Far too often B2B sales feels like it resides in some Monte Carlo casino where you are playing a high stakes game gambling on the size of your future wallet. Just a reminder it is the Monte Carlo Simulation which suggests that you can only approximate a definitive outcome rather than simple randomness. And randomness is found in many phenomena that we would like to be able to predict, such as changes in the weather or the movements of share prices, oh, as well as sales. Within all of this, Monte Carlo, randomness and approximation, resides uncertainty and business hates uncertainty.

The Monte Carlo simulation, inspired by the casino city of Monte Carlo, is a computer simulation method to calculate the what would appear to be apparently incalculable randomness.

If you roll a dice, you know that you will roll a 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6. But you don’t know which of these numbers you will get with a given roll. This is exactly how the Monte Carlo simulation works: by running multiple trials based on random sampling to determine an outcome, using a combination of probability calculation and statistics.

 Why do we bring up the Monte Carlo model ? Because while it reminds us that models do not represent reality, but are simply an approximation of reality, sales shouldn’t be like gambling.

Yet. Even looking at the standard communication effectiveness formula – right time, right place, right message, right person – it can feel a lot like playing a slot machine hoping you get 4 apples in a row to be successful. In the business world it gets even more complex, and multidimensional, because in B2B for each one decision and sale there are multiple ‘right persons.’ This also increases the complexity of a sale in that each ‘right person’ may need a slightly different message at a different time and at a different place.

This can become seemingly so complex and seemingly uncontrollable, the natural instinct is to simplify for consistency. Interestingly, that instinct to simplify will actually increase the gamble. It is exactly like hoping all 4 apples show up on your sales slot machine.

Some thoughts:

Sales does not reside in a casino

Fortunately, in the business world you don’t have to play by house rules. You can count cards. You can calculate odds. You can stack the deck in your favor so that every time you pull the lever on your sales slot machine you will know the % of times all apples will come up.

This takes engineering. The ability to identify appropriate decision makers and engage them in a meaningful business discussion has to be engineered in order to be effective. To be clear, you can calculate the odds of winning and you can predict how much you will win in sales – consistently.

Today lets focus on lining relevant messaging up with the right decision maker <at the right time & place>.

Now. If you type “finding the right decision makers in business” in Google you will get about 51,700,000 results <in 0.47 seconds>. It is obviously an issue many B2B businesses have to address. Unfortunately it appears that about 51,000,000 of those results never discuss what you are supposed to do with a decision maker once you find them. <note: we didn’t really read all 51+ million results>

Suffice it to say that senior decision makers are paid to make tough decisions. Their decisions are not flippant, rarely are they made emotionally and often a lot rides on the outcome of those decisions. While it is impossible to eliminate risk from decision making it is certainly possible to limit risk.

** note: If your expertise and data can actually shift the context from uncertainty to risk, that is actually an effective step in navigating complexity.

It is also possible to develop sales pipelines by understanding not only who the decision makers are, but what risks they are trying to avoid and what outcomes they would like to improve.

Doing it ‘right’

While the “right’ formula is the same in consumer & B2B, consumer sales and marketing tends to be broad initially in creating awareness and educating ultimately focusing in on a specific decision maker. B2B not only cannot afford to manage its sales and marketing that way, it shouldn’t. It is neither effective nor efficient. In B2B the targeting should be specific, the messaging based on the discussion and the recognition of where the decision maker is within the buying process, the time & place all focused on assisting the decision maker in further education or to facilitate them through the final phases of the buying process.

The following is a description and goal of each individual stage:

– Account Validation: Our sales consultants will personally verify core demographic information contained in the initial data integration. Our sales consultants will additionally gather and or confirm all information that is required to determine whether or not an account meets the thresholds established by our client for their particular products and services.

– Contact Verification: Our sales consultants will personally identify and collect all pertinent contact information. This information may include name, title, location, division, phone number, email address and decision making responsibilities.

– Opening: Our sales consultants seek to make a connection immediately.

– Needs Assessment:  Our sales consultants will explore customer needs thoroughly and capture meaningful business intelligence and inject educational information & tools when appropriate.

– Solution Dialog: Our sales consultants will leverage your solutions persuasively.

– Close: Our sales consultants will act when the time is right and ask for the appointment.

In conclusion: Strategically creating affect

Gambling belongs in casinos not in sales development. Strategically developing a robust sales development decision maker target plan takes the precision of engineering. Pardon the gambling analogy, but laying down a sales royal flush of right decision maker, right time, right place, right message, delivered in the right way shouldn’t be dependent upon someone else dealing the cards, deal your own.

That’s what Company X does. Deal you the royal flush with sales development expertise.

<business success factoid/case study here>

======

Note from Author:

This was part of a project I did with an interesting B2B company to write some blog posts and new business direct mail thoughts and help with market positioning. They were interesting because <a> they wanted to focus on a smarter, more intelligent, level of thinking in their communication <b> they truly had an ‘edge’ to them in terms of attitude, and <c> they were interested in taking on specific objections they hear day in and day out in a candid fashion. It was fun for me and I generated maybe 20 draft thoughts for them in less than 3 days. I am sharing some of my favorites <in rough draft form and the name of the company removed>.

===

====

====

“I am not afraid of my truth anymore and I will not omit pieces of me to make you comfortable.”

—

Alex Elle

===

So. Being yourself is a tricky topic. In business, Life & deciding what you want to do.

I know <I know>.

Seems like “being yourself” should be simple. Like ‘breathing’ type simple.

But it’s not. It’s not because there is a constant struggle between an internal part <’who am I’ type shit> and external <figuring out how ‘who am I’ should actually act in public>.

For example, one of my favorite young writers, Jamie, describes herself this way:

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

I’m a writer, pretty much by process of elimination. I am also a professional aspirationalist.

That’s not a word, but I’ve made it into one, since there was nothing that could quite describe me because I didn’t want to say I’m a “professional dreamer” because that sounds like some hippie shit.

I have aspirations, like, lots of them. If you’d like me to create a TV show, get in touch with me. How about publishing my memoir? Get in touch. If you are from The Ellen Show, I will, of course, accept your interview and would be delighted to dance it out with my girl, so long as she doesn’t prank me by making me eat cilantro. In fact, I want no cilantro in anything.

<Jamie Varon>

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

Professional aspirationalist. Not ‘professional dreamer’ nor ‘professional pragmatist.’

Ok.

Professional aspirationalist is just awesome.

If I could ever vote for a new term, that would be it. It’s fucking awesome. It captures the essence of restlessness & hope & striving & unlearning &, well, all the things I believe are good and healthy with a person seeking to be better tomorrow than they are today.

What I truly love about it is that she came up with a term to capture her “self.” I love it because being yourself, and even recognizing who ‘yourself’ is, is hard. And when I say hard think even harder than maybe becoming a Navy Seal type hard.

……….. self …….. an entanglement of nuances ………….

It is incredibly hard because the truth is that ‘my truth’ , more often than not, is most likely an evolving tangled web of characteristics which, as it evolves, simply becomes more tangled <rather than untangled>.

Yourself is constantly adapting to new learning, new learning about things and new learning, and unlearning <changed beliefs, opinions, attitudes, perspectives>, about oneself.

That’s why I love professional aspirationalist.

True north on Jamie’s compass is defined. And its not a destination, but rather it is a direction.

Aspirationalist is a moving target. It is restless and unmoving at exactly the same time. It is an adventurer with some pragmatism. It’s not being on Ellen <although she would be delighted to do so> because once that happens there will always be something else.

Being an aspirationalist means not only having dreams, but dreaming … oh … and doing.

Yeah.

Doing. As in doing lots of different shit.

Uh oh.

That also means … well … increasingly more and different dreams <and aspirations>. And increasingly doing more and different shit. Dreaming and doing. Lots of different dreaming and doing.

In the end <to me> being a professional aspirationalist means being a restless soul. Restlessly seeking, traveling, doing, thinking. Professionally constantly in motion <mentally or physically>.

I love it because it captures my personal belief that becoming ‘better’ as a person is experiential rather than tangible <although tangible ‘doing stuff’ is certainly a component>.

