Evomend - Timeless resources.

Thoroughly honest cheating

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Mon, 19 May 2008 08:00:00 +0000

Not much is allowed in Wembley © David CurranWe're suspicious of people who don't abide by the rules.

They're no team players. It's hard to accomplish something together. They cop out when the going gets tough. They're evasive They don't address any issues. They're cheating, lying and betraying, from dusk 'till dawn.

Really?

About 2,300 years ago

...Alexander the Great was facing an intriguing challenge: the Gordian Knot. He was well aware of its history and the prophecy associated with it:

At one time the Phrygians were without a legitimate king. An oracle at Telmissus [...] decreed that the next man to enter the city driving an ox-cart should become their king. This man was a poor peasant, Ahmidas son of Gordias, who drove his parents into town on his father's ox-cart. [...]

In gratitude, he dedicated the ox-cart to the Phrygian god Sabazios and either tied it to a post or tied its shaft with an intricate knot of cornel (Cornus mas) bark. An oracle further prophesied that the one to untie the knot would become the king of Asia (today's Asia Minor).
(From Wikipedia)

The rules of the game seemed to be clear. Nobody was able to untie the knot, however. Except for Alexander. His solution: he sliced the knot in half with a stroke of his sword.

Wasn't that cheating, to the extreme?

Well... would twiddling the threads have convinced anybody of his leadership skills? Would it have shocked the Persian king? Or was that stroke of the sword an important, even necessary part of the solution? A clear message by a person who could tell the essential from the insignificant?

Think about it: By how many rules do you abide that don't get you anywhere? Rules that move your goals beyond reach? Rules that were designed to disorient you?

515 years ago

Columbus was dining with many Spanish nobles when one of them said: «Sir Christopher, even if your lordship had not discovered the Indies, there would have been, here in Spain which is a country abundant with great men knowledgeable in cosmography and literature, one who would have started a similar adventure with the same result.»

Columbus did not respond to these words but asked for a whole egg to be brought to him. He placed it on the table and said: «My lords, I will lay a wager with any of you that you are unable to make this egg stand on its end like I will do without any kind of help or aid.»

They all tried without success and when the egg returned to Columbus, he tapped it gently on the table breaking it slightly and, with this, the egg stood on its end. All those present were confounded and understood what he meant: that once the feat has been done, anyone knows how to do it.
(From Wikipedia)

Not a big deal? Was Columbus cheating?

Or is it rather what Mór Jókai summarized like this: «Research means to see what everybody else is seeing, but to think what no one else has been thinking before.»?

Think about it: Which rules keep your thinking in a box? Can you tell games from reality? Where would you need to take a step back, in order to see you are trapped in a game that follows certain rules?

145 years ago

Europeans don't get baseball. People in the US don't get soccer. So, just for my personal amusement, let me vex you with the soccer rule of the offside.

Actually, it is pretty simple. As a soccer player, you're not allowed to hang about directly in front of your opponent's goal, get passed the ball and score. That would be too simple. When you get passed the ball, there must be at least one field player of the other team between you and the goal. Such are the rules.

And they're pretty old as well:

As football developed in the 1860s and 1870s, the offside law proved the biggest argument between the clubs. Sheffield got rid of the «kick throughs» by amending their laws so that one member of the defending side was required between a forward player and the opponent's goal; the Football Association also compromised slightly and adopted the Cambridge idea of three. (From Wikipedia)

Now imagine you're a clever field player, paying attention to always have an opponent's field player between you and the goal, in order not to be offside when you get passed the ball.

All of a sudden, the opponent's team runs away from their own goal, as one, and you end up alone there, like a fish left dry by the low tide. It happened the very second one of your teammates was passing the ball to you. You've guessed it by now: you're now offside. This «low tide» strategy is aptly called the offside trap.

Well... that's not what the original offside rule was meant for, is it? Quite nasty exploitation of that rule, isn't it?

Think about it: Which rules have been made up against you but can be used for your benefit? Don't always look for legal loopholes only. Instead, figure out where the rules also apply, even unexpectedly.

20 years ago

In 1986, on what seemed like just another training day, Jan Bokloev was in serious trouble. He had to master a challenge within a fraction of a second, otherwise he'd stall at full speed and crash into the ground. Which is never very funny, especially when you're a ski jumper like Jan.

Bokloev said goodbye to elegance («Parallel skis! Parallel skis!») and spread wide open his skiers so they formed a V-shape. He avoided the crash. And he was dazzled to find out that he could even jump farther this way.

The experts didn't like this V-style at all. They said it looked ghastly. And as judges, they reduced Jan's style score points heavily, in every competition. But Bokloev didn't give up. After two years of practice, he could jump farther than anybody else. And since scoring was based both on style and distance, he started to win. Today, all top ski jumpers in the world rely on the V-style.

Well... Bokloev jumped so far that style simply didn't matter that much anymore, as a criterion. Did he game the system?

Think about it: Do you give in to Naysayers too much? Do you suffer from a system of beliefs like this one: «1. We have never done it that way! 2. We have always done it that way! 3. Who do you think you are!»

