Musings of a Common Man

Systems or Relationships: How do we engage discrimination?

noreply@blogger.com (A Common Man) — Tue, 26 Jun 2018 08:07:00 +0000

All of us are blind, including those that believe they are "aware"

When considering the issues of discrimination, injustice, and racism, I've heard many on the social justice train say that we need to seek out corporate forgiveness (I believe that was laid at the feet of the indistinct "majority"), and have endured the ardent push-back of many in the majority that bite down hard on dialogs that create further divisions saying that we need to just move on and quit talking about it to achieve unity.

For followers of Jesus, does either perspective bring believers together? Where do I even start?

Perhaps its in understanding.

Do we have prejudices? Of course. Do each of us have blind spots? Yes. Is the answer to bringing restoration the systemic engagement and corporate forgiveness of a majority -- or is it individual relationship that seeks first to understand?

Personally, I believe its the latter -- and being willing to engage individual dialog from foundations of mutual respect and interest that start with valuing the contributions of each people group -- whether male, female, Asian, Latino, Africans, Caucasians, able-bodied or disabled, etc. With appreciation and understanding, we can continue to look for opportunities to engage injustices that are discriminatory.

The only way to find a blind spot is to be examined. To be willing to have someone else offer a perspective that, perhaps, you've not considered. And if you've not considered it, it may be a blind spot. So it starts with conversation.

People vs. Systems - Both needed, but for different reasons

But here's what I've learned in my conversations with people: Not everyone feels the same way. Some of my African American friends feel like most systemic barriers have been removed. Some still see rampant racism. Still others see improvements with more-subversive prejudices that lurk from shadows. Some believe that you find what you're looking for while others believe its there and impossible to not see. Holding up one person's perspective as representative of a people group, while informative, is hardly defining.

The key is that there isn't a single, systematic answer to address everyone's perspectives in most cases. Systems are designed to engage a majority, and are horrid at engaging nuance. People are nuanced and require individual engagement. But engage individually within contexts of community we must. And where systemic discrimination occurs, we need to do our part to change it.

System change can have benefits. But systemic restoration does not work unless it meets individual need.

After World War II, the United States spent millions in its occupation of Japan to bring healing and rebuilding. (It is a unique trait of who we are as Americans, and a reflection of our Judaeo-Christian character.) For people -- individuals -- it was not the systemic engagement that was the solution, but helping prop up families person-by-person with education, housing, training and food that made a difference. Systems don't offer and create forgiveness. People do. And that's why relationship is important to overcome racism.

As one who has spent months in training on this topic, it's also a false dichotomy to believe that racism is the unique mark of the majority. It actually cuts all ways. However, it's important to understand that those in the majority who hold power do have a greater impact to bring about necessary changes.

The hard part is that even the terms we use create barriers to unity. If we say "Everyone's a racist", we immediately turn off those that believe they're not. What if we instead said, "None of us has full understanding of what it's like to be someone else, so let's learn what life is like for someone who is not us?" And what if that started at a place of valuing contributions rather than critically perceiving short-comings and differences? Maya Angelou captures it well in her ending of the poem, "Human Family":

I note the obvious differences
between each sort and type,
but we are more alike, my friends,
than we are unalike.

We are more alike, my friends,
than we are unalike.

We are more alike, my friends,
than we are unalike.

WWJD?

My calling is unity and restoration through Jesus -- knowing full well that many cultures engage the truth of Jesus differently throughout the world and that it doesn't require adopting mine to become and adopted one of the King. Jesus followers in Latin America are different from those in India who are different from those in Illinois. You don't have to do it like I do it to follow Jesus. You just have to know Him through God's Word and live in the richness of that relationship as bounded in scripture. (Read some of the writings of Dr. Samuel Betances as one of the most-challenging and compelling authors ever on these topics.)

Likewise, all that claim to believe Christ is the Redeemer are also bound together in the Kingdom and must be known by their love and faithfulness to His calling. If you are called to fight injustice, then fight it with all the fervor that the Holy Spirit empowers you with as you point others to Jesus. If you are called to be in relationship and understand others, then be a bridge-builder like no one has ever seen using the Cross to bring others together. But perhaps all should stop biting down on the "Here's the only, right way" to engage areas of discrimination, racism and injustice". Perhaps it's as simple as it just starts with me, entering into relationships where I can learn and grow, and seeing how I can help others be seen and heard.

