——

“Most men are individuals no longer so far as their business, its activities, or its moralities are concerned.

They are not units but fractions.”

=

Woodrow Wilson

——

Well.

In business and in Life people like consistency.

We actually like rules. And we really <really> like some guidelines for how to do things, what to say and when things should be done.

Oh. And .we love, yes, LOVE to look to the past for answers or the ‘formula for what to do or how to act.”

Ah. That sneaky ‘learn from the past or be doomed to repeat mistakes’ advice.

True, but not true advice. What makes it not true?

Context.

Future truths, or solutions, only partially reside in the past. The other part lives in the present and what is swirling around that moment.

Which brings me back to the opening quote.

We like to see things as units and yet they are simply fractions. Some people stand on fractions and act like they are whole solid foundations.

Be wary of those people.

They are not really seeking truth just answers, okay, well … maybe just an answer.

——-

“Fear not the path of Truth for the lack of People walking on it.”

Robert F. Kennedy

——-

I admit. The trouble we constantly run into is, yeah, context. We are always contextual, mosaics of the moment, and this is troubling for anyone seeking simple answers. Frankly, most of us would love a simple answer now & then <if not all the time>. But some people thrive on simplicity and black & white.

Please do not read into what I just wrote that these people live a colorless life. Everyone has color and everyone certainly has pieces of light within and without. 

====

“We are mosaics. Pieces of light, love, history, stars … glued together with magic and music and words. “

Anita Krizzan 

==

All I am suggesting is that magic, or the contextual aspects, in Life creates a certain intangible aspect to everyday situations. And while this intangible thing is a nagging aspect in common everyday life & business … at critical points, let’s call them ‘semi-critical moments or junctures’, the contextual intangible aspect is nerve wracking.

Nerve wracking because we want a simple solution in semi-critical moments. And context demands some complexity. It demands looking at fractions and not the whole. This means we constantly struggle with the fact <the Truth as it were> we, as individuals, businesses, countries and societies, are simply fractions and not the unit.

I would also suggest decisions, business & in life, are simply fractions and not a self-sustaining unit.

Yet, we try and make most of our decisions as if everything is aligned and unmoving — kind of like taking a snapshot and taking action.

Uh oh. This is double trouble.

This means, contextually, whatever action or decision you take or make will be relevant to what was … not what is. 

———-

“Only a crisis — actual or perceived — produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. 

That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable.”

Milton Friedman

————-

In closing out this thought I would like to point out that this thought, while it seems like a stronger Life thought, is maybe even more importantly a business thought. Far far too often in business we ignore the fact each decision is contextual seeking comfort by sitting around saying “let’s look to the past for the answer.” I admit I find it slightly odd because in today’s business world every single mistake or hiccup/interruption in the status quo is labeled a crisis and crises tend to produce real change. We shouldn’t be seeking comfort in the solution but rather an uncomfortable solution which enhances the possibility of comfortable results.

On the other hand. Maybe that is my explanation to the oddity. Because what we label a crisis really isn’t true crisis we tend to just depend on whatever ideas are lying around. And the most typical ideas lying around are “what can we learn from the past.”

If you ever wonder why great decision makers should be paid some inordinate amount of money … reread this. Great decision makers see the past, the present & the future and envision the mosaic better than most of us <certainly I>.

They understand the situation is simply a fraction of what is.

This should also help explain why so many people make incredibly bad decisions.

Every moment, every situation, every success and every failure … is contextual. In fact contextual exists in almost every situation in such a wide vivid mosaic perspective that ‘learning from the past’ almost seems like an inordinate waste of time.

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

“[an] idea is a powerful thing — but it’s just an idea. It’s a sketch before the painting.  The truth is that an idea is rarely an answer. It’s usually a hunch wrapped in a bundle of unanswered strategic, operational, technical, and financial questions.”

———–

Mark Payne

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

“With an apple I will astonish Paris.”

———–

Paul Cezanne

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

So.

Could you ever imagine a business person suggesting surprising the world with one of the most ordinary common things in Life — an apple?

People would think that person was crazy.

“We need something new.”

“We need to be unique.”

Well. Let’s face it.

Most new things suck.

Most new ideas are just bad.

And most new shit just stinks.

Which leads me to say several things upfront:

• The concept of Big ideas in marketing is crap. Yup. Crap.
• Confusing a bunch of tactics with a big strategic idea is just plain stupid.

As a corollary to the above statement — iterative tactics without a strategy idea is insane <it is just a race to the bottom>.

• If you can get paid for having no ideas … do anything to keep that job.
• Small <with sharp edges or points> ideas, even the ordinary looking ones, may be uncool but exponentially cooler than no idea and infinitely better than supposed big ideas.

Look.

I truly believe the entire big idea discussion is crap and misguides organizations to aim for the wrong things <and encourages organizations to overlook some big things>. Success is all about tiny sharp insights. Sharp insights that have the possibility of expanding to something big <unfortunately I now have a visual of one of those stupid little sponges that expand when you put a drop of water on them>.

Yeah. It is quite possible saying Big Ideas are crap is overstating it a little, but I can unequivocally state that the entire process to “find” or “uncover” the Big idea is crap.

Huh?

Simply by starting your thought process out with this question you have complicated your business thinking and in fact you are saying you are seeking the wrong thing. For in seeking something big you have a tendency to discuss hollow good looking concepts which can easily be torn apart into meaningless little nothings. Ideas are good in any shape or size <no ideas have no shape therefore … by this logic … are not good>. I just tend to believe often big things come in very small packages when it comes to ideas. So if all you do is look for big packages … well … you are gonna be sorely disappointed when you open it up and look at the idea.

Maybe <and this is quite possible> I am missing something but what I seem to see in all this Big Idea mumbo jumbo is “hey, I don’t really have any idea so I am going to constantly implement a boatload of little tactics until some of them start working and then write up the idea.”

Pragmatic but not really that … uhm … great an idea.

Yeah. I have certainly seen a great tactical idea generate a honed strategic idea but I can honestly say I have never seen anyone just throw a whole bunch of tactical shit up against the wall and see what sticks and then like a Rorschach test identify the strategic idea from the shape of the tactical shit.

Regardless. It is kind of the way business in general seems to be evolving <to my dismay I may add> but good ideas die not because they aren’t “big” but mostly because they have to run the following gauntlet <with these things standing on each side>:

1. Consensus

———

“A consensus means that everyone agrees to say collectively what no one believes individually.”