I love it because it isn’t for the faint of heart.

And isn’t what truly being yourself is all about? Having some courage to even suggest ‘I will not omit things just to make you comfortable.’

Professional aspirationalist reminded me of this other quote:

 ==

“I am a world that cannot be explored in one day. I am not a place for cowards.”

Caitlyn Siehl

==

Yes.

Being a professional aspirationalist means you are not a place for cowards.

Anyway.

I wish I had come up with this word, but I am not as talented a writer as Jamie.

I like it for its sense of Life’s paradox. Paradox in that it is independent and dependent at the same time.

I like it for it’s sense of Business’s paradox. Paradox in that success in business is a combination of stillness, at the right times, and movement/restlessness at all times.

I like it because at its core it doesn’t mean shunning the world and simply being a dreamer. It has rich & royal hues of reality threading its way through its fabric.

I would like to believe I am also a professional aspirationalist.

Now.

To be clear <because Jamie is correct the word selection was thoughtful to avoid the ‘hippie shit’>. Pragmatically, we aspirationalists do seek <some> approval and acceptance <ohhhhhhhhhhhh shit>.

Accept what I just wrote <that last sentence>. Don’t fight it <even if you are one of those who say ‘I don’t give a fuck what anyone thinks”>.

Because you do care.

Whether you like it or not, whether you think it is right or wrong, whether you think it is a good thing or bad in that it makes you ‘weak’ in some way, just get it set in your head – in some form or fashion – we care.

Don’t worry … we all care <not just aspirationalists>. We all care what the people around us think about us. And by ‘people’ I mean everyone from those closest to you <who would most likely accept you in any shape and form you ended up in … but you don’t want to disappoint them> to society overall <there is some value in gaining credit for who you are and what you do>.

Some acceptance from others feeds our self-esteem & self-worth <and all that Maslow stuff>.

Ah.

Please note I used the word “feeds.” Approval and acceptance is not the only nutrition necessary for a healthy esteem and worth.

It is simply one part of the diet.

Even we aspirationalists need a balanced ‘self diet’. We do not seek sole value from proving ourselves to others. And we don’t accept sole value in and of ourselves.

Being an aspirationalist is … well … the paradox. Independent dreamer with some dependence on external cues as to the value of our aspirations.

We want to fit into the world on our own terms.

Regardless.

What a description:

                       Professional aspirationalist:      I am not afraid of my truth anymore and I will not omit pieces of me to make you comfortable. I am a world that cannot be explored in one day. I am not a place for cowards.

We need more of these people in our world — in Life & in business.

Me? I will continue living life, trying to do good shit in Life & business, as a Professional Aspirationalist.

==========

“We all have one foot in a fairytale, and the other in the abyss.”

—–

Paulo Coelho

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

My anger at the world coils inside of me. It’s a directionless seething, there’s no name or face to aim at.”

————–

Claire Zorn

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

Well. Life demands us to draw a lot of lines.

And more often than we would like to admit it demands we place one foot on one side of a line and the other foot on the other side of the line.

That may not sound … well … right.

Or maybe the best thing to do.

It may even sound like I am suggesting you ‘straddle the fence.’

Nope. This isn’t straddling, this is about being grounded or balancing oneself.

Balancing? If you don’t place one foot solidly on either side, you can be quite easily consumed by the extremes of Life which are, more often than not, found on only one side of a line.

If you don’t place one foot solidly on either side, you can be quite easily consumed by others who seek to consume what you may think you don’t really care that much about <but you should … and actually do when you care to think about it enough>.

If you don’t, you can be quite easily consumed.

I guess what I am saying is that Life demands you pragmatically be active in drawing some lines so that you have some sense of when you are getting too, well, “too”. It helps if you can have some sense of where to actually place your feet that is meaningful.

Maybe what I am saying is that many of us have no problem ‘making a stand’, but if you really aren’t sure where your line is then it is quite possible you aren’t really sure you are taking your stand in the right place.

Okay.

Maybe think of it this way.

It’s kind of like making sure you have things in perspective when you take a stand.

It’s kind of like demanding realistic hope.

It’s kind of like demanding some hopeful despair.

It’s kind of like demanding you believe in some fairytales and some abyss-like darkness.

It’s kind of like demanding lines for yourself so you can deal with the lines Life is going to demand of you.

Look.

I don’t really believe there are angry-only people. They just have so much anger within themselves that their line is drawn differently than others.

I don’t really believe there are dreamer-only people. They just have so much imagination within themselves that their line is drawn differently than others.

But here’s the deal.

You have to draw some lines.

There has to be some reality to ground some imagination.

There has to be some truth to ground some questioning.

There has to be some principles to ground some rebelliousness.

There has to be some fairytaleishness <I made up that word> to balance out some of the inevitable abyss.

You do have to have one foot somewhere other than where your other foot resides.

I know.

I know.

That sounds a little of whack from conventional wisdom because far more often you hear “both feet on the ground” and shit like that. But if you have two feet on the line … well … you have chosen to stand on a thin balance beam and will teeter your entire life. That is tiring & dangerous. But if you have two feet, one on each side, you have chosen a life of fairytales AND a life in the abyss.

All that said.

Yes.

There are times you draw a line and make a choice to shift both feet solidly onto one side. I would suggest this is a situational decision and not a “living Life” type decision. Situational like:

That is right and that is wrong.

That is good and that is bad.

That is normal and that is not normal.

Those are most likely the moments in which Life says “now, in this time and place, here is the line … on which side to you choose to stand?”

I would suggest sometimes we fuck this up by confusing a ‘Life one foot here & one foot there’ decision and a contextual situational decision. What I mean is that in that time and place you may try and keep your fairy tale foot in place and your abyss foot in place … and mistakenly take on a different type of decision demanding a different type of line.

That would be a bad decision.

The good decision?

In that time. in that place. In that moment. You shift your feet.

Sigh.

I never suggested lines were easy. Just that Life demands we draw a lot of lines. I would suggest that if you do not draw some lines you will find yourself lost in anger coiled within, or maybe constantly living a less than fairy tale life dreaming it all away, or stuck in some dark abyss seeing no way out.

Yeah … lines come in pretty handy at times. Pretty handy in managing Life. I can tell you <for sure> that lines can be pretty handy at helping you decide when something should end … and something should start.

======

“When leaders and organizations develop skills without cultivating energy, the result is organizations (and schools) filled with spiritless specialists.”

Zach Mercurio

====

Bastian Lehman, the CEO of Postmates:

No competitive advantage should come at the expense of workers.

====

Leda Glyptis wrote this in one of her pieces: “It took me a long time to admit to myself that hard work delivering results is not the same as work that has an impact.”

Early in your career you are demanded (pressured) to show you can get things done. Results is the key to unlocking pay, respect, promotion and even some independence (getting your boss of your back). I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that early in your career getting things is mostly tied to some specialist role (although if you pay attention you learn that getting things done well incorporates a lot of generalist, and relational, aspects).

That said.

I was slightly different than Leda in that I always sensed impact was more important than simply generating results. It made my career tricky, or, as one co-worker said to me later in Life “you always liked to do it your way.” The difficulty in focusing on impact is that most people want to focus on process with regard to creating impact. To be clear that process does not have to always be efficiency. Business, if you generate results, can be quite accommodating to an effectiveness ideology. Regardless. Business, in focusing on results, tends to encourage spiritless engagement. Now. They would never tell you that. They speak of culture, passion, caring about your work, etc. ad nausea in fact. But. Deliver results and business can overlook a lot of shit. The problem is, well, inevitably you cannot overlook that shit. If you are really honest with yourself a career of results can feel a bit hollow. It will feel a bit like you missed something. You may not know exactly what you missed but if nudged a bit you’ll most likely speak of some missing engagement aspect.

Simple doing only contains, and retains, a certain amount of value. And when you assess that value, while it does have value, it doesn’t quite measure up to the highest value you may see when you look around. And, well, for a results person, this may feel like assessing your results and finding them wanting a bit.