Our reality is an eternity where all peoples that have accepted Christ will be one family. Only those that live in comfortable isolation and the insula of their own finite communities need be concerned. Better still -- reach out and get to know those brothers and sisters before the celebration begins. (It's always better to party with friends than strangers...)

And finally, my ending suggestion would be that these dialogs are meant for face-to-face relationships rather than engagement through tit-for-tat social media. If no opinions are changed and followers of Jesus divided, then what is the value? I think a lot of good people are misread through the faceless interpretation of intent in a Facebook, Twitter or other media post.

FWIW

Foul language is for the birds (get it?)

noreply@blogger.com (A Common Man) — Wed, 14 Mar 2018 00:01:00 +0000

You are free to use whatever language you want. It's a property of our free will. As with all "freedoms", is it without boundaries, or best lived within boundaries?

My preference is usually to trust judgement rather than having a rule. But I want to challenge our use of words like "f*ck" and "sh*t" in our regular vocabulary.

First -- let me say that none of us are perfect on any level. And I am quite fallible. So no one should read this out of a place of judgement.

The Bible talks a lot about how we use our tongues. Jesus specifically said that what comes out of a person’s mouth is reflecting what's in their heart.

Luke 6:45 “The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.”

Paul wrote in Ephesians 4:29, “Let no corrupt word proceed out of your mouth, but what is good for necessary edification, that it may impart grace to the hearers.”

To this, John MacArthur has written the following:

“The word for ‘corrupt’ refers to that which is foul or rotten, such as spoiled fruit or putrid meat. Foul language of any sort should never pass a Christian’s lips, because it is totally out of character with his new life in Christ.” The final portion of the verse offers a worthy use of our tongue--"what is good for edification.”

The book of James gives us three illustrations from nature to demonstrate the sinfulness of cursing: “With [our tongue] we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be this way. Does a fountain send out from the same opening both fresh and bitter water? Can a fig tree, my brethren, produce olives, or a vine produce figs? Nor can salt water produce fresh,” (James 3:9-12).

Except … it's totally savage these days ("cool" for you old timers) to be a Christian who swears. It gives the "curser" an "I'm into Jesus, but I'm not legalistic" badge.

But that concept misses the boat – akin to saying, “May I sin more so grace may abound more”. That’s the exact opposite of what the Apostle Paul tells us to do!

At its foundation, profanity is our weak attempt at displacing God by instead putting ourselves in a place of judgement over people and circumstances. Father Maney writes that at its core, swearing is contempt – a mixture of rebellion, anger and disgust – expressed from a position of superiority. It is the furthest thing from that which we have been called, which is to live in gratitude and contentment, humbly considering others better than ourselves. It’s not hard to understand why even subtle levels of contempt are damaging—not only in marriages but in all human interaction. If profane language has a privileged place in the lexicon of contempt, then Christians have a unique mandate to avoid profanity. It’s not that abstaining from pejorative language outfits us with some holier-than-thou halo. It’s that we are called to live with a servant’s heart, affirming the dignity of every human and the sacredness of existence.

So you say that Biblical proclamations about our language were only about using G-d’s name in vain. But as historical linguists point out, there are commonalities of cursing that are true regardless of the age or language: They have to do with what comes out of the body (fluids and solids), sex (and body parts that should be modestly covered), and misusing the name of either deity or follow humans. So, when we're reading "no corrupt word should...”, it's really consistent in spite of entomology.

The bottom line? Swearing shows a lack of control -- whether it's giving oneself over to anger, contempt or superiority, and is not what it means to bring peace and love to the fore.

In essence: It's anti-Christ.

Next time we want to swear, we should carefully consider this line of thinking -- and if it is really in alignment with what our Creator desires of us.

FWIW.

Growth.

noreply@blogger.com (A Common Man) — Tue, 07 Jul 2015 01:43:00 +0000

It is very good to see the growth in the church away from unfounded "traditions" and more in the spirit of the Jewish Messiah -- who asked us to follow Him because of His lessor yoke (teaching).

Cards, dancing, and alcohol evil? Ummm...no -- unless they are your uncontrollable weakness. Instead...

Life---and life more abundantly! Cool! (Pass a good beer as evidence of God's provision and love -- and I'll make sure to not become a drunk!)

