be ‘eliminated’ at that time … oh … that survival thing) but you also need to be ready to change.

Look. Everyone has the capability to change. In fact I have a nifty chart which shows how most people accept & accommodate change.

Its pretty simple but shows that we need to work through the different levels of response to effect change. I would imagine there are several points to be made but here are the two from me:

–          you learn as you move through each phase at each point actually changing how you think about future problems/challenges to further change

–          you can get stuck anywhere in any phase at any time (the nifty chart actually helps show how easy it is to NOT change because you get stuck somewhere).

So. As change is introduced to you & your life you are forced through all four levels. I would imagine the most important thought would be to attain the fourth level as quickly as possible.

Anyway. Survival, and change, pretty much always depends on the most basic first step – believe that you are able to make the changes.  And take the first step.

Without that? You have the thought, but no action.

And the result of no action? Lack of survival again.

All that said. I tend to believe a lot of people will read the Darwin quote and seek to find meaning within ‘survival of the fittest’ bigger picture. I have some strange advice (coming from me).

Think small.

Think day-to-day.

Think “me.”

Think that survival is about adapting to the environment around you.

Think adapting means “initiating a new order of <personal> things ….”

—

“It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things.

For the reformer has enemies in all those who profit by the old order, and only luke-warm defenders in all those who profit by the new order.

This luke-warmness arises partly from fear of their adversaries, who have the laws in their favor, and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not truly believe in anything new until they have had an actual experience of it”.

Machiavelli

=

Bottom line.

Always think about how can you adapt.

By the way, I am not suggesting (and I believe Chuck Darwin wasn’t either) 100% change to adapt (although some situations demand it). Successful change typically begins by pinpointing anchors of stability (one you either have or can develop) which help to make the transition change not only viable, but more likely successful for you.

Regardless. Make change your constant companion and friend.

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

“The only thing that has ever made me feel old is those few times where I allow myself to be predictable.”

Carlos Santana

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

General Mark Milley:

“disobedience, when done, must be done with trust and integrity, and you must be morally and ethically correct.”(Disciplined Disobedience)

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

Well. There is no lack of articles on generational gaps in business and, yet, almost every one of them focuses on simplistic “generational characteristics”, “old versus young” and “what millennials want” and shit like that. Sure. Useful but I would argue all young people have always wanted a version of the same thing “do good meaningful shit without all the old people bullshit.”

Anyway.

What no one seems to talk about is the core frictional axis in today’s business generational issue: business philosophy<embodied in how ideas are created & implemented>.

That said. While I will certainly piss some people off by suggesting 50somethings are slowing us all down <impeding progress> I will do so by hopefully using some rational arguments rather than simply ranting.

The foundation for my belief will center on 2 things:

• Compensating
• Compensation

Of course this is, in reality, about ‘letting go holding on’ <with a dose of ‘please move on’>. That said. 50somethings are the biggest impediment AND catalyst for progress.

Let me explain.

Impediment. They cannot let go. They are holding on with a stranglehold sense of fear to what they ‘know.’ I recognize that this is actually a topic on some elder generational life truths:

• No one can do it better than I can.
• It was always better when I was younger.
• It is always worse now than it was before.

Every generation as they get older believes this. Every generation of businesses has a bunch of people sitting in their corner offices looking askance as the young skip down the hallways tapping their proverbial fingers on their desks wondering how to corral all those young whippersnappers to do it the way they did it.

And it can get worse.

The old folk think they are living in the present <their perception> by implementing what is comfortable <the past> therefore their behavior is incredibly difficult to impact because their mind is telling them what they are doing is actually different than what they are actually doing.

Ok. Now that I have blasted 50somethings as being stubborn bitter curmudgeons and the biggest impediment to change, I will take a minute and also note, given the right attitude, 50somethngs can be the biggest enhancer/catalyst of progress. There is a relatively small percentage of 50somethings who have the ability to straddle generations <attitudinally> and have the ability to insert themselves into the younger generation’s minds and desires to strengthen the engine of progress rather than stall the engine.

Please note … I am not suggesting these 50somethings have to be as good as the young at technology or whatever new innovative techniques out there yet to be discovered, in fact, it may benefit them to not be or even try. Their value is in their heads and experience and the nudging of ‘what can be’ using selected knowledge from ‘what was.’