** note: on specialists and specialism. To be clear, I am not anti-specialist. In fact, specializing can be quite rewarding. In fact, being a spirited specialist can be incredibly rewarding. I would argue to be a spirited specialist one would be a craftsperson with their skill. I believe it is Jackson & Jackson, “How to Speak Human”, who pointed out the shift from craftsmanship to professionalism (where we went from being a profession, and having a profession, to creating an industry of professionalism. This distinction is most likely the difference between spirited specialist and spiritless specialist. I am a self-proclaimed generalist, loving knowing some about many things, and yet I can be quite envious of the specialist who sees their specific skill as a craft and wield it as a craft. Ponder.

Now. It would be silly to not admit that the internet, or technology, hasn’t played a role in this.

All the internet has done is tightened the gap between mediocre professional experience and talented young learner.

Oh.

In addition, it has blurred the value in true professional experience <what to do with what you actually learn> and learning.

Oh.

In addition, the internet <and our generation in its insane focus on simplifying everything> have blurred the contrast between what is truly complex and what is truly simple.

Oh.

In addition, the internet, in combination with an insanely stupid focus on short term results defining a decision/choice, has created an impression speed has more value than, well, anything else. In other words what experience truly brings, ‘slow down a little to speed up’ skill, is more challenged than ever before.

All the digital age has done is commoditize experience perception-wise and it is up to someone with experience to decommoditisize it in reality. It is was true yesterday, true today and will be true tomorrow. Not everyone can do any job and a complex job can never be simplified.

All of this leads me to the fact Zach Mercurio, author of The Invisible Leader and the best speaker on Purpose I know, talks about impact all the time. Sometimes people miss that as they navigate their own visceral response, and biases/opinions/attitudes, as he speaks about Purpose.

“I’ve been thinking about this for a while. How do so many extremely talented people become so miserable in organizations?”

Zach Mercurio

Impact, from a personal perspective, once you get your head wrapped around something other than results, is fairly easy.

Impact, from a business perspective, is trickier – but rather simple and easy.

When I was doing strategy work for businesses I kind of became known for my ‘better’ strategies and questions.

How does this make a person better?

How does this make a life better?

How does this make the society better?

How does this make things better for a person in making the world better?

While, yes, products and services are inevitably problem solvers and people buy products & services to solve problems, that simplistic value equation/assessments provides the opportunity for that product and service to:

• Absolve itself for any accountability beyond simply solving that problem
• Miss the opportunity value of not being spiritless (while I do not believe Purpose adds value I do believe when embedded there is a halo effect of intangible value)

‘Better’ forces a business to ask some hard questions.

Now. While Zach and I would most likely have a healthy debate on how tightly I attach value to impact, in my view, a business has to. This, in my opinion, is not to the detriment of individual assessment of impact (in fact I think it can often create a healthy layer). Better is an easy thing to grasp. Yeah. Maybe too easy in its ability to morph into some possibly not-really-that-better things but, in general, it provides a compass toward good, not bad.

Business, being business, has always wanted to quantify ‘better’ inevitably seeking to shift it into the results category.

** note: this is why I almost always balk at empathy, authenticity, mindfulness in business because I believe they are embedded and not objectives, but business will always seek to quantify (assess results)

If you decide impact is more important than results, you are in for a rocky road. If you don’t believe me, just watch Alain de Botton’s Tedtalk “Gentler philosophy of Success.”  Impact is intrinsically more satisfying, yet, society (and business) inherently embraces extrinsic results. If you generate the results, society rewards you, yet, it still sometimes feels like a hollowish satisfaction – that there must be something more or, well, better.

Look.

If I am honest, I am sure I played the role of a spiritless specialist at some points in my career. It was probably uncomfortable, but I did it. It’s quite possible I was within the generation navigating the change from “industrial and based on mass production, mass distribution, mass consumption, mass education,  mass media, mass recreation, mass entertainment, combine[d] with standardization, centralization, concentration, and synchronization and organizational bureaucracy” ( Toffler) to, well, a shift to the opposite and this puts certain demands on people to ‘do’ to bridge from an old way of doing things to a new way of doing things.

If I am honest, part of my career impact has been navigating this shift.

** Note: I am willing to place navigating this shift in the ‘impact’ category because I believe this was a positive shift for business, people and society, albeit, it’s a work in progress.

If I am honest, analyzing oneself on impact is hard. Its hard because we are hardwired, with some real reasons, to results. Therefore, some days, even if you write down how you made an impact each day, you will find yourself holding pencil above the paper not really sure what to write. Some days you will find no real victory, just the attempt.

And this is where results, impact, purpose and mattering all come crashing together. Results, impact, purpose and mattering are not typically short-term actions. What I mean by that is you do something, or somethings, ‘feel’ like you may have made some positive impact, but not see any direct correlation (ever) or correlation is ambiguous or correlation is days, months, years away. In the end impact is simply feeling like you have done something to make something, or someone, better in some way (but results can provide a short-term dopamine hit).

And maybe that is also where I land on Purpose (with a capital P). I believe Purpose is an outcome, not an objective. But I also recognize people like objectives. Maybe if everyone would center some Purpose objective on something simple like ‘better’ – better today than I was yesterday and ‘somehow making things better for someone’ – I believe you will attain the objective of Progress. And I would argue that if you attain Progress, I am fairly sure you will have positive impact which, in my pea like brain, should fulfill some Purpose.

In the end.

Results and impact. Parents, school, society, even peers, will bludgeon you with results judgment. From an early age we are taught this is how to not only assess yourself but assess yourself versus others. I am not going to suggest that, in a whole cloth way, this is wrong because at some point you do need to assess some truths with regard to your skills or even your own behavior. But we need to get a grip on how we view results. We need to understand that results are often a means to an end – the end being impact. Maybe we should ponder Viktor Frankl from Mans Search for Meaning:

“For success, like happiness, cannot be pursued; it must ensue, and it only does so as the unintended side-effect of one’s personal dedication to a cause greater than oneself or as the by-product of one’s surrender to a person other than oneself.”

Results have consequences not just to ourselves, but to others. And maybe that is where I will end. I think we all know this; it just takes some awareness to become truly aware of it. We all know the world is bigger than “I”; it just takes some choice to do something about it.

……. slow down … do not pause ………

====

“… they should try slowing down instead.  In our study of businesses (conducted with the Economist Intelligence Unit), the companies that embraced initiatives and chose to go, go, go to try to gain an edge ended up with lower sales and operating profits than those that paused at key moments to make sure they were on the right track.

What’s more, the firms that “slowed down to speed up” improved their top and bottom lines, averaging 40% higher sales and 52% higher operating profits over a three-year period.”

–

Harvard Business Review

====

This is about something called ‘critical slowing down.’ To be clear. This is not “make haste slowly” which I have written about before.

In business, and Life I imagine, some people are masters in appropriately reading a situation and assessing timely ‘slowing down’ which enables speeding up.

This is a business management skill, an invaluable skill, and it is incredibly difficult skill to master.

Slowing down to speed up fights against all the natural business instincts. It is a phrase often tossed around in business, one often discussed, one often not done.

It is not done because most people suck at this balancing act (appropriate slowing down and appropriate speeding up). This balancing actually demands one recognize the environmental contextual aspects. Yes. There is a natural oscillation between the two <speeding up & slowing down>. For example, science has shown that climate actually slows down preceding abrupt climatic shifts.

Regardless. Let’s just say that in business slowing down very often becomes high impact high probability events and that the fluctuation between slow to speed increases impact. This fluctuation creates angst and decisionmaking stress because most people tend to see disaster in the swing <which is, in reality, a pace driven transition> because we are leaving one natural state and arriving at another – liminal space.

Let’s face it.

Not many business people are good at undergoing any critical transition let alone a ‘slow down/speed up’ transition.

Why?

Because each aspect in and of itself is a natural state and each begets inertia <at its worst> or chaotic activity <which is close to as bad as inertia>.

Inertia weakens internal stabilizing forces which compounds inevitable change forces.

Chaotic activity sometimes appears good <it is the semi-appealing ‘we are being busy at being busy’>, but that behavior begets multiple variables which evolve unpredictably and ultimately inhibits critical transitions.