Since Jesus isn't here and we instead have something better, the Holy Spirit (His words, not mine), we have to rely on the completed Word (which Jesus is called in John 1:1) and know that "the Ghost" is leading within the boundaries of Christ/the Word. The church is just that: People following God through His ONLY Son, Jesus.

Those who wrote to build the church and go on those missionary journeys and, save John, all DIE for what they knew to be truth. And Paul? He heard the WHOLE PLAN. But today, we blow him off in favor of things more palatable. We don't like the little ugly, zealous Jew with a thorn in his flesh.

Truth is God LOVES using the impossibly broken and unusable to fulfill His Purposes. Not "as they were", but renewed and redeemed to something entirely new. That is truth.

Today...Truth is out of vogue.

What's consistent is that cultural difference exists where the behavior wasn't called "evil". Women leading in church? Not evil. Paul didn't permit it, but nowhere in scripture is it called evil.

Husbands not treating their wives as Christ did the church -- to love to the point of death, putting her salvation before saving his own butt? Not evil, but all us dudes are out of bounds with this one. It is our unmitigated goal.

But there is evil.

Without going into details, I am one of those that should have been stoned for sexual sin. Period. Dot. End of sentence. I have been an unrepentant sinner.

But no more.

And since I'm not a Jew (the olive skin ended with my Dad through his Mom) and ceremonial law doesn't apply to me, I instead look to what the moral law says, what the New Testament says, and -- ultimately -- what is written of God's character. Thankfully, Levitical and Ceremonial Law don't apply to those of us in Christ.

Without scripture -- there is no "God's character". Just...knowing Him by His Invisible Qualities.Thankfully, we have the Bible. We can know as much of Him as He's chosen to reveal to us. Even the Old Testament reveals something to us about our Father.

Others use the Old Testament Law as a big excuse. "Well...the Bible says eating shellfish and the flesh of a swine is terrible, but you do that, right? So you can ignore all that's there." That is like my kid saying because I yelled at his Mom in my anger, he can go rob a bank. Brilliant.

What we're facing is the erosion of truth for the sake of Man. Not God -- Man and his desires.
Here's what Paul says about the final days in his letter to his friend/mentor, Timothy:

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. ²People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, ³without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, ⁴treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— ⁵having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
⁶They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, ⁷always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.

Wow.

Another "in vogue" thing to do is dismiss Paul. But please remember that if you are part of a church, you are there because Paul, Peter, James, John, Barnabas (sorry...that's who I think wrote Hebrews) dared to believe these things. And the 7 stages of the church (see Revelations 4) have several consistent threads.

At least...consistent until the last, very flawed, church listed.

And I think we're almost there -- and not because of the long list of "terrible things", but because of that ending: We've become vast learners -- but not of truth.

We put more stock into the latest theology, blogger, and opinion. We put more stock into things we "believe". We value human relationships more than Scripture.

Instead of following in the footsteps of past generations who got it right, we condemn them for the things they did wrong and ignore their difficulty that makes living in most 3rd-world/emerging economy nations look like a cakewalk. But from the comfort of our 21st century pedestal...stone! Stone! STONE! We cast them with impunity.

We learn a lot in our Information Age ...and lost the ability to come to grips with Truth.

Sheep and Children. We're called both repeatedly in Biblical text.

Sheep are just stupid. Without their shepherd, they're just lost.

Children have great trust. Complete trust. Complete love.

What's in style today? "Question Authority"..."Question Truth"..."Question...everything..."

Questioning is good. THAT is VERY Jewish. But it's always questioning God within the boundaries of respect..."Fear" in the OT...and in alignment with the Word. That's what's so amazing about children. Children understand that the questions really aren't about impressing with depth, but about learning the Truth. They are about Him...the Word.

The Word was With God. The Word Was God. He was with God in the beginning.

If we believe that scripture is still open to being re-written by "Jesus", then there really isn't any foundation of truth. Might as well do what I want and ignore this whole God thing. I'll love God and love man in whatever way I see fit as I think "the spirit" (not God) leads.

"...terrible times in the last days." "...always learning but never coming to a full knowledge of truth."

Instead, Paul said repeatedly that we are to test the Spirit.

Test against what?

Acts 17:10-11 is the answer: Test it against the scriptures. God's Word.