Last year

Do you know Tim Ferriss? He ran a bet that he could win a medal at the national Chinese kickboxing championships. And he won.

Not by kickboxing, though. Weigh-ins were the day prior to competition. By dehydration, he lost about 28 pound before that. The night before the matches, he hyperhydrated back to 193 pounds. He simply hustled his opponents off the mat.

Unsportsmanlike? At least, there is a lot of Tim-bashing, like here.

Think about it: Which traditional rules do not actually make sense? Wich ones have gigantic loopholes? «Everything popular is wrong», says Oscar Wilde. Is it really abuse of a well-aged rule or is that rule just crude, despite its age?

Today, at your place?

What do you think about bending rules creatively, for your own benefit? Tell us in a comment below!

Why we clutter

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Tue, 06 May 2008 07:41:55 +0000

VANITY TOYS charm bracelet (detail) © briserisvegliWhy is it so hard to keep a place or a room free of clutter? Why do empty surfaces fill up with clutter, instantly? Why do items start to gather at the very places we've just cleaned a moment ago, as if moved by a ghost's hand?

It's about more than just clearing and cleaning.

When we clean places up, we want to believe we're creating free space. However, we're just creating a vacuum. What's the difference?

Horror Vacui

A vacuum is free space minus meaning. This makes a vacuum suck in, instantly, the meanings and the hodgepodge of others - we simply can't stand any vacuum for a prolonged time, because the horror vacui would seize our minds, refusing to let go. Wikipedia defines it like this:

In philosophy the horror vacui stands for a theory initially proposed by Aristotle stating that nature «fears» empty space. Therefore empty space would always be trying to suck in gas or liquids to avoid being empty.

Well, how do you give meaning to a vacuum, then? How can we turn it into free space? Alternatively: how do we discover the meaning that we couldn't spot so far?

Downsize it

The smaller a free space is, the less likely we mistake it for a vacuum. Unfortunately, our Lilliputian view of the world is colliding here with John Maeda's Sixth Law of Simplicity:

«What lies in the periphery of simplicity is deﬁnitely not peripheral.»

Consider this law, for a moment. The free space around the buttons of an iPod actually belongs to those buttons. Only Paris Hilton would demand that some Swarovski crystals be glued to it.

That window sill under the vase holding a single flower actually belongs to that flower, and most of the time, we leave it empty. That wall holding a simple painting belongs to that painting - however, we can rarely stand to attribute this meaning to it and to leave it completely free. The bigger a free space is, the more peripheral and unused it looks, to us.

It's easier to preserve several small free spaces than a single, big one.

Live in Abundance 2.0

The shorter free space stays free, the less likely it is mistaken for a vacuum. For human beings, the longest piece of free space is their lives, which makes us vulnerable to the biggest of all vacuums, the existential one:

there is more and more evidence that our feeling of meaninglessness is spreading further and further. (...) When I get asked to explain the origin of this existential vacuum, I'm always offering the following abstract: Opposed to animals, man can't count on instincts to tell him what he must do. And opposed to his ancestors, he lacks the traditions to tell him what he should do. Knowing neither what he must do nor what he should do, he seems to become insecure about what he really wants.
Viktor Frankl (1905-1997), Man's Search for Meaning

We're trying to fill this existential vacuum with sense and meaning. Objects lend themselves readily here because when they're big and expensive they seem to be, quite literally, larger than life:

I'm on my way I'm making it, huh!
I've got to make it show yeah, hey!
So much larger than life
I'm gonna watch it growing
Hey hey hey hey
The place where I come from is a small town
They think so small, they use small words
But not me, I'm smarter than that,
I worked it out
I'll be stretching my mouth to let those big words come right out

I've had enough, I'm getting out
to the city, the big big city
I'll be a big noise with all the big boys, so much stuff I will own
And I will pray to a big god, as I kneel in the big church

Peter Gabriel, Big Time

Of course, we don't have that much space at home, so our expensive errands end up being not even status symbols - they lack the free space around them that could turn them into something special.

Focus on your dreams of doing something and being (learning) something, not on having something. Learn to cherish the free space in your home as a means to help you do more and be more of what you want, because there is less ballast that could stop you. Specialize on Abundance 2.0, as Clay Collins over at The Growing Life called it:

Abundance 2.0 means that you live a radically authentic life, be radically true to yourself, get paid for being you, quit the things you need to quit, and still have enough materials possessions to be happy and make your family happy. Abundance 2.0 is what happens when your life is so great that the private jet just isn’t necessary.

Look closer. From farer away.

Aniu, qanikcaq, qanisqineq, nutaryuk, qetrar, muruaneq.

Got it?

These are 6 Inuit words for what we call snow. It all depends on whether the snow is on the floor, drifting on the water, just fell, has a snow crust or still looks like a powder pond.

The more intense our mind investigates a vacuum, the more often it finally recognizes a free space it couldn't see before. By observing more closely, we learn to spot patterns, to create meaning by applying them and to find words for them so we can talk to others about them.