Abba Eban

———

The consensus & ideas concept gets stated like …“if I have an idea I want to share ownership so it succeeds.” That is kind of the bullshit you hear.

Look.

A good idea is a good idea. A great idea tends to have sharper edges to it <it can hurt a little and make some people feel a little uncomfortable>. All I really know is that gaining consensus will only dull a sharp idea.

No debate on that.

A good idea, in fact, the best ideas, are typically borne of an individual not a consensus.

No debate on that.

Collaboration <not consensus> can nurture an idea to greatness but as an acorn becomes an oak — we should be seeking the acorn. We should be seeking the people who have real ideas and learn to revel in the initial seeming smallness and power of what it is … and understand the gloriousness of what this little thing can become if it is watered and nurtured … not drowned in consensus.

========= 

“Instead of meetings about meetings let’s barge into someone’s office w/ a great idea & figure out how to do it.”

Tom Goodwin

===========

Figure out a way to implement without consensus. Not saying it’s easy but that’s kind of the gig.

2. Fear

To be fearless in a room full of fear is frustrating. Fear is the biggest enemy of any idea … big, medium or small.

===========

“Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

H. L. Mencken

===========

Fear takes shape in organizations in a couple of ways:

• Fear of being wrong or making a mistake.

This is a tough one. Nowadays with employment being what it is many people are running scared. And scared leadership is putting even more pressure on people to make fewer mistakes <rather than do more right things).

An iterative ideation process is a beautiful way to hide from making a mistake. How can you be wrong if it is baked into an admitted iterative process?

• Use data to make a subjective decision.

Ah. This is where research comes in. In other words “why use common sense and our knowledge when we can implement a congruent multi phase segmentation study that identifies the double helix DNA of our desired customer.” <or some other bullshit you hear in the business world>

I believe big research studies don’t produce big ideas. But. If you have patience and look hard enough typically within this big research study you can probably mine a little sharp looking diamond of an idea that can make a big difference.

But most organizations don’t use research that way. They use research to make a decision for them. They use data out of fear.

All that said. In the end I remind everyone of something I said in the beginning:

“With an apple I will astonish the world.”

I wish more businesses would think this way.

But.

Small & ordinary isn’t sexy in … well .. anything. In today’s business it needs to be Big & extraordinary to be meaningful.

That is just crazy.

We need more people talking about making the ordinary extraordinary and that small sharp ideas are the ones which break through a fairly cluttered world. Within the ordinary always resides a small mundane thing. And it is easy to focus on the mundane as common, useless or even pedantic. Yet each ‘ordinary thing’ also has the capacity, if we are open to it, to usher us into an experience of  something extraordinary & usher us into some new way of looking at the ordinary & usher us into some new way of experiencing the ordinary.

Even the ordinary contains infinite possibilities <if we would only seek it there>.

Within finite often resides the infinite.

Within each of us ordinary people resides something extraordinary.

I mention that last point about us ordinary everyday schmucks <people> because we need to remind ourselves something experts have been trying to tell us for quite some time … “ no one is born a genius … genius takes time and opportunity to develop.” David Shenk <The Genius in All of Us: New Insights into Genetics, Talent, and IQ> described genius as a process, not something someone has or is borne with, but rather something that someone does.

We all have some genius within us. We all have the ability to take something ordinary and surprise the world with something extraordinary. This belief, this understanding of self, far too often is trampled in the rush to get things done and the search for ‘something new’ and gets suffocated in rooms of consensus.

It’s sad that as we rush up & down the hallways of our businesses we tend to overlook the opportunities in the ordinary.

<sigh>

Surprise the world with an apple.

What an amazing thought. Just seek the small sharp insightful seemingly ordinary looking ideas and stick it to the competition.

======

“It’s time we stop worrying, and get angry you know?

But not angry and pick up a gun, but angry and open our minds.”

————————-

Tupac Shakur

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

This is hardly worth fighting for

But it’s the little petty shit that I can’t ignore

When my fist hits your face and your face hits the floor

It’ll be a long time coming

But you got the message now

‘Cause I was never going

You’re the one that’s going down

One of us is going down

I’m not running,

It’s a little different now

‘Cause one of us is going

One of us is going down

—————-

Sick Puppies

<You’re Going Down>

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

Well.

Every time I watch the Olympics I am reminded of a topic which is not discussed often enough in business … angry competition. I call it angry strategizing.

Yeah. The Olympics has reminded me about competing angry.

While the Olympics are supposed to be about the love of competition and a better world through sports competition it is actually about determining the best in the world. And that, my friends, is not about love it is about the rage of competition.

While I will surely give a nod to respect shown to other great competitors and the aftermath camaraderie that can only be had among the best in the world who have competed the hardest and recognize greatness around them at the Olympics, and how they do so even in loss, I must point out that the Olympic best carry a certain rage into their competitiveness. It may not be the traditional version of anger but it is most certainly a version of anger.

It drives them to compete with the intent to beat the shit out of whomever they are competing against and be the best they can be so they can actually be the best.

I say all that because I don’t believe enough business people strategize with some anger. Anger that … well … there are some stupid ideas out there …

some stupid opinions

some stupid attitudes

competitors say and do stupid things

and certainly there is a stupid acceptance of mediocrity.

I know that I have sat in a meeting room with some business partners and looked around at the competition and what they were doing and saying and, well, got angry. Angry enough to want and do something about it.

By being angry in business <no, I am not talking about being some anger management candidate> I mean planning angry, developing a strategy thinking with some anger about the status quo, maybe even having some anger toward conventional thinking and certainly some anger against whomever you are competing <but you can still respect the ones who deserve the respect while doing so> is effective and leads to effective business strategy to create real distinction in the marketplace.

To be clear.

Anger, to me, is much more useful than disdain. Disdain breeds some arrogance and certainly diminishes the capabilities of the competition as you think about competing against them. In your scoffing at them it suggests that it is … is … well … just not worth even thinking about. Anger, on the other hand, suggests you are facing what is straight on, in its face, and taking it head on. Anger guides you not toward some flimsy white space but directly into the fray — directly toward the space you want in a market <whether it is already occupied or not> and take it. Or, as Admiral Nelson once said, “you can do no wrong by putting yourself as close to the enemy as possible.”

And you know what?

In business strategy that is smart. So that is why I call this the angry business strategy.

To be clear, there is only one real way to win and that is without cheating. I say that because anger almost forces you to not only recognize that there is no virtue to be found in taking a shortcut <although shortcuts never really exist anyway> but that there is no long cut or shortcut but rather simply getting up and going — and competing to win.