Let’s call it ‘selective best practice learnings.’ Topmodels suggested it was the happy few who could explain things. I have to tell you. I think the market place needs more of these “happy few” 50 year old+ employees than ever before (and I am gonna tell you why). Now. I am not suggesting all 50+ people are the same. And this generalization may be translatable to other age groups but let me suggest there are three groups:

• Over 50 and all they know and believe in is what they were taught when they were in their 20’s.
• Over 50 and they have all the knowledge they need to be on their own and like being on their own (I call these builders)
• Over 50 and have accumulated iterative learning over the years and have a unique combination of old and new (and like renovating)

(note: I wrote a post about Builders versus Renovators)

The first group is lost in the past. They will struggle because their thinking and ideas and even their vocabulary can be out of date. They will suck at transformation or renovation. Their hope is finding someone who needs to work on their internal construct of how to get shit done. But mostly these are the people when we were young we thought were ‘out-of-touch’ from the real world (or chuckled to ourselves because they would throw out up to date buzzwords acting like they knew what was going on).

The second group has accumulated enough knowledge and expertise and confidence where mentally they have flipped from ‘working for someone’ to ‘working for myself.’ They have recognized their ability to build. And they like building (which is different than transforming). They would suck at transforming because they want to run the place and not simply be an enabler for the organization to shift. (Ralph also talks about this within his newsletter as “fear of flying” and learning about yourself). They could possibly be out of touch or they could be leading edge entrepreneurs. But it doesn’t matter because they are now going forward as their own boss.

The third group? They are renovators. Companies should be fighting over these people. They are old but not old. They are experienced but still learning. They have a solid thinking construct but flexible in application. They may have their quirks (because I believe all of us older people start feeling more comfortable in our own skin and therefore are a little less worried about ‘fitting in’) but also tend to be more interested in the result than worrying about step by step how they get there. They can actually make the current buzzword understandable by using past functional learnings to explain them.

So. When I say “fighting for these people” I don’t mean to suggest that companies should be stockpiling these people at the expense of young energetic fresh thinkers and doers. I am simply suggesting that companies need a good tier of these boomer types to transform themselves when, frankly, a lot of companies need to be ‘transforming.’ (and my definition of transformation is leveraging from solid good older characteristics an injecting some new characteristics). I am also not going to suggest there should be a direct correlation between % of boomers in population and % of boomers in the makeup of business organizations. That would seem kind of silly to me.

But the numbers are pretty compelling that organizations should seek that third group of over 50ers (let’s be nice and call them boomers). In 2009 The PEW Center released a study outlining the current generation gap is the largest in the almost 50 year history of the study. Today, an astounding 79% of Americans believe that there is a generation gap in the ways young and old think and believe. Truly the only way to bridge that gap within an organization and eliminate generational divisiveness is to have boomers who can effectively communicate with and motivate all age groups.

There are not many of these 50somethings out there.

—————–

“The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.”

L.P. Hartley

—————————-

I equate it to the fabulous few who can travel to a different country and seamlessly blend into the attitudes & behaviors of the new country.

Generations are, in general, slow to change and adapt in a normal every day situation. Today’s 50somethings are exponentially challenged with change and are not dealing with it very well <i.e., not letting go very well>. I believe it was a French sociologist, Emile Durkheim, who developed a psychographic method to establish different socio-cultural groupings <I believe it is called the Sinus Milieu>.  Anyway. Basically it is a model that challenges us to think about behavior, preferences and cultural practices. The main premise behind the model is called ‘the lock-in principle.’ The principle simply states that if we get used to something we do not want to change our habits <or attitudes an beliefs> even if we are presented with something new or different that might be better. Simplistically it consistently shows <to a point that it is almost an unequivocal behavioral truth> that habit is stronger than the desire for improvement.

This thought partially explains that while 50somethings actually share the same desires as young people they are reluctant to let go of what they “know.” this gets compounded by two things:

1. With the advent of data & technology, the working business model has transformed from a “idea construction” model to a “idea destruction/reconstruction model“.
2. With the internet the gap between older experienced based knowledge and younger theoretical based knowledge has become sliver thin.

JEREMY SCRIVENS

“Over the past ten years, businesses have used Lean, Six Sigma, business process engineering and other techniques to drive costs out of a business. They have also succeeded in driving people nuts. Something really important happened two years ago. The percentage of people who loathe their jobs has been rising and the number of people who love their jobs has been falling. Two years ago these lines crossed. If we don’t find a way to reverse that trend then we are truly stuffed.”