A plain is not just a plain is not just a plain. Not every square inch is just an available square inch, an evidence of poor use of available space. Free space can have a meaning that only your intuition may be able to discover.

Consider, for example, dead courtyard surrounded by walls on all sides, with no porch or halfway space between the indoors and the outdoors, and with no more than one path leading into it.
In this place, the forces are in conflict. People want to go out, but their timidity, which makes them seek a place halfway to the outdoors, prevents them.

They want to stay out, but the claustrophobic quality, and the enclosure, sends them back inside again. They hope to be there, but the lack of paths across the courtyard make it a dead and rarely visited place, which does not beckon them, and which instead tends to be filled with dead leaves, and forgotten plants. This does not help them come to life - instead it only causes tension, and frustrates them, and perpetuates their conflicts.

Christopher Alexander, The Timeless Way of Building

Make it come alive

What's the difference between a bottom covering and a carpet? A bottom covering is a futile attempt to hide a vacuum. Because it is just a covering, it does not provide meaning. It is the continuation of vacuum by other means, a plastic tarp covering a dead body, not actually hiding anything but rather screaming Crime Scene! Crime Scene! out of every fold.

The more alive free space looks like, the less likely it is mistaken for a vacuum.

A carpet is a flushing meadow amidst the desert sands. It does not form a real barrier, but still creates a garden. It is strange: the closer the carpet extends to all walls, the less lively this garden feels like, no matter what imagery the carpet contains.

Don't hide something, but change it. Turn a vacuum into a flushing meadow. Replace a bottom covering by a carpet. Turn your sanitary facility into a bathroom. Instead of just preparing food in a kitchenette learn to say, practice and live cuisine.

My home is not a place, it is people.
Lois McMaster Bujold

More reasons why people clutter?

Do you know more reasons why people clutter? Add a comment, below!

Mentioned here...

Why projects fail

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 07:09:50 +0000

Brick wall © Les ChatfieldWhy are Projects so hard? Why do we fail here so often, even in workplaces featuring thorough planning and highly disciplined execution?

We do not fail despite, but because of these. We believe that turning a project into a success is like baking a pizza, while in fact, it resembles much more creating a pizza recipe.

Why? In our projects, we're not into producing identical results from identical ingredients. Every project is unique - it is like research & development, not like production. In R & D, diversity of results is what we strive for. In production, diversity is our worst enemy. We should be aware of this, however, we're making the same 4 mistakes, over and over again:

Mistake #1: We favor processes and tools over individuals and interaction

Hey, something that is both expensive and complicated can't be wrong, can it? Plus, it is comfortable and reassuring to use and do in projects what everybody else uses and does. Projects are as simple as having an input being transformed by a process into an output, case closed.

However, pizza, perfumes and beer share a common trait: ingredients and production are specified in painstaking detail. Customers expect the very same results having the very same level of quality, all the time. That's why processes may be a company secret, but never creative.

We're stunned and dazzled whenever we witness such frictionless operations. If this thinking works like a charm for the assembly line, it can't be wrong for our project, can it? So, lets define our processes and have our work certified according to ISO 9000 standards. It'll make our day.

Wrong. There are no work instructions that can guarantee creativity, competence and team spirit. Even a streamlined pizza factory would grind to a halt if it weren't for the human «lubricant» covering its process chain. As a matter of fact, work to rule is a guaranteed way to bring everything down.

Have you noticed how many rules and regulations are just fears that have become manifest in paper? Fears like: They won't be able to do their job well without instructions. Our results will not meet our quality standards without this. When they lack a handbook, newbies may not be able to become productive quickly enough....

Face your fears. Establish a project culture where fears can and will be discussed and made obsolete by everyday, low-tech behavior, instead of erecting monuments of regulations in their honor. Start small and «infect» others, turn team spirit into an epidemic!

You're on the right path when you feel your team is starting to morph from a partnership of convenience into The Three Musketeers. When you encounter problems, resist the impulse of raising your «defensive shields». You're not Captain Kirk on the Enterprise, offering just a meager «communication channel» to a Klingon opponent.

Mistake #2: We behave as if comprehensive documentation trumped a working, fit-for-use result

Analyze! Analyze! Analyze! Only after all requirements have been captured and fully understood we can start to implement the result. Every document is a milestone, isn't it?

Wrong. analysis.doc never crashes. A prototype may, on the other hand.

Consider the meaning of good enough in the course of your project. Documents defined as milestones can become millstones tied to your feet. It is an utter waste of money and time to give more attention to documentation than to the results that you want to achieve. Documentation exists to enable people to go ahead. Once long chapters and impressive diagrams have become more important than communication in your team, you're in trouble.

Try early what may harbor hidden risks. Learn faster by failing earlier. If your documents and diagrams look battered after their contact with reality, make that contact more often. If it hurts, do it more often.