I am sure someone will point out that it may simply be you look around and get aggravated by what you see and decide to do something about it. But I think if you have the team, and you have the product or service and you actually have the means to make your mark in the business world … then … well … it is okay if you look around at the competition and the competitive business world and get a little pissed not just aggravated.

You get a little angry …

This is stupid … there is a better way.

This is crazy … I have a better product.

This is nuts … I can’t believe people believe that shit.

Your anger puts an edge on what you decide to say and do.

Far too often we sit around and have pot after pot of strong coffee and have intellectual discussions on how to smartly effectively compete. We worry through some fairly random details, talk about being the best and then go ahead and be anything but the best.

So … you know what?

If you are better, and have a better offering and are truly worth a shit and want people to know you are worth a shit … well then … there is no real intellectual challenge. You get on with getting on. You just get competitively angry and stand in the middle of the field and say “here I am, and I am not going down.”

I am not suggesting being stupid about competing. Nor am I suggesting bludgeoning the industry and competitors with some dull edged hammer.

But I am suggesting the anger puts some attitude into your strategy and tactics. It puts a sharper edge into your sense of competitive purpose.

And here is what I know.

If it isn’t blind anger but rather competitive anger you won’t tiptoe into your messaging and go to market strategy. You will stride in with some swagger, some confidence and clearly some strong purposeful messaging.

I think … no … I know more businesses would do better to attack their business strategy with some anger.

Get a little pissed about perceptions, attitudes and mediocrity.

Get pissed that people are accepting less than the best and less than real truth.

Get pissed at yourself if you are in a position where you don’t believe enough in yourself and your offering to be able to get pissed.

Yeah.

I do believe more businesses should strategize with some anger. As Tupac said … not angry and pick up a gun, but angry and open our minds.

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

“As with events, so it is with thoughts. When I watch that flowing river pours for a season its streams into me, I see that I am a pensioner; not a cause, but a surprised spectator of this ethereal water.”

—–

Ralph Waldo Emerson

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

“The sphinx must solve her own riddle.  If the whole of history is in one man, it is all explained from individual experience.”

——

Ralph Waldo Emerson

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

“Comparisons are a shit way of evaluating things.”

—-

Bruce McTague

===========

So.

We LOVE using the past to try and explain shit. Past people, past events, past words and past … well … everything.

When we are faced with something new, or someone new, we immediately start sifting through the scrap heap of the past to start creating some semblance of a jig saw puzzle to explain what we are facing.

There are a number of problems with doing this.

The biggest is that scraps are scraps. Oh. And the scraps used to reside in a completely different context <which is impossible to recreate>. And, yet, we continue to try.

The problem is that in doing so we elect to not judge the present on the merits of the present. We decline to judge a person as they are, the circumstances as they are and the decisions on the merits of what it is. We do this with everyone and everything … how money is spent, decisions we need to make, new people we have met and even leaders. We do it all partially well intended <we want to make sure we make a fair assessment of hat we are seeing & hearing> and partially because simply examining something and stating “this is good” or “this is bad” <or acceptable or unacceptable> seems … well … flimsy.

Comparisons tend to make things look more solid.  And, yet, we tend to absolutely suck at creating the proper comparisons. And, that happens for a variety of reasons – also some well-intended and some not so well intended.

I will start with the well intended.

As Emerson once wrote: “our being is descending into us from know not whence.” And we struggle with that truth. It makes us uncomfortable … uhm … no … REALLY uncomfortable. If we don’t know where things descend from then we begin to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to find comparisons to do so. this all comes at the expense of judging what is, the beings and such, on the merits of what exists. And this is where the shit hits the fan. We either dip into our own memories or a slew of people start telling us what memories to take a look at <the latter is part of the not so well intended>.

Well.

Here is an unfortunate fact … our memories, which is how we tend to judge and create mental comparisons, are constructive and reconstructive.

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

“Many people believe that memory works like a recording device.

…….. our memory chip ……..

You just record the information, then you call it up and play it back when you want to answer questions or identify images. But decades of work in psychology has shown that this just isn’t true.

Our memories are constructive.

They’re reconstructive.

Memory works a little bit more like a Wikipedia page: You can go in there and change it, but so can other people. “

—

Elizabeth Loftus

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

“You can ask the universe for all the signs you want, but ultimately, we see what we want to see when we’re ready to see it.”

——

(via 1112pm)

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

We desperately want to define things through comparison and continuously ask the universe for signs to show us what we want.

We desperately do so because in the absence of some comparison we would then have to judge what is on the merits of what exists — the good, the bad and the indifferent .

That doesn’t mean a shitload of people around you aren’t gonna try and affect how you will build your comparisons and encourage you to compare in some fairly creative <sometimes absurd> ways.

What do I mean?

I go back to the psychologist Ebbinghaus who studied memory construction <his published essay Über das Gedächtness in 1885> where he realized that memory and recall of continuous passages of prose or verse would be affected differentially by people’s experiences and prior knowledge.

Memory is a snare, pure and simple; it alters, it subtly rearranges the past to fit the present. 

Mario Vargas Llosa

 

What that actually means is that the memory you tap into to create the comparisons you seek are slightly mangled by yourself <in how you remember it> and can be manipulated by devious not so well intended people around you. The Constructive and reconstructive nature of memory:

• Memories are distributed; not unitary
• “remembering” involves retrieving and reassembling
• memories can be revised over time
• Reconstruction is filling in “missing details” on the basis of logic, assumptions, what “must have been the case”
• More common reasons for forgetting: Lack appropriate retrieval cue = something you attach to a memory, can use to recover it>
• Reliable retrieval cues are key to access <and multiple retrieval cues are best>
• Existence of older memories blocks access to newer ones

Ah. If only we could pull out our brain and use only our own eyes. But, not surprisingly, this is the exact same issue new ideas, “white space” theories, fresh thinking, true <not made up> disruptive people & things face.

All that said. I will point out that something doesn’t have to be truly new to face false comparison challenges … it can simply be a new person in an existing role or a common problem or question just in a different time. Suffice it to say anything new, or any change, is being asked to be defined by the past. And there will never be a lack of people stepping up and suggesting they can define something through a variety of comparisons <many of which you spend more time trying to fend off than is worth the time>.

This is a mistake. This is a fundamental error we make. It assumes what is can somehow be extrapolated by something by what was <the past>. In reality, as I have noted numerous times, I cannot exactly extrapolate the past because I cannot exactly replicate the past … which means <in harsh terms> there is nothing there and nothing from nothing is … uhm … nothing.