The most powerful, Spirit-filled people I know are those who are FREED from fundamentalist, un-scriptural traditions ("The Don't Do List", the "Use Christian-eeze List"), AND are FILLED with the Spirit to do His bidding to bring Good News and Joy and Peace and Justice (even social justice!), and are LEARNING and GROWING and challenged by Truth. So...unbelievably...amazing.

What have I learned? Two big truths.

The first one is this: Many of us (self-included) bombed big time by being more committed to political and social control than helping people know the Messiah who came for them, died for them, and rose again for them -- who sent the Holy Spirit to guide us until the last days, and who will eventually come again.

The second one is this: Many of us have chosen to follow after our own desires (self-included) instead of being rooted in truth, be filled with the Spirit, and to live completely free.

FWIW.

Work - Right where we're supposed to be

noreply@blogger.com (A Common Man) — Thu, 26 May 2011 16:03:00 +0000

Many years ago, I read a Navigator's book called "Your Work Matters to God". What I can remember is how I went from seeing work as a curse to instead seeing it as an emulation of God the Father, whose first recorded acts for people was all about work.

As I was cleaning up my desk, I came across notes I'd taken from a sermon by Pastor Brian Steenhoek of Voice of Hope Church in Wayland. I'm going to take a second and repost those here for my future review...and for anyone else who may find them interesting. It's a fun lunchtime activity, right?

-------------------

How can I live in a place that God designed me to be in regarding my work?

First one must evaluate their own views of work. Three of the most commonly accepted are:

1) Work is a curse, and its only goal is to reach retirement.

2) Work is all-consuming and provides a sense of self-identity.

3) Work is a calling of God.

The first two views are flawed from the start. It is not a curse that only provides an ends to a means. Nor should it be what defines us -- and removes us from the balance of our other callings in life -- to be good spouses/parents/children, to spend time serving the church, and to be called to investment in others.

Work is indeed a necessity. But it is also a calling of God. Consider Ephesians 2:10:

"For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works which God prepared us in advance to do".

When we don't have work -- or cannot find it -- it is demeaning. It feels devaluing. But it's fascinating to consider that we exist today due to the Father's workmanship and that we were created in Christ. Further, we were made specifically to do good works. And...we were prepared in advance to do. It is the concept that God has designed us for a specific purpose.

To be doing what God created us uniquely to do -- to be in our "sweet spot" -- requires us to be able to answer a few questions:

1) Are we viewing work appropriately?

2) Are we doing the work God has called us to do?

3) Are we able to say that the work we're doing is what God wants us to do and that He is blessing it?

It's ok if we're not there yet. God will get us there on this journey if we follow Him. (Proverbs 3:5-6).

Here's how to get there:

1) Live Out Your Values! Don't just talk them; Live them.

2) Pay attention to what your unique gifts are -- and use them in work that best fits them. It is God's gift to prepare us in advance. We have to use them in places where we fit.

3) Pay attention to your life experiences. God can use these just like he can use your pre-ordained aptitudes.

(See Romans 12:6, Ephesians 4, and Exodus 31: 1-5)

Evidence of the Father's love for us can be found in how He provides exactly what is needed (not necessarily "wanted") in exactly the right time and the right way. Work is one of these things He provides.

There's a Hebrew word, chazone, which denotes being exactly where you are supposed to be. It is the sweet spot of where we are to exist. It's the intersection of three things -- our core values, our experiences, and our gifts. Where they meet, it's CHAZONE! -- and we always know it when we're in it.

Colossians 3:23-24: "Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving."

____________________

Personally, I've always read those last two verses as a chastisement. Almost like a "Hey! You! You're acting all bored or annoyed or your not giving it your best. Get with the program! Start working harder as if you were working directly for God!!"

But it instead should be balanced with an ideal. It speaks to that perfect place of understanding that your work is a calling on your life. It is what God has "ordained" you to do. And it's not just about you. It's about the people whose lives you touch as you do your ordained work. And if it's not what you should be doing, then...perhaps...consider a change.

For my company, I want us to:

1) Love God. This doesn't mean that the business entity has to be overtly or "in-your-face" with the message of Jesus, but it should certainly reflect those values in the behaviors of the organization.

2) Bless Others -- starting with our own families first, then as many others as we can.