Mistake #3: We prefer contract poker to customer collaboration

As a customer, are you familiar with the following situation? On every minor change request, the project manager starts to re-calculate costs. Better bring a lawyer to the table if you depend on any type of guarantee, you need a painstakingly precise contract for work and materials. Once you've signed it, you're sitting in a golden cage, being entitled to exactly what you needed - half a year ago. Any change request must pass the arid lands of the Change Board; in the meantime, stuff gets implemented and billed that you don't need anymore. Since you probably can't justify this in front of your boss, you start covering your a... and archive every single tiny email - you never know...

As a member of a project team, are you familiar with the following situation? Customers never know what they want. However, you can never get them to pay just for your services. Contracts for time and materials are a no-no, they want work and materials, to be able to tell you, afterwards: «Oh, by the way: you've already accounted for some minor favors when you calculated your offer, for sure.» Say NO to any request and they'll escalate it up to a level where the hourly rates of the people involved exceed what you're making in a whole month. In the end, the customer gets his will, anyway. A huge part of your day is eaten up by maintenance of the infamous Excel sheet listing all requirement changes. In any given situation, whether it's analysis.doc or changes.xls that you need to follow, well, only god knows. Of course, every little change stresses your budget and puts all deadlines at a growing risk, but the customer doesn't (want to) see it...

Why isn't the customer part of your team?

Mistake #4: We rather follow a plan than respond to change

In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.
(Dwight D. Eisenhower)

What can you do to keep a project on track? Four classical levers are time, money, quality and scope. If you want to adjust them all at your will, you're going to fail. The longer you consider the issue, the more you'll realize that talking about scope is the only way to go. Using the scope lever turns change into your friend, for customers and project teams alike.

Why, then, do people talk so obsessively about time, money and quality, instead? Because a compromise about any of these can only be achieved at the expense of one of the parties involved. That's why people like plans so much: everybody gave their best and found a so-called agreement in the shape of a plan - alas, plans, you know...

As a matter of fact, it wasn't their best when every change results in an avalanche of follow-up changes, vexing everybody and turning «change» into a synonym for «root canal treatment».

Embrace change! Embrace it. It's not about change containment, it's about welcoming it. Change isn't the problem, but ritual belief in invariable plans is.

Stay agile!

It is hard not to believe in the common wisdom about what works for project management. Especially when it's expensive, clumsy and slow (rather perverted criteria for pro work environments at the state of the art, if you ask me).

Instead, stay agile! Focus on individuals and interaction, fit-to-use results over extensive documentation, customer collaboration and on responding to change. Everything else is an optional means.

What's your opinion? Please write a comment, below!

I highly recommend these helpful books if this posting made you curious:

Destiny or Self-Determination? Square of Quotations No. 1

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 07:07:26 +0000

This is the start of a new series: Squares of Quotations. Every posting will focus on the balance between two good things and on their respective exaggerations (see info box below).

Today's topic: Destiny or Self-Determination?

Lots of attitudes we find annoying (in others as well as in ourselves) are maybe just exaggerations of an element of truth. When we give such an attitude a closer look, we feel that there is simply a need for a counterbalancing attitude.

As soon as we feel annoyed by how another person behaves, we might as well look for the element of truth in it and show our appreciation for it. That will make it easier to suggest a counterbalancing behavior, in order to highlight a path of improvement.

Of course one can also exaggerate the counterbalancing element of truth, possibly in an attempt to compensate for what was found to be too extreme, in the first place. Obviously, such an overcompensation isn't helpful either.

Two elements of truth plus their respective exaggerations form a square of values, describing paths of positive development. The concept of a Square of Values was first described by Paul Helwig (unfortunately, link in German only). Later, Friedemann Schulz von Thun extended it to include paths of positive developments, too. Only the form of a Square of Quotations is my own invention.

Self-Determination versus Destiny

«If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right.»

Henry Ford
(1863-1947)

«God, give us grace to accept with serenity the things that cannot be changed, courage to change the things that should be changed, and the wisdom to distinguish the one from the other.»

Reinhold Niebuhr
(1892-1971)

«What the mind of man can conceive and believe, It can achieve.»

Napoleon Hill
(1883-1970)

«Fate rules the affairs of mankind with no recognizable order.»

Seneca
(5 v. Chr. - 65 n. Chr.)

What are your thoughts on this? Please leave a comment!

Ask the reader: what is your most timeless self-development problem?

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 07:12:37 +0000

Cyril the squirrel up for a challenge © Brian SnelsonYou've been there, I bet! There's a problem that just refuses to be solved. As a matter of fact, your workarounds didn't really «work around» that problem. Sometimes, you're able to find a solution like a service or a product that will do the job. Alas, all of a sudden, the service or the product gets discontinued. Even worse: vendors and providers decide to split it up, into Scylla and Charybdis, oops: Classic and Premium. You've experienced the consequences: endless footnotes attached to suspiciously low prices, imposing limitation after limitation on you. All of that fine print tortures first your eyesight and in the second place your patience. Say goodbye to comparing offers and prices...