Yeah.

Most comparisons end up meaning nothing <although they look like something>.

Yeah.

This means most comparisons we create are just plain and simple false comparisons. Without trying to be flippant with regard to what I believe is a fairly standard operating procedure for people … we need to stop. Stop false comparisons.

It is a trap. And a dangerous trap.

Comparisons normalize that which should not be normalized … just as comparisons can de-normalize that which should be normalized. False comparisons wielded by the devious can construct almost any “normal” you could desire <even if it is hollow & not really normal>.

Anyway.

In today’s world there does seem like there is a lot of crazy shit happening. And in our desire to veer away from the “crazy shit” feeling we seek some comparisons to normalize the situation <thereby calming the ‘crazy shit feeling>.

Just a couple of notes of warning on that.

<a> Finding comparisons, if done well, you can actually be convinced there really isn’t crazy shit happening even though there is truly some crazy shit happening.

As a corollary to <a>,

<b> if there is truly some crazy shit happening there will be no shortage of people ponying up false comparisons trying to convince you that there is no crazy shit happening <and some of them will be quite effective>. The only reason I point out the warning is that there really is some crazy shit happening and we need to stop finding comparisons to make today, and some people, look a little less crazy than it really is.

There you go.

I will end where I began … “Comparisons are a shit way of evaluating things <and people>.” We should invest the energy judging what is, people, ideas and things, based on their present merits not some false comparisons from the past.

================ 

“If I cannot deflect the will of Heaven, I will raise Hell.”

“flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.”

——-

Virgil

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

“Don’t try to behave as though you were essentially sane and naturally good. We’re all demented sinners in the same cosmic boat — and the boat is perpetually sinking.”

—-

Aldous Huxley

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

Ok.

This is about doing shit and doing the shit you really want to do … in business.

This is not about ‘finding your passion’ or ‘maximizing your potential’ … this is simply about something you actually decide you want to do … maybe something that is decided you should do … and are going to do.

Now.

I am sure I am going to completely bastardize the true meaning of this quote but I think about it with business in mind. This thought piece is a derivative of my “how far would you go to solve a problem” business thought.

In that piece I discussed saving your business. In this piece I am discussing saving your business objective or goal.

So.

Far too often businesses ‘hedge their bets’ against specific stretch goals & objectives. They sit in fancy conference rooms eating fancy snacks reviewing annual sales goals and business objectives and talk about ‘reaching high’ and then … well … blink. They start thinking, what they call, pragmatically … or practically.

Yeah.

They start ‘hedging.’ And when that happens not meeting the objective becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

What do I mean?

It is a tough, but reachable, objective and, yet, they don’t take the necessary complete steps to attain it. I am not suggesting this is easy.

Leading a business, particularly a larger one with some overarching politics and ‘management assessment mumbo jumbo’, is fraught with peril.

If you do what it takes to reach an objective and fall short … falling short looks … well … shorter. You invested and the investment REALLY did not pay off.

If you do what it takes to reach an objective and reach it … well … sometimes reaching it comes with a cost and your ROI don’t look as good as it could <by the way … this is a wacky version of “you did good … just not good enough”>.

Reality suggests to anyone with half a business brain that reaching true, not fake, stretch goals or aggressive objectives come at a cost. And that is where this Virgil quote comes into play. The Virgil quote is literally translated as “If I cannot deflect the will of superior powers, then I shall move the River Acheron” but more commonly translated as “If I cannot deflect the will of heaven, then I shall move hell.”

This is a version of “do what it takes to get where you want.”

I say that because I did a little research <mostly because I am not intellectual enough to actually read Virgil and like it>. Apparently in the Aeneid it is the goddess Juno who says this quote in a state of rage and defiance. She admits she doesn’t believe she can win but defiantly takes action anyway. Even better <to me> she is standing up against her peers … defending her right to do what she believes should be done, her own way, whether any of her peers approve.

And you know what?

If they do not approve, she will ignore them and “move the ancient river in her favor” … or … in my words … it becomes time to try and defy gravity.

She refuses to sit idle while others do nothing.

Look.

I will never <ever> suggest sacrificing values & ethics to win or reach an objective. My point is that to reach some objectives and aggressive goals you have to be defiant. You have to rebel against ‘hedging’ and sometimes you gotta step up and do what it takes. I do believe you can raise hell if heaven isn’t getting you where you need to be … without sacrificing ethics and values. And I do believe most managers in business need someone to rebel against their ‘fear of risk, failure, looking bad’ asses.

Anyway.

When I speak with businesses about the only thing I can tell them for sure … is that the future is uncertain. But I can also tell the with certainty that if history is a guide then we who are defiant, are determined, and do whatever it takes are the ones who push through the seemingly impossible and make it possible.

If you are a maker, a builder, an architect of fate … you do not hedge your bets nor do you let resources sit idle in inaction and, frankly, sit in inability to do shit that may assist in … well … doing shit.

========= 

“I shall find a way or make one.”

—

Robert Peary

=====

At some point in business you are forced to pick a side, pick a battle and pick a moment.

At some point in business you are forced to steer … or be steered.

At some point in business you are an architect of your own fate or fate will build you.

At some point in business you are forced to face adversity or be suffocated by that which stands in your way.

That said.

I could argue that the real difference in business remains one simple distinction. Those people who do something and those people who do nothing.

Ok.

Maybe the real difference in business is those people who do something when an aggressive goal is placed in front of them and those who people who do … well … less than it takes. And that is where determination steps into this discussion.

Because ‘less than’, in business, is clever. It can cleverly disguise itself in little line items and subtle decisions to hold back little things in reserve.

=====

“You give up the world line by line.

Stoically.

And then one day you realize that your courage is farcical.

It doesn’t mean anything. You’ve become an accomplice in your own annihilation and there is nothing you can do about it. Everything you do closes a door somewhere ahead of you.

And finally there is only one door left.”

Cormac McCarthy

======

Without really intending to subvert your effort to attain some sales goal you ultimately give up your objective line by line. In other words … you’ve become an accomplice in your own annihilation.

What is maybe worse than that?

As you hedge your bets you actually close door after door that maybe could have led you to your goal. Without steadfast determination, and maybe a little defiance to safe business protocol, you will inevitably find yourself standing at the only door left available for you … not reaching the goal and having excuses as to why you didn’t reach an aggressive goal.

Your main excuse? You were less aggressive than you needed to be to reach the aggressive goal.

I will conclude with the obvious.