Both states inevitably create what most people see as the unintended consequences in which something can get knocked off balance and become ‘extinct.’ And sometimes the consequences can occur without ever showing signs of critical slowing down.

Here is a truth: consequences occur whether they are intended or unintended.

This business truth happens because business systems, more often than not, are a bit more complex, and contain some complications, in their underlying dynamics than simplistic theory or simplistic diagrams attempting to create structure to an organization and its dynamics with the market & consumers/buyers.

I would suggest that you cannot draw a picture for what is <because it is obsolete as soon as it is drawn> and you cannot draw a picture for what will be <because predicting multi-dimensional dynamics is outside the purview of reality>.

All that said. That is why you cannot pay enough to a business person who has the ability to know when to slow down to enable effective speeding up because, whether they are labeled as such or not, they know how to navigate complexity.

It is here I would be remiss if I did not note, more often than not, the ones who claim to be good at this, are not. It is the ones who do not make the claim, the ones who recognize that more often than not it is something you just kind of sense, that you treasure.

All I know for sure is that I have been fortunate enough on occasion to have slowed down in business and had everything speed up afterwards. It feels amazing and the organization & employees, many who balked at the slowing down, absolutely love the freedom that came after the slowing down.

Here is the truly difficult thing about this whole ‘slow down/speed up’ thing.

You know when you get it right.

But you don’t know when you get it wrong or even when you may have missed the opportunity to ‘slow down to speed up.’

And that makes it exponentially more difficult to convince people it is the time to slow down <and the benefit will be speed later> and exponentially more difficult to figure out when to do it <and makes it impossible to train anyone for>.

I hesitate to say it is a ‘gut/instinct’ driven skill because then many people automatically suggest “judgement over experience.”

In addition I also hesitate to say this is solely a knowledge-driven/experience-driven skill because that ignore the ‘art’ aspect of this.

I would say that this particular business skill is one of those things:

<1> you either have the instinct or you do not and

<2> the instinctual judgement is more often than not driven by at least some experience, and

<3> experience increases the likelihood, but doesn’t guarantee, of future good use of your instinctual judgement.

Many business people screw the pooch on the entire slow down/speed up idea and also falsely implement it.

The most often abused slow down/speed up tactic is, well, there are a couple.

1. The project meeting in which all projects are discussed by everyone.

This is close to slow down/speed up, but not the best kind. This is actually “stop, share, get critique, and go.” More often than not this is simple ‘scrape some barnacles off the bottom of the ship’ type management. Sure. It can help speeding up but incrementally … not exponentially.

2. The ‘kick off meeting.’

This is the infamous “let’s take a moment and make sure we are all aligned before we getting going.” What a bunch of baloney. Yes. it makes sense to insure everyone is on the same page when getting started <although I would point out that more often than not everyone doesn’t give a shit about the overall objective just their own components objective and timeline>. But this is not true slow/down speed up … this is more about alignment.

Look. Real slow down/speed up management is midstream management where you have some critical learnings and maybe even some momentum. And you purposefully do not have everyone stop … just slow down … assess … kind of like having a fighter squadron get fuel in flight … and then shoot off on the mission.

Real slow down/speed up business management creates exponential dramatic speed increases and, at its best, velocity. Reality shows that these dramatic shifts don’t really happen as part of a business status quo. They are situational, contextual and often do not happen because a business doesn’t have a business person who sees it, senses it or can steer it.
Bad slowing down never creates good, or effective, speeding up. It just slows people down and most often frustrates employees as wasted time.

Good slowing down creates dramatic shifts – in speed, velocity and in direction.

More often than not they are driven by one person who senses a contextual shift in the dynamics within a situation. One person who doesn’t have a picture drawn to adapt against but can draw a picture of what they see & sense from which others can leverage from to generate speed.

Truth: not everyone can do this.

In fact, while most people, in general, suck at make choices the business people who are really good at making the faster better choices and recognizing when to slow down to speed up are few & far between.

That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t seek it just understand that more often than not you will just slow down <and not speed up>. All that said. Remember. Critical slowing down is never about slowing down it is about speeding up your business.

———————————

“How passionately they explain the numbers and how much they emphasize the deck is stacked against athletes varies between institutions. It is a message that a lot of coaches don’t want to send.  And it’s a message, frankly, that a lot of athletes don’t want to hear at this stage in their lives.”

=

Mark Nagel

———————-

Lloyd Christmas: What do you think the chances are of a guy like you and a girl like me … ending up together?

Mary Swanson: Well, Lloyd, that’s difficult to say. I mean, we don’t really…

Lloyd Christmas: Hit me with it! Just give it to me straight! I came a long way just to see you, Mary.

The least you can do is level with me. What are my chances?

Mary Swanson: Not good.

Lloyd Christmas: You mean, not good like one out of a hundred?

Mary Swanson: I’d say more like one out of a million.

–

[pause]

Lloyd Christmas: So you’re telling me there’s a chance … YEAH!

==

Dumb and Dumber

——————-

We are in the middle of a pandemic, we do not know the long term effects of actually having the Covid virus, and, yet, college football season has now begin. I think its time we all had a candid conversation about college athletics because these young men are not getting paid now, most of them will not get paid for doing what they are doing now and the universities are getting paid a lot of money. Maybe we should get a grip on the truth – these are not ‘student-athletes’, these are ‘athletes universities make a lot of money on.’ Yes. Its about the money, not the education. With that said, let’s talk about the future of these college athletes who are making money for someone else now.

First. Let me be clear in using a dumb & dumber quote upfront I am not going to be suggesting college athletes are dumb. If anything, I believe people would be surprised at how worldly and smart and hard working 90+% of college athletes are.

Second. I am actually going to use college basketball to talk about the link, or the lack thereof, between playing college sports and playing professionally.

During the NBA bubble, as we watched some foreign players be quite successful, I was asked how many college players move on to the NBA. I guessed maybe 5%.

I was wrong.

Just using Division 1 it is 1.2%

There are about 350 Division I college basketball teams. Each team offers 13 scholarships. That’s about 4,510 Division I college basketball players in a year. In addition. 265 teams in Division II, 325 teams in Division III and 259 teams in NAIA. That’s about another 11,000 players. Using Division 1 alone … only 1.2% of college basketball players will be drafted by a National Basketball Association team. Less will end up actually playing.

Uhm.

This means less than ½ of 1% of total college basketball players will play in the NBA.

Ok. Sure. “Professional” doesn’t have to mean the NBA because there are a lot of other options around the world, especially in Europe, Israel, Turkey, etc. And, to be clear, there are not a lot of Division III student-athletes who think, or know, they are going to play in the NBA. Overseas professional leagues are pretty numerous <even if they don’t pay as well as the NBA> and the idea of spending at least a year playing in and getting to see another part of the world while getting paid is pretty attractive especially to students focus more on their studies than many Division I athletes – especially those who want to play in the NBA.

All the caveats aside this means 98+% of college athletes never play professionally.

So while we typically watch elite teams play incredibly high level of basketball on TV every week, 98% of them will not play professionally.

Ok. That was a semi stunning thing to write.

You watch these incredibly talented young athletes and assume it will be a given they play professionally.

Yikes. Not so much. Sure. So maybe the elite of the elite may send a small number from one team in one given year and then maybe half of those end up being professional career worthy, but that is the best of the best and over a 5 year span the % drops significantly.

Playing professionally, in any sport not just basketball, is … well … a pretty long shot. Several years ago a guy named Jake New tackled this topic.

==

College athletes vastly overestimate their chances of playing professional sports.  The problem is so pervasive that Mark Emmert, the NCAA’s president, devoted significant space to the issue during his most recent state of the association address, saying that “athletes often have incredibly unrealistic perceptions of their professional prospects.”

According to NCAA surveys, more than 60% of Division I college men’s ice hockey players think it’s likely they’ll play professionally, but less than 1 percent ever go on to the National Hockey League.

About 45% of Division I women’s basketball players think they have a chance to play professional basketball, but only 0.9% of players are drafted by a Women’s National Basketball Association team.