On this blog, I'm into discovering and describing timeless solutions for self-development problems. I've got some questions for you:

What are your timeless self-development and organization problems?
Did some solutions turn out to be Pyrrhic victories?
What is your toughest nut to crack, that obnoxious problem you'd like to see covered by a blog posting, here?

Please answer in a comment - I'll pick the toughest challenges and turn them into postings on this blog!

3 steps to your Personal Mission Statement

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:32:59 +0000

Lipstick © Simon EvansDo you need what Stephen R. Covey calls a «Personal Mission Statement»? What for?

Let's leave aside what companies or political parties want to tell you about their so-called mission. Compared to these, drafting a Personal Mission Statement (and updating it from time to time) can be real fun. If you do it well, the statement will give you

Orientation: What are the values that guide your life?
Identity: How can you unfold your personality in a world that gets more chaotic, every day?
Decision support: What should you stick with when you find yourself in a complicated situation?
Sound relationships: What can other people expect of you?

How do you draft a great Personal Mission Statement? After some thinking, I arrived at a simple set of criteria. My statement shall be

relevant and positive. My statement must have meaning now and here for me, not in a perfect but distant future or for mankind (whoever that may be) in general. I want inspiration for today and tomorrow instead of control after the event. My statement shall foster my independent thinking, it must not block it or drown it in clichés.
universal. I just don't need separate statements for work, at home, relatives, neighborhood, dog, etc.. In addition, my statement should be attractive for others, too, not just because I like Kant's categorical imperative, but also because it's a simple lesson to be learned by everybody that you can't always have your will at the expense of others without tying up resources (and ultimately wasting them and the time you could have invested more productively).
suitable for daily use. I want a personal mission statement that both allows for making compromises and establishing constraints for them. I'm not a slave to fundamentalisms, looking forward to flagellate myself for not being able to satisfy inhuman demands. On the other hand, I'm not looking for fluffy paragraphs that will never ever provoke any conflict.
short. My statement must fit onto a single page. I'm not going to change it every week, but it must lend itself to be changed at any time, anywhere. You can't do this with a novel.

Well, what does that mean, in practice? How do I arrive at such a personal mission statement? Let's consider three steps:

Determine the structure
Finding your values
Determine principles from your values

Step 1: Determine the structure

There is no standard template for mission statements, but some proven approaches. Unfortunately, they mostly deal with issues that only companies are facing.

I'm quite sure that two sections are enough:

Values - your individual, written decisions about your criteria on what is good and what is bad for you and the culture you live in (I said bad, not evil).
There is no place here for any «if» or «but». Conflicts about trade offs and clashes among values will be inevitable, but they shall not become part of your list of values.
Principles - guidelines you will follow when you choose your behavior for various domains of your life, according to your values.
In general, «principle» is defined rather as a rule you think you can't violate without making your values suffer. To me, this view is too lopsided - principles that only forbid things aren't sufficient.
Nor is a principle a strategy, a «long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal», as Wikipedia defines strategy. Principles are meant to establish values in your daily life and to protect them. This is an ongoing mode of living, not a goal.

These two sections ought to be sufficient for giving your actions a stable base. Of course, there are mission statements that include visions, goals, roles or even desirable behavior, too. In my view, however, such items wouldn't fit my criteria for a universal and short statement - I'd need to modify it more often and it would hardly fit onto a single page.

Step 2: Finding your values

I've already written about direct and indirect pathways to your values, so I'm just listing them here:

Consider admiration
Consider roles
Consider dreams
Consider moments of flow
Consider moments of happiness
Consider confrontations
Consider sarcasm
Consider paranoia
Consider manias
Consider pain

As an example, when I do that, values like simplicity, respect and learning come to my mind, among others. Let's do a quick check: yes, they're all relevant, positive, universal, suitable for daily use and short. Which values come to your mind?

Step 3: Determine principles from your values

Principles aren't platitudes. A platitude is a statement nobody having a little common sense would deny. Principles, on the other hand, are debatable, I guess precisely because they must already be applicable to a concrete domain of living.

«Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.»
Groucho Marx

Assuming the values simplicity, respect and learning: how can you obtain principles that guide your choice of actions and means in life?

To me, situations are key. Each one is unique. Most of them, and this is the strange part, are also familiar. This is why I can walk two paths to my principles: the path of the unknown and the path of the familiar.

The Unknown, or: the power of If I had only...

Review a couple of situations when you were really caught off guard. Situations when you did not behave according to your values. Situations that made you think (afterwards) «If I had only...»

Under unexpected circumstances, what did you do that violated, e.g., simplicity, respect or learning?

Did a brand new gadget offer drown out your desire for simplicity, even though you knew you already own a similar device that serves your needs quite well?
Have you been serviced so badly in your favorite restaurant that you felt you couldn't help but fire disrespectful remarks at the waitress?
Knowing you were wrong, did you still feel the need to force your will upon a colleague, instead of acknowledging your mistake and learning from her?