Sliver thin? This is the compensation and compensating thoughts I shared upfront. 

• compensation

While this is about management style as well as purpose ultimately this is about money … not only how we personally get paid <earnings & wealth> but also how the company gets paid <profits, revenue, growth, etc.>. The current 50something management generation is literally and figuratively the generation that got squeezed. This was the generation who had to learn how to do more with less. This was the generation who was also demanded to generate more profits and sales increases … with less.

If there is anything this generation understands better, it is the concept of the squeezed dollar.

Now.  Let me explain. As business evolves and the economic environment surrounding industry evolves the needs of the business leader changes. It is natural to adapt to what the economic environment demands <or be killed if you don’t>. The burden of this business generation? The squeezed dollar <versus the bloated dollar of the previous generation>.

The current generation of business leaders has had to thrive in a ‘squeezed dollar’ environment.

• The squeezed dollar is the unfortunate fact that because of the boomer generation leaders’ wonderful success … the financial community demanded the same results … but the consumer demanded transparency.

Therefore in order to maintain continuous sales growth <which is actually a relatively ludicrous concept> and continuous profitability the current business leader had to find ways to squeeze the same profit/growth out of less dollars <cutting staff while cutting prices while cutting … and cutting … and … well … cutting>. I say all this because this economic pressure creates a certain type of management style in order to be successful. 50somethings learned on the job and actually were quite successful maintaining the boomer ‘earn as much as I can’ attitude <a version of extravagant desire for more> as well as working leaner … on the edge of what an organization is actually capable of.

Compounding this is the next challenge.

• Compensating

There is always a fragile relationship between generations … old holding on to what they know and have while the young are trying to pry things from the old … trying to get them to let go <of ideas, responsibility, things, etc.>.

From a ‘wisdom’ perspective the current generation gap is different, and more challenged, at the moment <although it has been this way in the past … just not within our experienced past>. While this wisdom gap between adults and the youth <in Life and in business> has always existed I will call this unique current gap challenge ‘the war on the adult advantage’ <or false knowledge versus real knowledge> for the sake of my discussion.

False knowledge. This is harsh <and an over generalization> but adults have always made shit up. We pass our opinions and beliefs along as facts … as real knowledge based on real life experience. Let’s call this the ‘years advantage.’ Most likely it is a ‘focus group of one’ knowledge but in the past adults could own this advantage the majority of the time. And at its worst … it is simply a defense mechanism to deflect youth energy away from something we would prefer them not to be focused on or thinking.

Real knowledge. Adults almost always had a real practical technical ‘how to do it’ advantage … mostly because in this case we had seen & done it. And done it many times so that it was almost with true expertise <or at minimum we had the process understood and efficient>. Nothing beats practical hands on experience <remember that old folk>.

The internet has squeezed both.  Today false knowledge can be challenged immediately.

And real knowledge?  Well. With some professional proficiency an adult will always maintain an advantage but with the advent of the computer and technology … many adults have actually LOST the advantage. Ultimately … the internet has squeezed this entire advantage perspective <actual wisdom as well as the learning process itself> to the head of a pin.

Only those adults truly agile and adept at thinking are maintaining this advantage.

But, in general, the 50something response?

We are threatened. The two main pillars of advantage have become toothpicks. So we hunker down. We take an increasingly bunker mentality and batten down the hatches <ok … no more tired metaphors>.

What do the 50somethings inevitably have to hold on to <and put a death grip to never let go of>? Whatever slim margin of advantage we can own, the unassailable portion, is ‘how we learned to do it’ — the process and the mentality and the ‘work’ on HOW we learned what we learned that got us to where we are.

Heck.  We got here this way … so any other way is a short cut <or not the right way>. Uh oh. Why is this an issue? Well. My good friends at topmodels.com helped me out again. They refer to it as “why faith is replacing knowledge.”

“… our world is getting more complicated all the time. Black and white, good and bad, right and wrong have been replaced with complicated constructs that leave most people in the dark.

As the world around us becomes increasingly fast paced and complex, the amount we REALLY know – what we can really grasp and understands – decreases all the time. Today it is more or less taken for granted that we do not understand many of the things that surround us, such as mobile phones and ipads. And even if somebody tried to explain the DNA code to us, we would probably be out of our depth.