Writing about this is easy. Doing what needs to be done is hard.

All I can suggest is that you tie your values and ethics on tight … and then go raise hell if heaven ain’t helping you make the objective.

All I can suggest is if you are in a position to actually do something just make sure you look in the mirror and make sure you are not an accomplice to your own annihilation.

All I can suggest is that if you want something, really want to DO something, more often than not … in most businesses which tend to be either lethargic or less than  efficient … you got to aggressively create your own path.

 ===========

“And I do not assume that my experience is universal. It is simply mine, and I offer it to you as a window, dirty though that window may be.”

–

opticalnoise (a blogger)

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

Ah.

Sometimes young people say things with the type of panache you only expect from older people. This young blogger wrote the quote and I liked it enough to use it.

The basic thought many of us ignore. Experiences are personal <unless there is enough similar critical mass to make it quasi-universal>.

And in the business world I often find myself debating with people when they offer their experience as …. well … not dirty but rather … well … universal (and that is an issue).

Two basic thoughts.

–          Research of one is not research.

–          The odds that the person relating the experience <in business management> actually reflects mainstream American <or any mainstream consumer> is so low that, well, even Las Vegas wouldn’t take them odds.

Bottom line?

Realize that your experience is most likely not universal <particularly when discussing business … but beware when offering personal advice also>. This may seem like a no brainer, but I can’t tell you how often this basic rule is ignored. WE, even the most savviest behavioral people in business, ignore it all the time <alebet in degrees not wholesale>. I think a large part of it is that is because people personalize their experience <or their wife/husband’s/group of friends> that they cannot fathom that no one else feels exactly the same way.

Anyway.

All that said I am now going to share my dirty window experience list <although I actually stole the original thought from a blogger named arina and put my own dirt on some different windows>. I created the list because I almost have it all figured out <yeah … not so much>. Thinking back from my personal experiences I believe there are a few universal experiences <let’s call them windows we all peer through on occasion just for the sake of this post)> that seemingly work without fail throughout life:

–          The Karma window

Karma is this random thing floating out there in the ether that somehow impacts cause & effect on all of us. Simplistically … for every action there is a reaction. Yeah. Every action <and thought just in case you have forgotten>. It is amazing to me how often we forget that our actions always, yes, always, have repercussions.

Whatever force we exert … things we send into the ether around us in the form of our thoughts, feelings and actions … comes back to us in kind (if not sometimes multiplied). There are no exceptions and you get no free passes. Oh. Please note I included thoughts & feelings in the “cause” column. That is truly the Karma aspect. Somehow … someway … thoughts & feelings enter into the ether as some type of tangible force (or ’cause’) that often creates a nuclear-sized effect. Never forget that.

–              The Life window

This may actually be a different pane of glass in the Karma window. We are all connected by invisible glass in one window … called the Life window. When we hurt someone or when we pass judgment on someone … we are affected as well. Sorry. Life, for some reason, just likes to keep everything balanced.

What that means is you are probably better off (or more likely to be happy) if you attach what you care about (and Life objectives) with good intentions for other people. If you look at it selfishly, when your objectives benefit other people there is less difficulty in achieving them. Oh. And others will assist you. If you don’t look at it selfishly … well … just assume more good shit will happen in your life if you do good shit (and think good shit about other people).

–          The Creation window

Everyone is creative and every one has unlimited creative potential. It is just how you define creation. Create art. Create financial success. Create the most awesome balance sheet your company has ever had. Create a kid that will be the next president. Everyone one of us has the potential to create some type of greatness. You just have to make sure the window is open and the blinds are open. Oh. And make sure you know that you actually have that window.

–          The Neutrality window

Life is neutral. It does not play favorites. This is probably a derivative of the balance thing. In the absence of good & evil Life probably wouldn’t choose sides but rather stay in bed taking a nap. Life does not decide someone is more important or less significant. Life never randomly punishes.  Life never randomly rewards. Nothing is random but pretty much (with some notable exceptions) everything is earned. Everyone is given an opportunity to learn something (which ultimately is the key opportunity for personal success). Everyone pretty much has a chance in Life (albeit it is tougher for some people than others).

–          The Action window

This is the window right next to the neutrality window. In the absence of individual action Life will do its own things in its own time. Life does not just happen to us. It requires our active participation. Remember. Life is neutral. If you are inactive … Life is inactive <with you>. It will not take interest in you until you take interest in it. It is too busy paying attention to people paying attention to it.

–          The You cannot Ignore ‘What is’ window

“What is” will evolve into “what will be” when ignored. That I guarantee. In other words … you will continue to receive what Life gives you even if you refuse to accept it. If we ignore our problems, they will only get bigger and more urgent. If we ignore opportunities, they will cease to exist. If we refuse to learn lessons from the past, larger, more serious, lessons will be given to us. If we obsessively pursue a goal or idea that is not right for us, it will elude us until we accept that we can live without it.

–          The Stagnancy window

This one is the opposite side of the Action window pane. And this one is a warning. Stagnancy is addictive. What I mean by this is, if the view from your window is awesome, you can find yourself sitting there doing nothing but enjoying it. So. This I guarantee … it may be a beautiful view today but if you don’t move … and just stay there … it will lose its appeal. Stagnancy is the death of inner growth and happiness (or seeing beauty in life). When you do not use skills you lose them. Similar, without continuing effort in personal growth, you are doomed to fall back as Life continues moving. What happens then? Obsolescence.  Life, and people, and thoughts, and whatever …. just pass you by.

–          The Impatient window

Impatience is sneaky in life. Sometimes it can disguise itself as ambition or ‘goals’ or things like that. Because the allure, and desire, of success is something we all desire. And we may like the idea of instant gratification or easy success or short cuts … but deep down all of us know that things of value have to be earned. And that is where impatience rears its ugly head. You are peddling as hard as you can toward success … but as look through this window you are impatient, and it is challenging, because you want it NOW … but this window is about patiently waiting for the reward to come in its own time. Ok. This doesn’t mean you should be scared to do things nor shouldn’t be ambitious … this is more about having some common sense. Good things typically don’t come easy. If it were all that easy anyone could do it. Maybe learn to be patiently impatient for success.

–          The Reality-based Optimism window

Here is a reality <2 of them actually>.

1. Negativity begets negativity. If you think negatively I can guarantee you will never attain happiness.
2. Uh oh. But. If you always think optimistically I can guarantee you will always be disappointed <sorry about that>.