Which principles could have helped you to avoid this? Thinking about the situations I just described, the following examples of principles come to my mind:

One in, one out.
I'm adopting the principle of buying something new only as a replacement for something old. I shall either donate, sell or throw away the older thing, immediately.
Attack the problem, not the person.
I'm adopting the principle of thinking clearly about what exactly is the problem that is disturbing me. I shall communicate precisely the problem, and only the problem.
Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.
I'm adopting the principle of placing trust in my colleagues, by default, to make sure I will learn rather than judge.

The Known, or: principles in context

There are a lot of intersections of people, places, situations, resources etc. that keep repeating throughout our lives. I call them contexts, precisely of the type David Allen describes in his method of Getting Things Done (GTD). By convention, Allen designates contexts by a prefixed @ symbol. I've written extensively about what is (not) a context before, so I'll just repeat the list here:

People. Examples: @Joe, @Mom and dad.
Roles and service providers. Examples: @Boss, @M.D., @Delivery/FedEx/UPS.
Locations. Examples: @Desk, @Home, @Office, @Club, @San Diego Office.
Errands. Examples: @Walmart.
Recurring event agendas. Examples: @Weekly sales meeting.
Recurring idle time spans. Examples: @Morning coffee, @Gym, @Jogging, @Commuting.
Allocated time spans. Examples: @Reading, @Creative.
Required resources or tools. Examples: @Online/Web, @PC-Offline/Mac anywhere, @Phone/Calls, @Email.
Habits. Example: @Home.2Minutes.

Contexts are wonderful opportunities for deducing principles, since they repeat, by definition. What are the principles that come to your mind when you consider your contexts from the perspectives of simplicity, respect and learning? For instance, I can think of the these:

Avoid multitasking.
I'm adopting the principle of batching my tasks with respect to contexts, so their completion becomes simpler by avoiding task switching.
Respect good work.
I'm adopting the principle of noticing good work done by others and letting them know I cherish their performance. Especially with respect to services or professions I haven't chosen for my own career path.
«First empty your cup.»
I'm adopting the principle of focusing completely on my current task, so I can learn the most from it instead of framing new situations in my old views.

Start now!

It is obvious that it takes a while until you're satisfied with your Personal Mission Statement. I keep collecting new thoughts and insights that make me change my statement about twice a year. If the text doesn't fit onto a single page anymore, I force myself to shorten it.

How did you draft your Personal Mission Statement? Let us know in a comment, below!

Discover your values

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:58:09 +0000

Search of Amber © Maciek PelcWhat are the values you live by? If such a question catches you off guard - welcome to the club! A few years ago, I would not even consider writing down a list of my values or even figuring out a personal mission statement, as recommended by Steven R. Covey.

How can we become aware of our values? It doesn't look like a great idea to pick them from a list of all potential values ever uttered by mankind. Use simple triggers instead - events in your life that make you think. There are direct pathways to discovering your values, like:

Think about admiration
Whom do you wish good luck, from the bottom of your heart? Even if you don't tell them? And was that person really famous? Whom do you like to listen to, and why?
Be less awestruck - remember most role models never intended to be like that. They're rather forced to behave as they do, by their very values.
Think about roles
Which ones are the roles in my life that I enjoy playing? Daughter, son, father, potter, team lead, coach, club president, singer, member of the town council ...? Why? What exactly makes me enjoy playing a specific role? On the other hand, which roles are manifestations of values and principles that I don't like? What would be an alternative to playing them?
Think about dreams
Honestly, I never wanted to become an astronaut or an engine / race driver. This stuff sounded way too kitschy already when I was young. Did you ever think about something less spectacular that would be worth while pursuing? What did you want to be or do and why? What are your most non-perishable dreams? What are the values that acted as «dream preserving agents»?
Think about moments of flow
When was the last time you were so immersed in what you were doing that you completely forgot about time and place? What was so enchanting about that work?
Think about moments of happiness
When was the last time you were so happy that your stomach went crazy? What made these moments possible?

Of course, there are also indirect pathways to your values. If you choose them, be sure to employ Toyota's technique of 5 whys: never be satisfied with the very first value candidate that comes to your mind. Instead, question each candidate: why? Repeating this cycle five times should lead you closer to the real value behind the ostensible answers.

Here are the indirect pathways that come to my mind:

Think about confrontations
What is freedom, for instance? There's a saying: «Those who don't move don't feel their chains». It seems some people believe that freedom was the obligation, then, to do what others try to ban. Freedom is interpreted as a simple rule - multiply it by -1: «So, your parents are extremely religious people? Great, so you'll dress pitch black, keep out of the sunlight and turn all religious symbols in your room upside down.»
Doesn't sound like sovereign decision making, does it? In the end, we become what we fight. Just look at anybody corrupted by power.
Freedom means that we can do the right thing and we do it confidently, even if our parents, the pope or society like it. What is the right thing to do, in your opinion?
Think about sarcasm
Sarcasm is always (always!) an indicator of values somebody has seen violated. If you happen to know House, MD you know what I mean. Dare to live through your most sarcastic moments again - nobody (I know of) can read your thoughts. Whether you've actually made sarcastic remarks or not, just apply the 5 Whys to track down the values that weren't honored although you thought they should have been.
Think about paranoia
Yes, the truth is out there. Sometimes good friends of mine make me smile when they comment on my sensitivity to privacy issues versus compared to my blogging.
Meanwhile, I think it has become absolutely impossible for anybody to stay invisible on the Internet, or more precisely: to stay un-googleable. It just doesn't work. Here's one of the stories that convinced me: my grandfather spent some time as a worker in Argentina, some 80 years ago. Nobody remembers anymore when he left and when he came back. Nobody? Not quite, the Passenger lists of the harbor of Bremen 1920 - 1939 do: they know his age, occupation, marital state, his companions, the name of the ship and the date of departure, accurate to the day. All that stuff is available online. Do you need to be paranoid to be puzzled by this persistent data trace, reaching back into a whole generation before the advent of computers?
What's behind that paranoia, then? To be honest, I want to be in control of what part of my data is visible to the public. In control of who can see it. Wouldn't we even like to control how the facts are to be interpreted? And so on...
However, «control» doesn't sound so positive. Instead, we prefer to call it «privacy». As soon as we can't control anymore who's seeing our data, we might even resort to our last stance, «reputation management». You can find out a lot about your values as soon as you consider how you would not like to be seen by others.
Think about manias
Do you have arguments with people about the very same issues, over and over again? Do people keep accusing you of being fanatical about a seemingly tiny aspect of life, while ignoring bigger and much more important ones?
That's no problem as long as you get mixed feedback from different groups of people. However, get wary of your thinking when you can't find any supporters outside obscure Internet discussion boards.
Maybe (it's safe to play with this thought, nobody can read your mind) some aspects of life make you feel helpless, anxious or just plain irate? Maybe a mania is but a substitute for a real, but unattainable thing?
I start to be suspicious about myself whenever I feel the urge to stop asking the second or third Why in the game of the 5 Whys. Maybe I'm feeling as if somebody puts me under pressure of justification. To me, my reluctance to ask further questions means that I'm no longer exploring my motives but rather looking for ways to persuade others or to distract from an issue. Sometimes, there's a hidden value that begs to be uncovered. Could it be it is buried under a mania because committing to it feels so demanding?
Think about pain
Is there something you weren't able to tell somebody who has passed away? Something you would have liked to experience, together? There is nothing as painful as losing a love, a friend, a significant person. What was life's present to you, via this person? Could it be it's now up to you to give this present to somebody else?

Do you remember such moments of enlightenment? Please tell us about it in a comment below!

Options you can see from 50,000 feet

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 08:03:27 +0000

Goodbye © woodley wonderworksEach time you travel by plane, you are bound to experience a miracle. As the plane takes off, the busy throng of life is gradually scaling down, as houses melt into cities and cities sink into the patchwork of the earth.

Your spirit is unclamped. That sensation is so overwhelming that I wonder what astronauts (cosmonauts and taikonauts as well, of course) feel when they talk about the moment they saw the earth from space for the first time. You simply want to transcend your individual existence and do something (anything!) of lasting value.

Well, you are made to be great! Master productivity authors like David Allen (of «Getting Things Done» fame) encourage you to take on that 50,000 feet perspective; Stephen R. Covey, author of «The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People» even suggests that you write a mission statement as your personal guideline. Why, then, do intentions fade away as soon as our feet touch the ground again?

I think because transcending your individual existence is not what many people think it is. Rather:

It requires that you accept roles and responsibilities, not clichés. You need to fully understand what you are committing to. You need to meet expectations. You need to signal to others that they can trust you and depend on you. For lifetime, if necessary. You need to understand that you are dealing with other human beings who have equal dignity and equal rights, even if they don't have equal options in life.
It requires that you do what it takes, not what you want. You need to fully understand what altruism means. Altruism is what you do, not a fuzzy fantasy about how thankful others may be for what you do.
It requires that you do what it takes, not what yields publicity or fame. In the words of Harry S. Truman: «It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit.» Or, if you prefer Cato the Elder, who lived from 234 BC - 149 BC: «After I'm dead I'd rather have people ask why I have no monument than why I have one.»

In my country, there is a saying that goes like this: Accomplish at least three things in your lifetime: Build a house. Plant a tree. Have a child. This is probably a personal vision that is shared by many people around the world. Astonishingly, it mentions three achievements that transcend the individual.

Here is what you can do if you think you can't accomplish any of the three.

Building a house when you can't

Medina of Zabid, Jemen © Aiace TelamonioSo you think you'll never have enough money to build or buy a house. It saddens you.

Do you know the famous UNESCO world heritage list of monuments, groups of buildings and sites? Today, it includes 851 outstanding properties located throughout the world, like the Chinese Great Wall, the Taj Mahal in India or the Yosemite National Park in the US.

But did you know that there's also a list of the World Heritage in Danger? It tracks «the property appearing in the World Heritage List for the conservation of which major operations are necessary and for which assistance has been requested», to quote the UNESCO World Heritage Convention. It is shocking how much of our universal heritage is facing obliteration and collapse.