We are increasingly surrounded by ‘black boxes’ … complex constructs that we do not understand even if they are explained to us. We cannot comprehend the inner processes of a black box but nonetheless we integrate their inputs and outputs into our decision making. The amount that we simply HAVE to believe, without understanding it, is increasing all the time. As a result we are tending to assign more importance to those who can explain something than to their actual explanation.” <The Decision book: 50 models for strategic thinking

Krogerus & Tschappeler>

Well. That thought scares the shit out of 50somethings. It stands against everything we were taught.

Faith versus actual knowledge? How can you truly understand if you don’t understand <all the innards and stuff>? The young are replacing <some> knowledge with faith … and the old are not letting go of ‘stop and learn the knowledge.’ There is certainly a balance … but 50somethings are not interested in balance … they are interested in having ‘no faith’ because they perceive it as having ‘too much risk’ or ‘not the way we did it.’

<insert ‘get over it’ here>

There is a massive opportunity for 50somethings if they can get their shit together and quit ‘compensating.’ If they simply quit cocooning simply to maintain their adult dignity <their wisdom factor> and seeking to simply maintain whatever slim perceived advantage they can have over the youth <not actually increasing the gap but simply strengthening the fine thin line between the two>.

Today? It is a more hardened thinner gap than in past generations.

The future is always ‘now’ to the young because the future exists in their ideas. Whenever the future ‘happens’ it becomes the present and then immediately the past <kind of my explanation for the excessive restlessness the youth in business have>.  50somethings need to learn to let go and hold on for the ride <as a conductor>.

Ultimately … the old have lost their traditional grip over the young and are holding on harder than ever before. They are over-compensating to maintain control <or their advantage>.

Bottom line on this topic. It really comes down to two things … attitude and respect.

Attitude.

The right attitude <combined with some respect> is the requirement for adapting to change and generations.

With the passing of time each of us changes … experientially and psychologically. In certain situations, younger people do not like accommodating themselves to traditional experiences and in others older people are reluctant to accept the new. In order for a person to change themselves, it is necessary that they not only be convinced of the appropriateness of this change but they also have to have the right attitude. The attitude matters because … well … this shit doesn’t happen overnight <despite the fact everyone seems to think if you don’t make changes immediately you will get crushed>. In order for everyone to adapt organizationally everyone, both generations, need time.  Time to assimilate the new and the old and create the necessary experience as well as process it to make … well … progress.

Respect.

Oddly, I will suggest it isn’t that the young should respect the old, but rather the opposite. I believe the 50somethings need to get their proverbial heads out of their asses and develop some respect for the young and what they can do <that we cannot>. Show them respect and I imagine they will show us respect <if we have the ability to deserve it along with the right attitude>.

In the end.

There is a lot of talk amongst older folk on “changing” and “adding purpose to businesses” but my prediction?  Existing leadership <and middle management> will screw this up mainly because they will only see the short term as an opportunity to get an older, more mature, cheaper employee and not recognize the longer term issues that will arise. They will screw it up because they will focus on ROI & not ROY:

• Lack of ROY <return on youth>: youth and young people are the cheapest innovation engine in any organization. While typically overlooked in an innovation model their innate ability to provide a fresh perspective through fresh eyes is invaluable. Organizations may not recognize their current loss with the ‘lack of youth’ within their organizations but it is having an impact. It has a domino effect within an organization. Without the ‘hidden youth engine’ more pressure will fall on older employees for innovative ideas … and these employees are more focused on ‘safe behavior to maintain employment’ and … well … you can see where this ends up.

Focusing on what we perceive as ‘generational differences and ‘youth attitudes’ <and not the organizational issues> I believe we older folk will not manage this issue well. Mainly I believe this because we will tend to focus on numbers & jobs and not some key psychological aspects <some Maslow stuff>.

There is truly no generation gap with desire to what we want <purpose, meaning, joy of task, being better, hope>, but the real gap exists in the minds of HOW things should be done.

As noted in my construction versus deconstruction posts, it is a new business world out there today and navigating the transition is where the best minds of the older generation should be focused. I could argue we are currently in the business world’s liminal space <uncomfortable, uneasy transition space> and if you agree, well, then we are simply on our way to someplace new & better. I could also argue we need a new business model for a new business world and fortunately for everyone the young are more capable of implementing this new model than any existing generation.

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

“When a fact begins to resemble whatever you feel is true, it becomes very difficult for anyone to tell the difference between facts that are true and “facts” that are not.”

—-

Katharine Viner

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

“Alternative facts aren’t facts, they are falsehoods.”