So can you ever be happy? Yup. By being realistic, but being optimistic. A truth in this window? Good things DO happen to good people. Well.  Let me be specific … that is ‘good people who exhibit some reality-based goodness’. By the way … for anyone who wants to debate the view from this window …. research (published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)  predicted in simulated models that generosity/trust pays. Mathematically they found it pays to be trusting in the long run even though you will sometimes be cheated (so that is how Santa can figure out how to assess naughty or nice).

–          The Trade-off window

For everything you gain you have to give up something else. This is an unfortunately simple complex dirty window.

And the last.

–          The Desire window

This window sometimes has a weird filter over it that makes things not look as they really are. What I mean by that is not everything we go after is what we truly want. Sometimes we only think we know what we want … and sometimes we don’t know what we want until we get it. Maddening? You bet. But everyone has this window. Unfortunately this window is most typically found in the main room so you look through it a lot. This window is also, individually, often the dirtiest. You will be tempted to go to other people’s houses and look thru their “desire window” and hope for some guidance. Sorry. No can do. Your Desire window is your Desire window.  I kind of think they are like snowflakes … no 2 the same. You will probably not have a more aggravating window in your home. Too bad. Every home has one.

So.

There you go. I would suggest these windows are universal but will be individually dirty in different ways. At best you should try and wipe each one as clean as you can <smudgy is better than dirty>. While I made my personal experiences universal … I do look through other people’s dirty windows as often as I can.

Like the opening quote said … they offer a view … regardless of how dirty the view may be.

——–

“Nothing is more dangerous than an idea when it is the only one you have.”

==========

Émile Auguste Chartier <Alain>

———

Well.

I love this quote.

One idea is really <really> dangerous ground to stand on <part 1>. Dangerous in that it may be the most solid ground you have ever stood upon … and yet … you may leave it seeking another idea, and place, to go.

One idea is really <really> dangerous ground to stand on <part 2>. Dangerous in that it may be the most unstable ground you have ever stood on … shit … it may simply be a lily pad in the middle of a volcano … and yet … it’s ‘moment of stability’ seduces you to hold on to the idea like it is a gift from God.

Ideas, in general, are dangerous creatures. But ‘one idea’ is particularly dangerous.

Suffice it to say if you aren’t in the <multiple> ideas business as a company you are simply in the ‘doing most effectively’ <which is actually “we all do well so please pick me by my price”> business.

Ideas are the lifeblood of any business.

And ideas … at least good ones … are one of the most elusive objectives anyone can think of. You can set up the best of the best methodologies, you can train, you can encourage, you can give everyone funky crayons <and remind everyone that because we all grew up with crayons anyone can be creative – which is a slightly absurd encouragement in its own right> … but suffice it to say … a good idea just happens <and you hope like hell they happen when you actually need them>.

I believe most creative idea generator people are highly attuned to the where and the how they come up with ideas <therefore ‘forced idea thinking environments’ are not effective>.

Oh.

I also believe that that entire ‘how to’ knowledge is mostly nontransferable to others.

That said.

There is an interesting guy named Chic Thompson who, while I think he says some mumbo jumbo type stuff with regard to ideas and coming up with them, has suggested two things that I believe are good for people to take note of when discussing the whole ‘coming up with an idea’ discussion:

–          How you mentally approach ideas.

He says things like … rather than ask your students “what did you do at school today?” you should instead ask something like “what questions did you ask today?”

He also argues that changing the way we approach questions, problems, and solutions can reshape the outcomes <this sounds basic yet ‘idea creating methodology seems to fly in the face of this thought>.

In addition … I believe beyond rethinking the ‘how to’ generate ideas we also have to learn the mental assessment of risk and response. By that I mean I think ideas should typically be slotted so that mentally not only do we ask the right questions while thinking about an idea … we also ask the right questions in discussing an idea.

Someone came up with this chart <which I have recreated from some notes I made years ago>:

<sorry for the crappy chart but I suck at creating these things>

I buy this. People who come up with ideas are typically quite comfortable letting things germinate and have them bubble up. On the other hand … non good idea thinkers like a ‘point & shoot’ process … and even more importantly … like the comfortable ‘know we/I can do’ type idea.

Idea generation can often feel slightly chaotic … and … well … it is. However … within that chaos a good idea generator tends to be able to reach in and pull something good out of all the swirling shit.

Uhm.

A lot of people don’t like that a process that looks like that.

Next thought from that Chuck guy.

–          Ideas take time and a sense of relentlessness

I like to call it restlessness intertwined with a willingness and resilience to bear a shitload of failures <bad ideas> to find the solutions <good ideas>.

Apparently it took Chuck roughly 40 years to see an invention come full circle to its original solution in the right environment. Which led him to note … “when something goes wrong, something goes right … you learn from trial and error.”

40 years?!? <insert a ‘yikes’ here>.

Sorry folks … but an unspoken truth in the idea business is that 90% of great ideas are lost simply because when arrived at … it just wasn’t ‘their time’ … and when it DID become their time … they were in some landfill because they had landed in some trash can months, if not years. ago.

I say that <getting back to the one idea thought> because not only do we often suck at agreeing on the ‘one idea to focus on’ in the moment … we also tend to throw away a shit load of great ideas simply because it is not their time.

<note: in business … if you pull out an idea that was thought up months ago … or years ago … it cannot be used because it is … well … an old idea … or ‘it cannot be relevant because that was then and this is now’ – note: both those comments are dangerous because they are rooted in logic but absurd in practicality>.

Einstein was once asked what the difference was between himself and another person. He suggested that when challenged to find a needle in a haystack … others would stop when they found one … he tears apart the haystack looking for any and all that could be there.

Thompson’s version of that is he always suggests “always look for a second answer” when you imagine solutions to problems in a unique way. He was <is> a big proponent of young people bringing unique and fresh perspectives to discover creative outcomes.

I buy this.

Great ideas are typically born from other ideas. The original idea may be good … but they tend to be soft around the edges … and they need to be sharpened. I know that while I often like my first idea I will tend to ‘steal’ additional aspects from lesser ideas to strengthen another idea. It helps to look for and see all ideas and answers <albeit … in today’s business world many people struggle to discern crappy ideas from good ideas which inevitably means a good idea generator likes to protect a good idea by not offering ‘options’>..

Look.

Discovering creative outcomes & ideas typically comes down to unique and fresh perspective.

This means looking at things differently <which typically doesn’t translate into ‘methodically’>.

There are a boatload of tricks on how to come up with ideas.

“Thinking in opposites” … uncovering what can be flipped to get the right solution.