3) Do something meaningful. It might only be bringing the dignity of work to others. It may be something purposeful in bringing the restoration of the Cross to people's lives. It could be brewing beer. It could be anything -- as long as it meets the criteria.

My 2 cents...and as a reminder of what I am creating...

noreply@blogger.com (A Common Man) — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:29:00 +0000

Fading Fear

One of the realizations I've had over the past 18 months is that I had developed a healthy need to feel rather comfortable in my daily environ. Not that this is a bad thing, mind you. But I was existing in my own little insula of daily routine, familiarity with my surroundings, and in the assurance that there were no problems I'd come across in my day that I couldn't handle.

Need proof? Consider the following:

I had the same job for 11 years.
I've lived in the same home for almost 13 years.
I had the same part-time job for almost 20 years.
I've been in the same career area for over 20 years.
I've had the same wife for over 20 years.

(Oops...probably wasn't supposed to include that last one!)

Though I left home at 18 to join the military, and spent the next four years living in Texas, Illinois and (most of my time in) Alaska, had traveled to most of the States in the Union (including Hawaii and not California), and had done a variety of fun and exciting trips (Bahamas, Mexico, Canada, etc.), I've done almost nothing the past 15 years.

Needless to say, I had become a bit risk adverse. But here was the kicker: I didn't know it until recently. (A planned trip to Chicago and a conversation with a good friend made it clear...)

So...I decided to make a few changes. (Ok...that's not quite accurate. In fairness, it was change precipitated by the Providential prodding of the Almighty to get off my royal duff.)

You see, I liked having all the answers and knowing what came next. And though I had many opportunities to "jump ship", I unwittingly looked at my own grass and found it to be a lovely shade of emerald. Why leave for new lawn when your own doesn't look too bad? While I believe there are many folks to whom the "grass is always greener on the other side" allegory holds firm, I was one of the poor fellows who instead struggled with the concept of striking whilst the iron was hot.

Change was needed. More so was the need to understand this need.

For me, the requisite metamorphosis began with the completion of my MBA -- where the staff at Cornerstone University (<-- click to see video), along with some well-placed instruction at the writings of Thomas Friedman (The World is Flat), Peter Drucker (Innovation and Entrepreneurship), and the duo of Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgne (Blue Ocean Strategy) opened my eyes to things outside the realm of current experience.

(Disclaimer regarding these books: I felt that two of the three works -- Drucker withstanding -- had significant portions of Pollyanna-ish pandering that either were too simplistic/optimistic, or drew conclusions based on narrow research...OR both. Still solid books with many good observations/assertions. Just not "perfect" by any stretch.)

Simultaneous to the conclusion of my graduate program came the realization that -- though my efforts at work were appreciated by my peers locally and throughout the State, they were devalued significantly by our organizational leadership (almost all of which started after I did). So...I made a change -- and believe that it the hand of the Father in doing so.

In this change, I quickly discovered that I did not know a ton of things in my new role -- even though the new digs were something I was familiar with. Still, I now was the low man on the totem pole in terms of knowing what the heck was going on around me. I often did not have the answers, had to consult several others before deciding on a course of action, and was unsure of myself for the first time in many, many moons.

And though I feared this change in many ways, I was caught unaware by something I had not foreseen.

What revelation had gripped me?

In summary, that...it's ok.

It's ok to not know all the answers.
It's ok to be new.
It's ok to have to rely (heavily) on the expertise of others (though "trust and verify" will always be ingrained in my DNA).
It's ok to take a chance on something different.

And at the end of the first month, the fear and trepidation which kept me tied to the familiar had actually done me a great disservice. I had to relearn what it was like to be new at something, and what it was like to begin creating green grass where I was at. Also, I had new requirements of me replacing the repetitive autonomy that greeted me each day. These things are good in that they prepare you to be flexible to others and to lead even when you're unsure of what's going on. (Good leaders need to be vulnerable -- but that's a topic for another day.)

The summation of this blog is that many people who approach the winter of their life have regrets (as I know I will someday). But they do not say things like, "Gee...I wish I would have made more money" or "...stayed in that job" or "...been less risky". From the conversations I've had with those reaching retirement age, the number one theme I hear is that they regret not having taken a chance on something they "always wanted to do" while they were in the prime of their lives.