Chuck Todd

===========

 “Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?”

Groucho Marx

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

“Perception is a dynamic conflict between the attempts of an outer world to impose an actuality on us and our efforts to transform this actuality into a self-centered perspective. 

Perception is a confrontation between an inward-directed vector of external reality compelling awareness and an outward-directed vector of physiological, cultural, and psychological transformation.

Where these vectors clash, where they balance each other, is what we perceive. This in sum is my view of perception.”

—–

Source: Understanding Conflict and War – Volume 1: The Dynamic Psychological Field

==========

So. I had this piece in my draft folder for months and pulled it out when I heard the term “alternative facts.” Yeah. Not ‘non-truisms’, but real actual ‘alternative facts’.

This is a bastardized version of the false branding concept of “perception is reality.’

My belief is that at some point a long long time ago Trump read the back of some book about branding <because he has never read a book> that said “perception is reality” and he was off to the races creating a hollow universe of ‘perceptions’ in which he could skate along the superficial surface toward riches & fame.

Today, Trump and his merry band of liars, are now taking the perception business to a whole new level of absurdity.

Let us be very clear on some basic Truths:

• Alternative facts live only in an alternative universe.
• Perception is not reality.

As someone who has dabbled in marketing professionally “perception is reality” truly galls me. It is an ugly lie.

And it is even uglier because in an untrained, inexperienced mind … or a misguided lack of moral individual … it can be used to defraud people – unintentionally or intentionally.

Perception is perception.

Reality is reality.

And perception is reality only, and ONLY if you permit it to be so.

Here is a fact.

Perceptions, by definition, are hollow things unless they are truly a reflection of reality. And how can you know if this is true? If you puncture perception, it deflates to whatever reality is. That is a ‘full honest perception.’

Let me be clear <because any real business person who has worked on any consumer brand in the world understands this>.

When you float on the superficial surface of a “perception based Life” you can only get away with it until people get interested enough to actually interact. Because interaction is when the piper gets paid. As one famous advertising person said “nothing kills a bad product faster than good advertising.”

Look. I am not suggesting perceptions, and managing them, is not a viable marketing objective nor am I suggesting that perceptions aren’t important. What I am saying, not suggesting, is that you learn very quickly in the business world that perceptions MUST align with reality or you are screwed. Reality must deliver upon perceptions offered & promised.

For example.

Trump can tell me he is intellectual, smart and knows the best words, but every time his reality, his actions, deliver hollow simplicity, idiot thin-skinned responses and odd word salad verbiage I start questioning the perceptions he is asking us to believe.

The only people I have ever seen try and exist in a ‘perception is reality’ universe have been marketing hacks <who didn’t know any better> and con men <who knew better but wanted to make money and run>.

Perception is not reality and trying to create a universe based on perceptions is a hollow world.

Unfortunately in the universe we live in the American president, from day one to, well, ad finitum, will constantly be trying to convince us reality is not reality, perceptions are what he and his merry band of liars say are truth, alternative facts exist and there is some alternative universe that he, and they, can only see.

We seem to be entering a new era in which truth is what Trump and his administration wants it to be.

Trump was a historically dishonest presidential candidate, a historical dishonest president and his merry band of surrogates <liars> have displayed a persistent commitment to lying – needless lying or necessary lying. Trump is a man who creates his own reality and lives in it … and he and his surrogates are asking us to live in it. Okay, not ‘ask’, he is demanding it.

As his inauguration speech suggested, you will believe in his reality and will live in it and therefore you will be demanded, not asked, to follow his lead within it.

You & I, America and the rest of the world will have to decide whether it will accept this alternative universe or convince him his reality is actually a hollow universe of perversely wrong perceptions.

There are a number of risks at hand.

One is basic society construct – reality is no longer fact based, but ‘feeling’ based.

The other is that Trump anchors this alternative universe based solely on some warped perceptions and therefore those  who elect to follow will follow the pied piper <allegiance to him above all> and not to any ideology, values or principles <not even the US Constitution … because he becomes the sole arbiter of what the Constitution “means to say to us”>. Trump is not a normal phenomenon and his alternative universe of false perceptions and alternative facts should not be normalized by something as simplistic a “politicians have always lied” and “we can never trust the media.”

Politics has always had a tenuous relationship with truth but even in that environment there are limits.