<The NCAA said that it is currently procuring data on a player’s chances of joining other professional leagues, such as those in Europe, but the information is not yet available>

Men’s hoops players are the most unrealistic. More than three-quarters of men’s basketball players in Division I say they believe it is at least “somewhat likely” they will play professionally. More than half of Division II players say the same, as do 21 percent of Division III players. Only 1.2 percent of college basketball players will be drafted by an National Basketball Association team.

==

Now. We <colleges and adult influencers in general> don’t help. While the NCAA actually does a pretty good job marketing the fact that athletes should have realistic expectations and that ‘the majority of college athletes go on to do something better’.

Colleges kind of derail the message by promoting their successes <by the way, not in percentages but rather by individuals>.

For example some colleges list the individuals who have attended the university and gone on to fame and professional playing <not noting that these are actually exceptions and not the rule>.

For example on its recruiting website, UCLA is described as “#1 in Olympic Gold Medals from 1984 to 2008″ and “#1 in professional athletes.” And UCLA is very open in saying that for athletes who do dream of going professional the information can be helpful when choosing a program <note … I used UCLA and some dated information, but I could have used any big time college sports program and maybe not used #1 but some marketing of program success as an example>.

In addition parents and adults and gobs of books promote “if you work hard enough you can attain it” or even “believing you can do it is the path to actually doing it.”

This means that colleges simply feed into what has already been planted in an athlete’s head. Some guy named Gershon Tenenbaum, a sports psychology professor at Florida State University, calls it the “self-bias phenomenon.” And adults clearly exacerbate the situation with some relatively absurd levels of adulation with successful athletes.

I actually believe most young athletes are aware the %’s associated with professional sports is very low <even though they may not be aware of the NCAA research or specific numbers>, but young people are hard to convince — not only do they want to be seen as some statistic but we actually encourage them to be the exception.

Personally I know I have a love/hate relationship with regard to how my own parents managed my love of sports and whatever ability I may have had. They constantly stressed the low likelihood of being good enough to play professionally and were relentless with regard to me not ‘wasting my time’ on sports and focusing on other things therefore I always had a pretty good perspective on my abilities and ‘chances’, all the while I had coaches tugging at me to play and practice and ‘maximize’ the ability I did have.

I am not sure the tug-of-war was the best thing for my esteem, but it certainly gave me a realistic point of view when the time came to hang up my cleats & glove.

But it is not easy.

By the time you reach college level of sports you know you are ‘good’ and have attained at least a higher level on the athletic pyramid. For years an athlete moves on to higher and higher levels of competition and by getting to a college level an athlete actually gets to a level that is maybe 95%+ higher level than your peers.

In basketball a little over 3% of high school men’s and women’s basketball players make it to the college level.

In football maybe 6% of high school football players make it to the college level.

Success breeds some confidence, but the research also suggests it also breeds some delusional thinking with regard to what is possible.

What the hell.

(in your mind): You made it this far, so, why not all the way?

And in today’s world <which is NOTHING like when I grew up> we have elevated youth sports to such a level we almost create a celebrity status to not only successful teams <which inflates the egos of the individuals even if they are not stars> as well as the actual stars themselves.

We, adults, do this because we tend to believe confidence can elevate talent or that a higher level of confidence can help overcome any real odds of ‘yikes, we should lose this one.’

Breeding confidence in a young person is a delicate balance and we adults are anything but delicate with regard to the young & sports. This actually creates the “athlete student” problem <note: I did not say student athlete>. We have created a breed of young athlete that considers academics beneath them because they are “going to play professional sports.”

Yes. This is a delusion for most.

But those who could actually judge talent the best, coaches, have no real incentive to create a work ethic in academics <or social skills, emotional maturity and improving their reading, writing, and analytical skills beyond elementary school in order to “win” at something bigger> unless it is associated with ‘eligibility.’

Sure. We can find some coach exceptions (note: and i actually believe big time coaches have got better at this). But then there are we adults — who fuck everything up.

The head of the NCAA has clearly stated: “explaining to athletes that their passion — and years of hard work — is not likely to lead to a career is an uncomfortable but necessary conversation to have.”

==

“How can we help them understand the realities of what that looks like? What can we change to give them a more realistic sense of it? How do we get a handle on that? How can we provide them with a greater sense of the realities and what that looks like?”

==

The NCAA clearly advertises: “there are 400,000 NCAA student-athletes, and almost all of them will go pro in something other than sports.”

Let’s be honest. Young athletes don’t always absorb the message. But that is mostly because we adults haven’t learned the delicate balance of managing reality, dreams and confidence.

Reality is tough. Reality is often captured in some harsh truth.

I could simply suggest at the end of the weekend that 50% of the teams will go home as a loser. It would be harsher to suggest that of the 100’s of young men who walk onto the field most likely 90% of them, the elite players on the elite teams, will leave the field and do something other than play professionally.

Has anybody told them that?

Would they play the game a little bit harder or with a little more passion or a little more ‘this is it’?

Shit.

I don’t know.

What I do know is that I watch the games and be amazed by the talent and skill and sheer joy of the game and know that most of them will have to figure out a way of making a living doing something other than playing basketball. And. At exactly the same time I will be thinking that we are in the middle of a pandemic, not really knowing the longer term physical affects on each of these superb athletes (even the ones who are more likely to have possible professional sports careers) and know that the universities aren’t doing this because they seem them as students, they see them as money makers.

I love sports and I love watching college sports and, yes, I will watch even in a pandemic. But. Let’s not lie to ourselves. The young athletes we are watching for the most part will be doing something other than the sport they are playing and all of them are playing not because they are students or even ‘student-athletes’ but because they are making money for their schools. 

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

“Incrementalism is how we slide into participation by imperceptible degrees so that there is never the sense of a frontier being crossed.” 

—-

Jonathan Glover 

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

“Progress lies not in enhancing what is, but in advancing toward what will be.”

—-

Kahlil Gibran 

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

Well. Incrementalism is a virus. And once you catch it is a sonuvabitch to cure.

I, personally, believe the entire business world, including new business incubators, has this virus. Incrementalism has seeped its way not only into mainstream business but also mainstream ‘innovation’ pipelines.

Yeah. Innovations too.

I dare any of you to walk the halls of your local business incubation center and find a real, “break the etch-a-sketch” idea in there. If you are lucky, you will find one. The majority of innovation ideas these days, incubators as well as established companies, is all about incrementally leveraging from something existing.

Sure. They may claim its “unique” and “a whole new way of doing things”, but the majority of the time, lets say 98% of the time, it is a derivative of something that exists. That is how far the incrementalism virus has reached into the business world.

But this post today isn’t about innovation. This is about how incrementalism just makes us sad. It makes us sad because if you embrace incrementalism that means you have given up on, well, something that is not incremental. You have given up on being able to do something big and risky and game changing. And, worst, you’ve given up on making any substantial decisions <because incrementalism is simply an excuse for not making a clear cut decision>.

Now.

You may not believe you have given it up because we, in the business world, actually cleverly use incrementalism to convince ourselves we are actually achieving big changes.

….. incrementalism dance ………

We do the dance of ‘small steps to achieve big change’ which is kind of some odd waltz in which we make the same moves over and over again and point to change as “we improved how we dance” <but we are still in the same place dancing with the same person dancing to the same music>.

To be clear.

Even I, someone who loves change and “shaking the etch-a-sketch” in business, have been sucked into the black hole of incrementalism.

We do an incredibly good job of convincing ourselves that big change is hard, shit, that any change is hard and almost impossible to do because ‘it is difficult to do’ (note: which is mostly a bullshit thought). Given that, we do an incredibly good job of convincing ourselves that the only way to effectively successfully implement change is through smaller thoughtful steps. All leading to … we do an incredibly good job of convincing ourselves of all that, in fact, so much so that’s all we do.

Look.