Well...this step off my comfortable confines is doing the same thing for me -- and moving me in a new direction that could hold all kinds of change for the future. As a bonus, I also get to learn that -- in spite of my inadequacies and mistakes -- it's all ok.

Here's a great quote that I'll leave you with attributed to Benjamin Franklin:

"All mankind is divided into three classes: those that are immovable, those that are movable, and those that move."

Pondering Good Leaders

noreply@blogger.com (A Common Man) — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 11:00:00 +0000

After a rather busy stretch of work, I'm finally able to take a break and post some of last week's thoughts on this, my day off.

One of the books I started reading was John Maxwell's 21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader. It's a bit odd, really, that I'm reading no less than 3 books at present: JRR Tolkien's Fellowship of the Ring for the past few weeks to the kids (with all my voice characterizations as I go), and a 2-book series entitled: Gemworld by John Vorholt. And...this doesn't include the books on CD I'm listening to as I commute the 46 miles to and from my work. Scary...I don't think of myself as a reader.

The Maxwell book begins with a rather unique preface extolling the reader to make it a book to ponder through. It would be an otherwise easy read and could be consumed in one sitting. But Maxwell asks the reader not to take that approach, and instead slowly digest each chapter as you feel your way through the book topic by topic. Apparantly one of Maxwell's friends did this while leading their company with his hallmark 21 Indisputable Laws of Leadership book -- purposefully considering each "law" and it's application through the week.

So that's where I began with chapter 1...about "Character". There were some damning ideas in there as to the person I've been in my life (and an encounter with the wife later the same day I read Chapter 1 did nothing to assuage my own critical opinions of self). We can all look at our past and dwell on the times where we've displayed anything other than the qualities of integrity, humility, faithfulness, etc. But the point of the chapter -- to be a person of character as the first indispensible quality of a leader -- is one that I otherwise feel pretty good about. (This chapter can be found electronically here.)

[Rant on]At this point, I'd like to do a quick side rant about John Maxwell. In my opinion, he's a smart guy and who has surrounded himself with smart people. But I despise anything that comes to a nice, neat number. If the first "21" book didn't raise the question, matching the number on the 2nd book certainly reinforced my annoyance that there was at least as much marketing awareness in the scribing of his tome as there was about Indispensability. Another annoyance is Maxwell's penchant to convey his ideas that seem to be "pre-conceived opinion that he looks to invoke into his material" rather than genuine observation born out of extensive research.[Rant off]

All that said, I know he's done more thinking and study on the topic of Leadership than most anyone else, and I do (generally) appreciate the challenge of reading through his materials. More times than not, I agree with his observations and am certainly appreciative of his work.

Now...this is a long-winded introduction to the musing that was spurred on by my foray into Maxwell's op-ed on the qualities of a leader. As I sat in my office (so glad to not be in a cube!), I meandered through the leaders that I thought were very solid.

As the names floated by, I was surprised to discover a common thread: 3/4ths of the best leaders I've known were women.

My first thought was, "Wow...I'm getting hungry." (It was late in the day.)

My next thought (which actually coincides with this journal and less with my desire to dine) was, "Why women? And what are the traits of these leaders that stand out? What are some of those things I admire and strive to attain?"

Juxtaposed against this revelation was the next realization: that some of the worst leaders I've known have also been women.

So my musing was engaged in earnest as I considered why there were more excellent female leaders than male leaders in my experience.

The first epiphany was the ability of the excellent women leaders to be able to keep their eyes on so many balls. The female leaders I've known have been able to effectively keep their mind on everything that needs to be attended to without losing focus. The old generality/adage about women being able to multitask seemed to be in play. Compared to many men, I feel I do this well. Compared against these women who were excellent leaders, I pretty much suck. So it is a trait that I admire.

Prioritization was the next idea that came to the fore. Even though leaders have a responsibility to focus on several concerns simultaneously, they cannot all take the same level of priority. The leaders that did a great job of prioritization were able to see through the dust of rabid activity and ferret out the critical from the mundane. This quality was certainly the sibling of multitasking, though quite different. Being able to keep many balls airborne is a gift in itself, but being able to provide the right amount of thrust correlated to the weight of each suspended orb is of even greater value. And in my experience, women do this better than men.