As Jonathan Last wrote in the conservative paper The Weekly Standard … “you can obfuscate, you can misrepresent, you can shade the truth to a ridiculous degree, or play dumb and pretend not to know things you absolutely do know. But you can’t peddle affirmative, provable falsehoods.”

Here is the surprising truth to add.

Journalism has always had a good relationship with truth, but even in that environment there have been missteps which create a false narrative that journalism, as a whole, is dishonest. The majority of journalists are not dishonest, every viable publication in existence has a standard of honesty & proof and while they may tend to a more liberal skewed perspective truth is truth and facts are facts and they treat both with reverence <because their existence relies on that>.

Anyway. This ‘perception is not reality’ truth is going to be challenged like it has never been challenged before.

I will give you the easiest way to puncture a reality/perception gap. Get someone to envision the repercussion of acting, or not acting, upon the perception. What does the day after look like, feel like and … well … be like.

This helps meet the challenge created by false leaders who exaggerate crises or create them with the intent to subvert, and pervert, the constitution, the judiciary process and the system itself.

This helps meet the challenge created by false leaders who offer simple solutions for complex problems.

===

“The simpler past seems more attractive than today’s complex reality, and so people vote [thanks to] inchoate frustrations. They choose simplicity and locality over complexity; identity over internationalism. Politicians promote themselves by giving voice to this. Hence, in addition to Brexit, we have calls for Scottish independence, Catalan independence, and so forth.”

—

Tainter

====

And maybe that is where perception gains traction in a complex world. If complexity doesn’t show simple benefits, or maybe the real benefits are difficult to align in a cause & effect way, perception starts beating reality.

Well. It will until reality catches up to the false promises & false simple solutions offered by perceptions.

The alternative universe can only last as long as the alternative universe can stave off the real universe. Just as alternative facts can only last as long as the real facts can get their shit together and get in the game.

I would note that Trump’s alternative universe isn’t so much about his lying <although that is truly the shiny object we focus on> but rather he’s just wrong in a simplistically naive way about almost everything <and even on the things he has a valid point on and I could construe as ‘right’ he unnecessarily cloaks it in ambiguity & hyperbole so that even his right is wrong>. He rambles aimlessly about anything that happens to pop into his brain and is convenient for him to say at the time. He is not typically deliberate about his lying he is simply authentically living in his own alternative universe and explaining that universe to us.

The universe itself may be one bigly lie, but his explanations are truth about the universe.

Trump is a rambling, bombastic, amoral narcissist. He’s never pretended to be anything else. What you see is what you get. His integrity resides solely on authentically communicating the big Lie <although … in his mind … in his universe … it is the big Truth>.

Oddly this seems to mean, at least to a lot of everyday people, that an authentic liar has more integrity than a calculated communicator.

He is genuine in his belief of this alternative universe.

His perception is actually his reality <just ponder that scary thought for a moment>.

Ok. That is bizarre. Fucking bizarre.

Trump and his merry band of liars use a variety of truth-blurring techniques <i call it “chaff”>. Their objective appears to not only be to control by creating doubts about what is real and what isn’t, but also to create an alternative universe in which whatever he does actually looks like it makes sense.

To quote President Trump himself … Bad! Sad!

There is a much bigger lesson here for everyone beyond whether our new president is capable of telling the truth or whether he, and his followers, even care and accept alternative truths as reality … perceptions are NOT reality.

Perceptions should always be held accountable.

People should be always be held accountable for the perceptions they create and offer.

In the end I come back to the beginning.

Here is what I think as an everyday person. Envision the day after your perception is faced by the harsh truth of reality.

Will you be scared?

Will you be excited?

Will you be happy, sad, or somewhere in between?

Good on you if you come out of these questions excited, happy and looking forward to the reality which perceptions suggested it would be. Just make sure you treat what you perceive with care.

Here is what I think as a business & marketing person.

The gap between perception and reality is the “death trap.”

====

‘In the day we sweat it out on the streets of a runaway American dream …’ It’s a ‘death trap,’ a ‘suicide rap.’  I want to guard your dreams and visions. ”

Born to Run

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

Perceptions create expectations. Expectations are developed to meet personal dreams & visions.

If expectations are not met in reality … people swing back angrily upon the ‘perception creators.’

Creating false perceptions is a suicide rap.

Creating false perceptions is a death trap.

Many of us business folk have the scars to prove this.

Treat what you ‘build’ as perceptions with care.

Perceptions are simply that … perceptions.

Facts are facts.

Reality is truth.