Big change is possible. You just need to be smart, thoughtful and choose the ‘big’ wisely and with open eyes. But nowadays we view ‘big’ as some place we need to work our way towards and not just something we do. Unfortunately, as soon as we step onto the incrementalism slippery slope it, more often than not, causes everyone to slide, unintentionally, into unchanging behavior <or microscopic change increments>. This means everyone does small thing after small thing which make everyone feel like they are changing and that shit is changing … uhm … all the while the world itself is changing faster.

This means in our incrementalism we are moving forward and, yet, falling behind. It’s like walking on a moving sidewalk in the wrong direction.

Maybe the worst part?

We do not even see the backwards effect of our supposed forward movement. This happens mostly because most of us suck at not only changing, but perceiving change. We easily lose sight of any change as we focus on the incremental activity we have wholly embraced as ‘progress’ <because we say in our minds: “big change is impossible and this is the way to do it!”>.

The other very real danger of incrementalism is that while you have your head down focused on the incremental task at hand not only may the rest of the world be moving faster than you – it may even turn. So you will keep plugging away plodding down your incrementalism path and all the while the rest of the world is now trundling away in a completely different direction.

By the way. In business this is bad.

Anyway.

I will absolutely admit that most of the business world absolutely recognizes the importance of seeking to continuously reinvent and innovation, yet, sadly mostly we are actually just going through the motions. The motions may look incredibly sensible but they really aren’t achieving any change of any significance.

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

the term Incrementalism is also used as a synonym for Gradualism. Incrementalism is a method of working by adding to a project using many small incremental changes instead of a few (extensively planned) large jumps.

Logical incrementalism implies that the steps in the process are sensible.

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

I fully admit that convincing people that change is not hard <and overcoming ‘it pays to be sensible’> is hard. And I fully admit that the “big version” of this is even harder AND I admit that any non-incremental change is even more risky <which makes overcoming “it pays to be sensible” even harder>.

But that isn’t my point.

My point is that it seems like we have convinced ourselves in the business world that change is ALWAYS best achieved gradually and incrementally. We should always find the easy small steps and do them.

So what <you may be asking>?

This means we begin measuring the success of the business not by any real change, but rather defining our usefulness and worthiness by measuring it in increments versus the past. Incrementalism more often than not doesn’t get measured by how much closer to the ‘big change’ you are but rather by how far you have gone from what you were.

Uhm.

That is nuts. And while it is nuts that is almost exactly how over 90% of business conduct business <and their change>. Worse? This incremental behavior decision making actually bleeds into incremental decision making in general. Everyone starts believing that a bold decision just isnt worth it when you know everyone feels comfortable with an incremental decision.

Look.

While I always advocate timely good big change, I certainly would advocate embracing incrementalism on occasion. Business change is, and as always been, about choice. You look around and choose where incrementalism may be most effective and where ‘big change’ is actually needed. In other words, for doing smart change you do both within your business.

** note: this is exactly the same for strategy – deterministic & emergent. Emergent is simply another word for ‘unplanned for opportunity’ or opportunistic and typically is an opportunity for a non-incremental result.

Yeah.

I can do both at the same time. This has two benefits:

• Organization: all businesses need to be reinvented in some way. I cannot remember one business I have seen or been involved in that hadn’t established some routine that didn’t need to be changed significantly. Incrementalism steadies the organization by not destroying something, but rather fine tuning it. Conversely when you can tie big change to the organization situationally it energizes the organization that it is being smart <to not change everything>, but bold <in that it is willing to make selective smart big changes>. Showing both is the best of both worlds.
• The employee/individual: incrementalism is a virus almost like mononucleosis. It encourages employees to almost sleepwalk through the day. When you inject big change and encourage everyone to believe it can be done and develop a plan to show it can be done and activate people to start getting it done, individual employees are reminded that there IS something more than either the status quo or ‘incremental and gradual change’ <which they were struggling to discern from the everyday grind anyway>.

In the end. My concern.

My concern is that our love of incrementalism is killing meaningful change. Its killing meaningful decisions. Its killing believing meaningful (bigger) things can actually happen.

I don’t want to kill incrementalism, but I certainly want to breathe new life into “big” and meaningful.

Just know this about incrementalism: the problem is that incrementalism is seductively sleepy. It’s the Prozac of business strategy. All I can really suggest is that every business should stop taking Prozac on occasion and watch how the pulse of the company picks up. They may find that Life off of Prozac just isn’t that bad. More importantly, they may find they can shrug off the sadness of incrementalism and have a happier organization. And that is a good thing in business.

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

“The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.”

——-

Michelangelo

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

“Go higher and higher, until it becomes impossible to bring you down, I wanna use a microscope to locate you, don’t even dream of coming down.”

―

Michael Bassey Johnson

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

……….. Pierre Pauselli …………..

Business, in general, has a wacky way of talking about bad news & ‘less-than-positive’ business information. In business, and Life I imagine on occasion, we look at down in some fairly absurd ways using voodoo math, clever graphs and … well … some dubious comparisons all to prove that down is actually up.

Yeah.

It has to be voodoo – math or graphics —  to show both down AND up.

No shit. Really.

To them … well … Down isn’t down, it is really up <if only my bank balance could implement that math>.

Examples.

Unemployment is down this month <but its still up versus a year ago>.

Sales are down <but it’s up versus the rest of the category>.

Our new product is losing money <but we are getting new customers>.

And maybe the most famous ‘up is down’ scenario … “we have cut our spending but get more with what we have!” <always be very very leery of this one>.

WTF.

Let’s be clear.

In business when is down, well, up?

(Answer to that question) ………. NEVER.

Down is down.

Down is bad.

Down is never the objective.

Sigh.

If I hear this one more time in one more conference room my head will explode:

————–

 “… well Mr. Giraffenee, it’s a tough economy right now. The category is trending downward at 11%, but we are only down 5%. So we are doing well in a tough category. In fact … <insert pregnant pause here> … we are actually up when you look  it that way.”

— people staring at powerpoint looking serious … “hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm …” —

(Mr. Giraffeney after a minute or so)

“So our sales are down … but not really down? I love it!”

————-

What a load of bullshit.

To me negative is down. And bad <because it isn’t up>.

To be fair it is easy to talk your way into the down but not really down rabbit hole of economic unreality <in fact … I say hanging my head sheepishly … I have done it myself years ago>. It is often a self-preservation, program preservation, technique <albeit a slightly dubious one>. Today’s management seems intent on finding something wrong to fix, someone to blame and some reason they will not look good. making down look up can be an effective way to protect a good long term idea in the short term <sad but true>.

To be fair It is extremely easy to justify ‘down but not down’ by saying if people aren’t spending, it must be ok that they are not spending with us. It is extremely easy to say if times are tight than that must be the reason they don’t value our brand as much <or any brand>. It’s a tough competitive world out there and it never hurts to remind everyone it is a tough competitive world.

Lastly.

To be fair … It is important to note that a person might not know he/she is doing something he/she shouldn’t do. Training in today’s business world is pitiful. Teaching people how to tell the tough truths, the harsh truths, is almost nonexistent.

Anyway.

It may be easy to fall into this ‘down is up’ double speak, but it is bullshit.

Up is up.

Growth is always the goal. And if you are not growing you are dying.

Here is something to chew on <a business truth as it were>.

A truth with no caveats on market status, economic challenges or budget constraints.

Business is out there.

People are buying stuff.

And there are plenty of people buying stuff.

Yeah.

Even today.

Even yesterday.

Even tomorrow.

Plenty of businesses are gaining market share and there are a boatload of profitable companies <flush with cash by the way>. And there are a lot of companies with increased sales. And there are a lot of growing companies.

The truth is that we have an extremely robustly sized economy out there my friends. When people talk about ‘shrinking economy’ or ‘shrinking industry’ … don’t laugh too hard in their faces … size is relative. No reasonable business is in an industry with only $100 dollar available and it is shrinking by $5.

Sales and growth are out there for the taking.

Note: while I originally wrote this during the ‘great depression’, fundamentally, this is true during the pandemic. while economies have clearly shrunk, people are still spending money. Every business should have the objective of ‘they should be spending it on me.”

I say all this because it can be easy to justify doing what you are doing a variety of ways and saying down isn’t really down is a way a lot of people do so.

Stop.

Just stop.