The final consideration I had was the communication abilities of leaders. Now, I consider myself to be an excellent communicator -- meaning that I not only speak effectively, but also listen well (when not multitasking!). However, the individuals that I greatly admire for their effective communication are almost ALWAYS women. It's not just the effective ability to speak, it's the intuition with which they gauge the listener -- or audience -- and modify their message accordingly. While there can be great male speakers, very few seem to be able to modulate their approach as necessary. It's like there's a stronger connection with who they are and what their message is than there is a need to communicate in a way that the receiver will be able to envelop.

As I shared some of these thoughts with Mrs. Musings, she proposed another area of admiration that I was neglecting. Female leaders do a better job of caring for those under their purview than do male leaders. She attributed it to the concept of women looking out for their own as they are (generally) naturally-wired nurturers. I paused on this, and slowly came to agreement. One of the benchmarks of solid leadership is to examine the followers. Do they feel like they're being taken care of? Are they in touch with the direction they are being led? Do they feel like they can approach the leader with anything? After considering the male vs. female leaders I've known, I had to proffer agreement with the premise of her supposition. (That's a fancy way to say, "She was right!" without really having to admit it.)

The last addition -- also credited to Mrs. Musings -- was the idea of affirmation. In my experience, women are better at ensuring their followers are affirmed than are men. Thinking about that, I realized that affirmation isn't a one-size-fits-all crown that can be gifted to anyone. It's a tailor-made hat that uniquely fits its wearer, whether its a top hat, a ball cap, or a fedora. The key ingredient is that it reflects the individuality of the affirmed. And in my experience, the leaders who have best accomplished this are from Venus, while we Martians still have a lot to learn. ("Take me to your leader" anyone??)

All this said, the worst leaders I've known have also been women. Without the long diatribe, the common threads I've experienced are: micro-managing/controlling, manipulative, overly assertive, bullying, unforgiving, imposingly critical and self-absorbed. These are "leaders" who want it their way -- and don't want you in their way.

So...on my experiential "bell curve" of leadership, I think men occupy the "near average" area, while women occupy the "plus-or-minus-2-standard-deviations-from-the-mean" tails. (This is not to say that I've ne'er encountered some excellent male leaders. But their commonality is the military -- which puts more purposeful focus on leadership than any organization I've known. Again -- a musing for another day.)

What this thesis doesn't account for is pretty obvious: Me. There are replete opportunities where the (very) strong women in my life have prepared/damaged me to hold the unique receptors to female leadership that may taint my perspectives. (Just admitting that seems like it holds less sway than it would otherwise...)

But these are my musing for today, and if you're a good female leader -- be it at work, church or home -- then good on ya!

Satisfaction with Cuts

noreply@blogger.com (A Common Man) — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 15:30:00 +0000

One of my many musings is about the migration of our society from agrarian to urban. A less-populated America was based solidly in the country with reliance on the city for tradesmen, few merchants and even fewer degreed professionals. Metropolitan hubs held less influence, and everyone was a bit more thankful for their daily bread.

If you stretched a bit of Tolkien's allegory, Hobbits could be inferred to represent a society that used-to-be. A love of good-tilled earth. Food and drink. Playing games and jesting. This could be an apt description of a people all but gone from the landscape of today's heritage where corporate farms do more to feed us than the labor of families. The simple folk who worked hard and died old were dependent on the land, the weather, and ultimately -- their God -- for every iota of their existence...and provided subsistence for those that would find their employ anywhere but the farm.

Over the past 30 years, this transition has occurred. We've become amazingly efficient agriculturally. The work of 100 families can be done by 15 laborers with better technology and machinery today. These are good things. But what's been lost?

For one, people believe that there is no need to rely on anything but themselves. Farming communities were just that: Communities. People that help each other, know each other, fight with each other, love each other. But the topic of community would be better explored another day. It is but one of the considerations of things lost.

Another is the ease with which we dismiss these essential elements in allowing us to meander after our own pursuits. The suburbanites of today exist with the only worries about what to do with their next paycheck and the upcoming weekend. The gains in agricultural productivity have afforded an even greater number in our society who can instead invest time in the study of every possible distraction without giving thought to their next meal. As such, many have become jaded towards the same foundational reliance upon good labor, good land and good weather for their existence. Most importantly, it's allowed us to forget the existence of a Creator who provide for us.

So what does this all have to do with cuts?