“Start off with what’s positive and then go to the negative” … then focus on making the negative positive <or how it represents some opportunity>.

I would be delighted to tell everyone what to do here … but I will note … because I cannot. What makes me hesitate to endorse any ‘idea generation protocol’ and ‘what questions to ask to stimulate effective ideas’ is that most ideas are actually thought up <insert a huge DOH! Here> in the shower or on the toilet.

Yup.

There are a bunch of surveys <informal and formal> and in general they have the following list of ‘where do you come up with your ideas’ when asking known & proven idea generators:

1. When showering or in bath
2. Commuting to work
3. Sitting on the toilet <note: this is good because it seems like per research we spend about 3 years of an average lifetime in the bathroom>
4. While falling asleep or waking up
5. During a boring meeting <note: this can also be an ideation or brainstorming meeting>
6. Leisure reading
7. Exercising

Most good ideas do NOT come from brainstorming meetings … or any meeting at all.  And they rarely come at your desk.

Ideas tend to come from the stimulus of the setting <and what that setting does to your mind … relax & think at the same time>. Therefore … the corollary is … the loss of ideas comes from the stimulus of the setting.

By the way.

While there is absolutely a relationship between creative & ideas … not all creative people are good idea generators. That said. You increase the likelihood of good ideas if you encourage creativity.

And there is a reason I bring this up. While we give ‘everyone is creative’ a lot of lip service the reality is that we tend to squeeze the creativity out of people as time goes by.

Read this and be prepared to be depressed:

———

George Ainsworth Land, author of Grow or Die, gave five-year-olds a creativity test used by NASA to select innovative engineers. Ninety-eight percent of the children scored in the “highly creative” range. When these same children were retested at ten years old, only 30 percent were still rated “highly creative.” By the age of fifteen, just 12 percent of them were ranked “highly creative.”

What about the average adult population? Only 2 percent of the adults who took the NASA tests were rated as “highly creative.” Therefore, our lifetime creativity, measured in terms of our ability to generate a number of new ideas, is at its highest point at five years old and lowest around forty-four years old. It seems that creativity is not just learned, but unlearned as we advance through life.

——–

Shit.

My main response to what we just read <after I pulled myself out of the depths of despair … because I am WAY past even the lowest ideation point> is that all our ‘planned ideation processes’ kill creativity … they don’t enhance creativity.

<I believe I just suggested killing an entire industry>

In our ‘outcome focused business world’ where ‘let’s use process so we can be as efficient as possible with regard to everything we do’ <ideas included> the process most efficiently kills creativity.

All that said.

I will end with 5 Ideas secrets <these are not mine … they are from some expert who I have forgotten … but I like these secrets>:

–          Creative Secret #1: Ideas are the currency of your future

–          Creative Secret #2: You come up with only 1% of your ideas while at your desk.

–          Creative Secret #3: By age 44, your creativity score is at a lifetime low and doesn’t go back up until retirement.

–          Creative Secret #4: The world isn’t going to slow down

–          Creative Secret #5: Good ideas are scary.

Oh.

And the last secret?

Go to the bathroom as often as possible. It increases the odds you will have an idea.

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

“When you make a choice, you change the future.”

―

Deepak Chopra

===========

“Oh, yes. Choosing… it has always hurt. And always will. I know.”

―

George R.R. Martin

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

Ok.

This is about Intelligence … and making choices.

Why do I put both of these together? Well. Do you know the origin of the word ‘intelligence’?

<because I did not>

Intelligence is derived from the latin verb intelligere … which actually means “to choose among.’

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm … so that means an intelligent person isn’t a smart <high IQ> person or one who has reams and reams of knowledge and factoids stored away in their pea-like brains <although I envision it could increase the likelihood of actually being intelligere>.

It actually suggests that the ‘intelligent’ are those who can discriminate fact from fiction, truth from lies, which half of a half-truth is the important half … and I imagine those who can discriminate … even if only between the bad and the worse.

Oh.

And, of course, that means intelligere is founded upon the concept of choice. And not jut the ability to discern the choice but also the character, and fortitude, and smarts … to actually make choices.

In addition … intelligere demands one have the curiosity to have at hand that which is needed to actually create, and have, ‘the among’ available.

Uhm.

The ability to ‘choose among.’

Once again … we seem to face the uncomfortable truth that things are rarely black & white, choices are inherently unclear and a simple “if this then it must be that” linear choice is almost never at hand.

Intelligere is … well … not easy.

Look.

I don’t know that I really have a point to make here today.

I simply found this interesting. It made me think about what I perceive as ‘intelligence’ in people.

I know I had always simply thought people who were smart were intelligent. And, frankly, I didn’t think much beyond that.

But.

Assessing intelligence not just as being smart but rather what you do with those smarts?

Whew.

I like that.

===

“Believe those who are seeking the truth.

 

Doubt those who find it.”

 

————

Andre Gide

=====

Well.

If I could earn a salary being a truth seeker I would sign up today. In fact. I believe we need a job like this.

I think we need a job like this because … well … Truth is significantly more elusive than I tend to think we believe. Truth is rarely simple … certainly not as simple as we would like it to be and even more rarely tied to what could be misconstrued as “common sense.” Truth is often complex, nuanced & tinged with contradictions.

And because I believe what I just wrote … I am always wary of those who come out blazing by speaking “the truth.”

Why? Things are rarely black & white. I also imagine I say this because my truth attitude is tempered by the fact I have been called optimistically cynical.

While my incessant curiosity always has me pursuing new & better & different knowledge <which inevitably create unlearning> I guess I question everything upfront. This means I filter thru everything I hear & rarely accept it as “it is what it is,” I imagine this is my cynicism part <or maybe one would hope as I have become older I can judge what to question and what to accept upfront>.

My optimistic side?  I always believe great things come of the cynicism filter <rather than use cynicism to drag things down>. Maybe this style of mine insures I feel more confident in what I know versus what I don’t know as well as draws my thoughts & thinking a little more away from opinion & more towards truth, fact & real knowledge.

By the way. I would like to believe more people <and society … and business … in general> would benefit from a filter like that.

Regardless.

I would like to believe I am one of those people who is constantly seeking truth. I may not be, but, it is certainly a good objective to try to attain. And I would welcome anyone on to my truth seeking team <as long as they truly were open to “unlearning to learn”>.

I do know that I believe as long as you are ‘seeking’ … you are being persistently curious … and … well … there are worse things to be.

I do know that I believe we need more persistently curious truth seekers in today’s world.