Up is attainable.

Growth opportunities are always there.

You may just have to be a little smarter to get it. “Smarter” almost always resides in appealing to consumer needs without losing sight of the fact you have to make money … profit. You cannot <and should not> discount your way to success. That path is a very slippery slope not only from consumer attitudes perspective <defining how they value you>, but it is also puts a massive strain on profitability <which impacts the organization like a bad ripple effect>.

You have to be smart and insightful with how you talk with people you want to buy your stuff.  Maybe you need to seek a new role, or a differently defined role, that is more vital and easier for consumers to rationalize. And, god forbid, tell the truth & have something worth paying for.

Here is a fact.

People will spend against need – real or perceived. They also search for value, but that doesn’t mean people will not spend premiums for quality. Or spend more money for a heightened sense of perceived need <which is actually a “want” if I was going to be technical with myself>.

Look at SUVs, Starbucks <where they are open drive thru lines are nonstop>, Apple and Whole Foods markets <I could point out a shitload of under-the-radar businesses but you wouldn’t know who the are>.

All doing quite well thank you very much.

All ain’t the cheapest shit out there.

This is simply finding growth under pressure … and under existing market conditions.

Harsh truth for everyone? Persistent sales stagnation is most likely a reflection of how people perceive needing what you have to offer more so than it is “the economy.”

(sorry to burst anyone’s excuse bubble with that)

If you want to look at the larger economic situation go ahead, but do so by just accepting an attitude that the economy’s growth is going to be minimal at best, with the risk of another sharp downturn very real, and quit whining and go out and find a way to grow. Businesses must not stop their quest for growth even in ‘bad times’ nor should they stop their quest under the guise that ‘well we were down … but not really.’

Here is one thing I can promise you about growth companies.

In every case, there are a group of people in that company that see things not just as they are, but as they could be.

And then they go out and get it.

No excuses.

So.

I guess I wrote this to warn people about people who stand up and say “we had a good year … we are not down as much as everyone else or the category.”

Down is never up.

And, by the way, up is attainable. Today. Yesterday. Tomorrow. No excuses.

I guess I wrote this to suggest to businesses that the greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark. Go get some market share.

Alice:                    “How long is forever?

White Rabbit:    “Sometimes, just one second”

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

<Tim Burton from Alice in Wonderland movie, but never in Lewis Carroll’s books. Its kind of Tim Burton’s version of Mr. Margorium’s “37 seconds is a lifetime if used well.” >

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

Today I am writing about living instead of waiting, doing instead of thinking about doing, and recognizing that even if you do live & do, some moments in time are different than others <although they all surely look the same as they appear on the watch>.

It all begins with recognizing Time is a funny thing.

It can ebb and flow all within a finite amount of time.

It can increase speed and decrease speed and yet remain an extremely identifiable finite amount of time.

It can take years of asking and creating questions and, yet, a second to answer everything.

All of which makes me think of two things:

–          Memorable moments

–          Moment of clarity

Obviously they are not the same thing, but could end up being the same moment. Anyway.

              Memorable moments.

I sometimes call these untangled moments. Life is a tangled snarled bunch of moments. But every once in a while you inadvertently pull the right end of the string and the knot is released and, well, everything becomes untangled.

It can be a smile from some across the room.

It can be a falling star.

It can be something really big — a seemingly small decision made amongst many.

It can even be, in business, tugging one project out of a seemingly endless list of projects to do.

Frankly, you don’t notice many of these ‘one seconds’ when they happen.

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

“In real life turning points are sneaky. They pass by unlabeled and unheeded. Opportunities are missed, catastrophes unwittingly celebrated. Turning points are only uncovered later, by historians who seek to bring order to a lifetime of tangled moments.”

Kate Morton

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

They happen, shit gets done, and only in reflection you realize that these seconds last forever — they are a moment etched in time. These are truly ‘a second that is forever.’

Ponder. I have just explained one of Life’s most interesting paradox so now you can tell someone how one second can also be forever.

            Moments of clarity

Clarity is an amazing thing. It can be forced externally <let’s call these ‘oh shit’ moments> and internally <I call these ‘lock picking’ moments>.

Oh shit moments. Physiologically ‘oh shit’ moments actually causes the mind to become intensely focused. This physiological response actually permits our brains to record more data than normal. Physiologically what also happens is that memory then ends up replaying the information in slow motion mostly to assimilate all the additional information stored in there.

Think of it like filming something with a high speed camera and then replaying it at a normal speed.

I cannot figure out if time slows down or our mind speeds up to accommodate more information. Doesn’t really matter. “Oh shit” makes us focus and when focused our minds are pretty amazing computers. They create moments of clarity. These moments may be fleeting <and some of us actually miss the clarity moment as it passes by> and the consequences of not recognizing these moments of clarity <no “oh shit” to get us to focus>  is that we simply become overwhelmed by all the data being shared with our brains.

That leads me to the internally forced moment of clarity and a second way of looking at moments of clarity.

Focused minds overwhelmed by data still offer an open window to a moment in clarity.

The challenge? Life slams the window shut pretty frickin’ fast. You have to almost train yourself, and your mind, to see thru the window for the moment it is open. So I would suggest the second version of ,moments of clarity is the ‘lock picking’ moment.

Lock picking moments. Why do I call it ‘lock picking’?

I don’t know how to crack a safe or pick a lock <and I imagine I wouldn’t broadcast it if I did>, but I do know what it feels like to have a moment of clarity when thinking about something. It is like having all the tumblers in the lock suddenly align and you hear the click of the lock unlocking. And, yes, I swear I hear a sound in my head when it happens. Oh. And it is a frickin’ beautiful sound. I am often asked to describe it, and I do so, but I cannot explain the noise of the moment of clarity when the tumblers align.

I imagine it is just in my head. But I tell people that is what you are seeking. When everything just falls into place your mind will tell you in some form or fashion that you have entered into a moment of clarity. Interestingly <maybe this is just me>, but I have found that these moments are also very similar to the first one I described in that Life doesn’t hold that window open for long. What I mean is that I have learned over time to write it down or say it out loud to someone when the tumblers fall into place. Maybe the mind simply opens that door which you just unlocked and closes it behind you and you immediately enter a new hallway with dozens of other locked doors and the mind moves on.

I don’t know.

All I know is that moments of clarity are simply moments. They may echo in eternity <lasting forever>, but only if you actually recognize them. If you don’t? That one second just gets buried under the mound of other missed seconds.

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

“My life amounts to no more than one drop in a limitless ocean. Yet what is any ocean, but a multitude of drops?”

David Mitchell, Cloud Atlas

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

And, yet, within the multitude of drops, the limitless ocean called Life, one second can be forever.

Uhm. “Can.” You just have to make sure you pay attention.

That said. I will end with two relevant quotes from two great thinker/writers:

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

“Forever is made up of now.”

Emily Dickinson

———–

“Here we are, trapped in the amber of the moment. There is no why.”

Kurt Vonnegut

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

Kurt & Emily probably loved Alice in Wonderland. There is no why because how can there be in a world of nonsense where we seek to find some sense? The ‘forever one seconds’ always end up being trapped in amber.

Anyway. Here you go … the full Tim Burton script:

“It is better to be feared than loved.”

“The Mad Hatter: Have I gone mad?

Alice: I’m afraid so. You’re entirely bonkers. But I’ll tell you a secret. All the best people are.”

“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn’t be. And what it wouldn’t be, it would.”

“I’m not strange, weird, off, nor crazy, my reality is just different from yours”

”Alice: How long is forever? White Rabbit: Sometimes, just one second”

In the end I can only chuckle.

One second? Of course one second can be forever <and I am not entirely bonkers>. You just have to pay attention to moments and then make the moment matter.

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

“All cruelty springs from weakness.”

―

Seneca

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

“All the animals, the plants, the minerals, even other kinds of men, are being broken and reassembled every day, to preserve an elite few, who are the loudest to theorize on freedom, but the least free of all.”

Thomas Pynchon

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

“Normalizing your boss.”