This past weekend, I spent a considerable amount of time in trying to hunt for deer, for preparing my tractor for the winter, cutting down dead trees and fallen branches, cutting down a tree for Christmas, and in cleaning out a large shed I built with my own hands. I look at my hands now -- which have been in the soil, sawdust, oil, dirt, pine tar -- and see cuts. Lots of them. All but one of them came without my knowing it. A half-dozen scars on my hands with immovable darkness in the crevasses of my fingers that will only come out in time.

And it feels good.

It is satisfying to be able to look at the individual work of my hands. To know that THIS is a reflection of the Creator who gives me these opposable digits for use in things that go beyond the comfort of a computer, and sheltered office and a chair. It serves as a reminder to me that every endeavor of meaning comes with some bloodshed -- and that my very comfort is purchased with the sacrifice of others that raise food so I don't have to.

Most importantly, it is reminder that is only an arms-length away.

It reminds me that in the deluge of efficiency, the simplest of things can be forgone and forgotten. It reminds me that when we strip away all of our machinery and technology, all of our education and current philosophies, all of the trivialities, trials and tribulations of our lives today, we are still dependent -- all of us -- on Maslow's base-level physiological hierarchy.

Faith in things unseen -- like that we're still relying on good labor, good land, good weather, and the Love of a good God to provide. Whether we see it or not, it is there. Without it, pretty much everything else would not matter.

And in this reminder, I take great satisfaction in these cuts of my labor-worn hands.

Why 'Musings of a Common Man'?

noreply@blogger.com (A Common Man) — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 02:26:00 +0000

After considering this for many months, I've finally decided to take the plunge and begin a blog. There are a number of meandering thoughts behind this choice, some of which include:

Why blog instead of using some other online social networking gizmo (Facebook, My Space, Xanga, Windows Live Spaces, etc.)?
Who will read this crazy thing?
Is there a moral imperative that requires online journaling vs. the good old 'pen-n-ink' variety?
Why choose the title 'Musings of a Common Man'?
What's on for consideration here?

Well...here are the answers as I see them.

First, I've tried MySpace and frankly, got sick of the sexual overtones of every freekin' advertisment -- as well as the lame and goofy things that folks do to each other in terms of jokes, posting things, profiling tests of every unsubstantiated and imaginable kind, etc. Facebook is only slightly better. Yes...they both have their ups and downs, and if you like it -- knock yourself out! I like seeing your updates and lurking about. But for me, I really don't want to post the latest pictures of my [(fill in the blank)], nor have 50-gazillion friends that provide updates in lieu of real relationship. And more than anything, that's the crux of the real problem I have with social networking. It has some of the "feel" of relationship without any of the risk...or reward.

Who will read my musings? Probably only the folks that I tell about it -- unless I post some real gem (or insight into the endlessly cavernous depths of my stupidity) that goes viral.

About the moral imperative, it's this simple: I'm lazy. I don't like scribing by hand -- especially when I can type almost 100 words per minute. ("WPM" for those acronymically gifted.) So the only thing "moral" about this is that I don't journal, and would like to expend a bit of energy writing some of my thoughts down. There are many that I have that I'd like to reference later. So referring to the previous question, one person who will read my musings is...me.

As for the title of this little blog, it is my dream to write a book by the same title (c) This Author - 2008 through the end of 2099. I believe there are common ideas that are held by others, and these ideas are not so much revolutionary as they are dismissed. We often have ideas and thoughts throughout our day that never make it to publication. And the mind has one problem as pointed out in the Disney flick, "The Navigator": It leaks. For example, I know I had a great thought on Saturday (yesterday) that for the life of me is now but diluted vapor. Perhaps this little tool will help me out a bit.

As for the 'menu' of this blog, it's pretty simple: Life. In America. With emerging thoughts on a global scale. Spiritual. Focusing on leadership. And follower-ship. But not ship ships -- suken or otherwise. The blog will be a solid PG -- no swearing and little inappropriate language. But some of the content should involve parental oversight.

So...if you have stumbled across this blog then strap yourself in. It could be of no use to you whatsoever. For my dear readers who know me, your interested may be piqued about as much as an interesting info-mercial. Then again, maybe not. As much as anything, it's a place to keep my thoughts, for they are but...

...Musings...of a Common Man.