Anyway.

Truth seeker.

Well.

That is certainly a title I would like to put on a business card. Tough job but, whew, I would do take this job in a second.

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

“We should place confidence in our employee.

Confidence is the foundation of friendship.

If we give it, we will receive it.

Any person in a managerial position, from supervisor to president, who feels that his employee is basically not as good as he is and who suspects his employee is always trying to put something over on him, lacks the necessary qualities for human leadership – to say nothing of human friendship.”

—–

Harry Humphreys

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

“The conventional definition of management is getting work done through people, but real management is developing people through work.”

—-

Agha Abedi

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

Well.

Leading and managing people is possibly one of the most rewarding things you can do in a business career.

Firing people is possibly one of the most unrewarding things you can do in a business career.

Unfortunately these two things are inextricably linked.

I could argue that once you assume responsibility for firing someone … you learn more about yourself, and I imagine others learn about you, than from almost any other responsibility you assume as a leader.

No one likes firing people. Well. No one who is any good at business leadership. I don’t care if you absolutely hate the person you are firing, if the person has actually committed a fireable offense and you are in the right to fire them, or even if you fire someone for good reason … suffice it to say … it never feels good to fire someone.

And because of that … a good business leader never delegates the tough termination. And they never send someone to terminate a direct report.

Generally speaking … you fire anyone who is a direct report, or you were directly responsive for hiring, face to face.

Yeah.

This may not be, logistically, the easiest thing to do but it is part of the burden of responsibility. It is the mantle you wear and it is what you are obligated to offer the person being terminated – dignity & respect.

Anything less than that and you are shirking your responsibility.  Anything less than that is … well … chicken shit. And you are a chickenshit business leader if you do not do these things.

Sure.

What I just shared is a hard lesson but one business people learn in young management.

I will never forget the first person I ever fired. Paul.

An absolute great guy in absolutely the wrong position and possibly career. But that doesn’t mean it was easy to terminate him. While I was 99% sure it was the right thing to do <and my boss and her bosses agreed> there was an extraordinarily loud 1% in my head that kept me awake that night.

Inevitably he chose a different career and went on to become an SVP of sales.

And he was kind enough to drop me a couple of notes to tell me it all worked out for the best.

But I will never forget firing him. I can honestly say I never forget anyone I have fired <and that is a semi-long list after years of management>.

However.

I would like to think my leadership career is measured more by the people I did not fire.

Not firing, in a larger organization, can be harder than you think.

I think I spent more time explaining to the most senior people why I would not fire some of the people I managed than I did ever discussing almost anything else about employees with them.

Well. That is … it felt that way.

The crap that floats upwards into senior leadership about individual employees is amazing. The littlest mistakes and quirks seem to take on exponential size when it arrives at the most senior people — and they do not hesitate to share their disproportional views.

Regardless. All of those views cut into the ‘trust belief’ … are they respected within the organization, do they have the trust of the organization and can they be trusted with their responsibility.

And that is when you earn your stripes as a manager. You do not cave in to the ‘easy thing to do’ but rather stand up for your people and let the chips fall as they may. Oh. And you learn it is totally worth it to not take the easy way out.

Let me be clear.

No one is perfect. I was not a perfect employee nor was a perfect manager. And, yet, when judging employees there sometimes is the ‘perfect measure’ of which becomes the absurd standard.

Yes.

We should judge senior people more critically but we should judge them fairly.

Anyway.

I didn’t fire a lot of people. And I can think of at least 4 who made me incredibly proud that I didn’t … despite some pressure from others to do so.

All 4 of these have sent me notes at different points, not thanking me for not firing them but rather for simply giving them a chance, believing in them and seeing something in them that they knew <because all employees know when they are under ‘the human resources microscope’>  many others didn’t.

All 4 of them have been professionally successful and, more importantly, are solid good human beings. Neither of those are because I didn’t fire them but rather vindicate the non-firing decision.

All that said.

Firing someone, despite the pain of actually doing it, is often the easy way out and is certainly a way to avoid looking at your own flaws.

Flaws? I sometimes believe one of the hardest things you can learn in your career is that your best is not particularly special.

Learning the fact that your talent, in reality, is matched by a shitload of people.

Learning that your best is relatively easily matched by a shitload of people.

It is an unfortunate truth that:

• Talent is talent.
• Smarts are smarts.
• And expertise is almost always relative.

At any given point in Life and your career you can look around you and, if you are self aware, you will note you are rarely the most talented, rarely the smartest one in the room and rarely the only expert.

Even on your best day you may not actually be the best.

I imagine that is a tough thing to get your head wrapped around.

But I also imagine if you do wrap your head around it evaluating employees and how you fire them is affected.

I always watch how someone terminates an employee.

You can learn a lot about people in that situation … and you can learn a shitload about how someone feels about dignity, respect and responsibility in how they terminate an employee.

===========

Postscript 1: under the general heading of “chickenshit” from a business perspective I will comment on a Trump firing:

There are hundreds of different viable reasons to fire someone and if you have the responsibility to hire & fire and it is ‘at will’ you can do what you want. But HOW Trump fired James Comey was chickenshit.

It wasn’t face to face with a direct report <or even face to face with anyone … just a letter delivered by a non-government employee>.

While there appeared to be no sense of urgency to terminate the action was taken with an absurd sense of senseless urgency which permitted Comey the indignity of being blindsided, in the middle of a commitment to the people who reported to him and not even in town.

This was a chicken shit way of terminating an honorable employee. It is indicative of Trump’s lack of character.

Postscript 2: Under the general heading of “this is some crazy shit” from a business perspective:

Firing someone for lack of confidence when the people who you are actually working for have a general lack of confidence in you is slightly surreal.

This may actually be the ironic point of this little postscript rant.

The stated “Donald J Trump fired his FBI Director because of ‘lack of confidence’ is … well … crazy shit.

Well. If that is a true criteria and I were to look at some national polling data I could argue Trump could be fired on the same criteria by the American people.

Most leaders do not defend their firing decision through childish name calling.

“Crying Chuck” .. “Richie” in quotes <instead of Richard>. Calling people diminishing names. Childish crap like that. I have been criticized as a leader for people I have fired, as well as people who I didn’t fire, and when appropriate I responded with some “why I did it” information but I never deflected my choice & decision onto others by suggesting they were not qualified to criticize … and I certainly always treated peers with a modicum of respect.

Tweet response rather than standing up in person

Sniping from the sidelines is not leadership.

Period.

‘nuf said.