I would say 95% of us who have had the opportunity to weave our way through corporate America to reach a senior level position have been forced to normalize the behavior of at least one of our bosses.

Some more than others, but in some ways you become a normalizer, or a translator or maybe sometimes you simply sweep up the mess they left behind. That’s just what you do … uhm … assuming that boss actually has some redeeming value. As you get closer and closer to the most senior positions it becomes more and more obvious that gaining responsibility doesn’t always smooth out the edges of someone, but rather more often makes that person lean harder on/into the specific aspects of themselves which they can use to meet the growing responsibilities. Yeah. Many leaders don’t “round out their skills & character” <and become a well-rounded leader>, but rather hone the pointed skills that provide value or increase their power <sacrificing some other skills & attributes along the way>.

Ah. But then you run up against the ‘bull shitter in chief.’

Maybe they got their position through some family contact. Maybe they were a psychopathic ‘kill or be killed’ employee who successfully killed off any competent competitors for the position. Maybe out of sheer organizational incompetence they rose to a position in which they are completely unqualified for.

All they have in their hip pocket is bullshit.

But they are your boss.

Whew. Defending selectively incompetent behavior is one thing. Defending ongoing bull shit is another. Why? The former can actually enhance your reputation <and improve your own skills as you provide solutions in real time> while the latter only diminishes your reputation.

Yeah. I am sure some people will debate what I just wrote, but I would suggest they will only end up quibbling over my phrasing and not the truth behind the thought.

Reputation is not a simple concept. Your reputation is made up of a variety of things which means you can fuck up in one place, but offering a strength in another situation simply builds your reputation unevenly <which can be managed if you are self-aware>. The problem with normalizing a bull shitter’s incompetent behavior is that you aren’t shoring up selective incompetence/deficiencies you are actually forced to normalize their behavior by offering an alternative truth to whatever bullshit truth they advocated on all fronts – not selective.

I imagine the majority of us have never really faced this either <a> as a full onslaught from an incompetent boss — because most organizations weed out this problem fairly efficiently or <b> for long <most bull shitters get exposed by ambitious less senior competent no-nonsense fairly quickly>.

But, yet, I tend to believe in our nightmare scenarios in our minds we worry about what we would do if faced with an ongoing incompetent bull shitter boss scenario.

Personally <and anyone who knows me will probably nod their head and go ‘yeah’> I wouldn’t be able to do it. I would actually call bullshit <and get fired or ‘eased into a different responsibility’>. But, even that said, having been in a quasi-position like this you have a tendency to take on each bullshit situation as discrete from another and avoid any real pattern of behavior until forced to actually face a pattern of behavior. That is how we deal with it … and that is also the personal risk we run as we ignore the larger situation rationalizing it in our own minds as ‘discrete scraps of irresponsible incompetent boss behavior.’

All this come to mind as I think about Donald J Trump.

Let me use his first self-proclaimed “big foreign trip” <which fostered the image of Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure … or Pee Wee’s Big adventure  or even Pooh’s Grand Adventure – pick your poison> back several years ago <simply because there are so many to choose from but this was possibly the first which encapsulated the challenges people around him would face> .

Beyond the fact the trip was bookended with a self-proclaimed “big foreign trip” and a self-proclaimed self-reported “home run”, in between there were a number of cringe-able moments in which people were demanded to stand up and become responsible for defending or explaining some tone-deaf remark, some historically ignorant comment or some insensitive gaffe that the president did over the entire big adventure.

Was it the bullying body language he demonstrated at the NATO summit, shoving aside the Prime Minister of Montenegro? <a small country that I am fairly sure the president has no clue where it is>

Was it his apparent unawareness of where Israel is located, an ignorance displayed when he informed an audience of Israelis that he’d “just got back from the Middle East”?

Was it his seeming indifference to the difference between “Islamist” and “Islamic” in front of an Islam audience <a mistake he blamed on exhaustion on the 2^nd day of a trip … “does he have the stamina?”>

Was it his belief that after stating for months that NATO was obsolete that it was unnecessary to verbally state USA unequivocally stood with its NATO partners?

Was it his constant misstatements with regard to how NATO actually works?

Was it after a less than 30 minute visit to Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust memorial, which <or any Holocaust museum> has a nasty habit of bringing people to tears or, at minimum, some deep reflection with regard to humanity and the sometimes startling cruelty humans can inflict upon one another … he left an absurdly out of touch positive note in the memorial’s Book of Remembrance – “It is a great honor to be here with all my friends – so amazing and will never forget!”

Was it his odd alternative universe in which he suggests he has “righted people’s views of where America stands with friends & enemies after a misguided 8 Obama years” where Saudi Arabia is a good friend <let’s avoid they have none of the freedoms America typically support> and where Germany is described as “bad” <albeit only their trade deals … uhm … and their views on immigration … uhm … and their views on globalism>.

Was it his unflinching ability to lie to the face of the world’s newest democratic leader Macron by unequivocally falsely, in a sincere voice, stating “I was for you.”

Or, finally, was it the overarching sadness <to most Americans> in watching the seeming shift to ‘pragmatic relationships policy” <ones in which money exchange defines who we like and who we do not like> in which we find ourselves watching our leaders partying with disciplined non democratic autocrats and constantly showing uneasiness and sincere lack of warmth in interactions with the world’s finest democratic leaders.

Sigh.

Here is what I know <about not only Trump, but normalizing a boss’s behavior>.

If I were working for Trump I would find it hard to read any news, but, particularly European newspapers, without cringing and certainly being embarrassed. But if Trump were my boss where I would be most concerned is that he would be using me to lend some legitimacy as he behaved in some less-than-legitimate behavior.

And that is where one needs to step back and worry about their reputation.

Because lending credibility for a boss who has selective competency is different than lending credibility for a … well … “bull shitter in chief” boss.

As one article put it well … “seasoned people simply lend an air of occasional competence to an otherwise shambolic White House. By appearing before the cameras, looking serious and speaking rationally, they add a veneer of normality to this administration.”

And maybe that is where this whole thing ends up.

It is not about us, the people and media, accepting Donald J Trump’s behavior or getting numbed into believing it is normal … it will be about experienced competent people deciding how much they want to normalize his behavior. This whole situation is not really about a decision on what is best for America <although they will certainly be forced into thinking about that>, but rather their own reputation.

Good competent people will be standing there knowing they can contribute to <a> doing what is right and <b> herding an incompetent boss … both of which America in a larger context benefits … and, yet, they stand there watching their own reputations slowly slip away … drip by drip … word by word.

Good competent people can normalize selective incompetence, but they will struggle to normalize a ‘bull shitter’ whose only competence is ongoing ignorance. At some point people will begin questioning your own competence as you continuously articulate some semblance of nonsensical normalcy and they will definitely start questioning … well … your integrity or character.

And then what do you do? Because, in the end, that is what you are left with – just you & your character.

Why?

Because, frankly, no matter how skilled you are a shitload of people in this world are just as experienced as you are and a lot of people are skilled and competent just like you therefore you get judged, ultimately, on what you did when faced with a situation — did you speak up?

Did you defend the wrong and indefensible? Did you do what was right?

I am not suggesting this is easy.

In fact a good bull shitter can offer such an elegant smoke screen it can offer the competent some cover so they can offer up some truth and competence in a way that … well … is true & competent.

However, in the end, the difficulty resides in the smoke itself.

Because at some point every competent person associated with a bull shitter is asked to explain the smoke … and … well … how do I explain the smoke?

You can’t. And, worse? You cannot put out the fire.

Good people, no matter how good, will choke on the smoke eventually.

….. choice when working for a bullshitter in chief ……

And, let’s be clear, no one wants to see good people die.

It is painful to watch.

It is painful to watch good competent people being broken and reassembled every day, to preserve someone, who are the loudest to theorize on freedom, but the least free of all.”

That is the personal choice one makes when normalizing a boss … how much smoke is there and will I choke from the smoke they make?

I cannot offer a well-defined “here is how you know and what you should do” today because this is a personal choice. But, no matter who you are and where you are, watching good competent people standing in the smoke being demanded to define a smoke, not of their own making, is painful. And sad.