It may happen in your neighborhood, too, where UNESCO is not likely to show up that soon. If you know a local piece of cultural heritage that it really unique, help protect and preserve it. There is a multitude of things you can do and not all of them require funding. To name just three:

Commit to keeping a piece your local heritage tidy. No fame to gain here. Maybe just laughter, when you're the only one cleaning up after hordes of people who were carelessly dumping their waste. Some visitors, however, may notice that somebody takes care of that special place.
Instead of a donation, offer your skills to help preserve a property. Whether it is a national park or a monument, you could offer help with repair or maintenance; you could collect and summarize information for visitors and residents alike; you could write to your local government representative and ask for support.
Become member of or even found a local society for the preservation of a property. Engage in fund raising. Write articles in magazines. Offer regular, guided tours in or around the property. Collect and publish historical information about it. Help others see what fascinates you about it.

Planting a tree when you can't

Leaf © Scott RobinsonAre you aware that actually trees are people huggers? They hold on the the soil so winds can't erode it. Forests work like huge sponges, absorbing water that would otherwise flood your streets, or releasing water into arid lands that would otherwise desiccate. When you're hiking in your local hills and mountains, their roots prevent rock slides. Avalanches hit the trees first, not you.

What do you have to offer to the trees? You may quite literally want plant a try. I'm not covering this topic here, there is plenty of advice available online and my only suggestion would be that you talk to a gardener and choose a local species. If you can't plant a tree in any place close to you, for whatever reason, there is still a myriad of things you can do. Let me mention just three of them:

Participate in the Arbor Day in your country . Learn about the encouraging history of this day and find like-minded people. In many countries, Arbor Day is celebrated by planting trees, sometimes even by reforesting whole areas. Help in the preparation of that day. Learn to tell local species apart. Offer guided tours, to make others familiar with rare trees you've found in your town.
Learn how you are affected by forest desctruction in countries you didn't know existed. Help stop that destruction by conscious consuming: not buying wood or furniture of unknown or disguised origin, for instance.
If you can afford it, join director David Attenbrough and buy a piece of the rain forest to save it from being destroyed . He says: «I have been immensely lucky in that my professional work has taken me to all corners of the world where I have been able to see first hand some of the rarest and most spectacular wildlife on earth. But the fate of the creatures which share our planet lies entirely at the hand of mankind - it is within our power to protect them or watch them become extinct. Let us choose the first route.»

Having a child when you can't

Children in Cambodia © Adam Hinton / Plan International Deutschland e.V.Maybe you were dreaming of having a child. There are so many ways that dream can become annihilated (a harsh word, but appropriate here, I think). Medical reasons, maybe. Maybe you were considering adoption, too, only to learn that thousands and thousands share the same dream, so your chances are tiny.

I hesitate to say «having a child» here, because my suggestions include to respect the fact that you can never have a child, even when you're the biological parent.

There are so many ways, so many organizations that support children in your country and all over the globe that I'll just mention one, below. Whatever path you will follow, I suggest if you choose to support a humanitarian organization, verify that in fulfills the following criteria:

They demonstrate a proven track history, both in terms of years and successful projects. There should be nothing to hide here.
They grant everybody open access to their financial information, not shying away from putting their combined accounts information on the internet, for download.
They let you sponsor a child you get to know, even if it's only a photograph and one-page status you receive, from time to time.
They contribute to the well-being of the family and of the place the child lives in. Remember the african proverb: «It takes a whole village to raise a child.»
If they work in a foreign place, they maintain good connections with local residents and send you first-hand, up-to-date information about the region, on a regular base.
They make you let go. While this may be the hardest part for you, the goal is the well-being and growth of a child and of its environment, not to keep a human in perpetual dependency.

My wife and me chose to become member of our local branch of Plan International. We were sponsoring a funny little boy in Kenya; the project to improve life conditions in his village was successful and our sponsorship had to end. Since then, we support a little girl in Sudan.

Plan fulfills all of the criteria I've listed above in a way that is more than excellent. They even contact local residents who help out and translate letters into the local languages and dialects. I asked them for a nice photograph to help me support their cause in a blog posting, and within a few hours, their PR staff responded, the lovely picture attached that you see above. They really walk the extra mile.

You were made to be great - so what will you choose to do?

Are you a killer?

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 09:30:00 +0000

Xavier Borges, World of Warcraft orphan © miguelbHave you ever asked yourself why that K-word is used so pervasively? It's because destroying something is easier than building something.

Killing is the choice of the clueless and uninspired. Wit may not be at one's command, but killing always is:

Did you know your reliable GTD system is worthless, unless it is blessed with a killer setup? By the way: Whom or what exactly is your system going to kill, and why? Will it annihilate your coworkers' Moleskines in a sea of flames or what?

Blogs need killer headlines - allegedly; I dare say that they rather need inspiring, motivating, charming, fascinating, seductive, provocative, thrilling, suggestive, enchanting, intriguing, challenging or even just plain interesting headlines.
What does a website and a domain name like Killer Startups tell you? Don't those startups have any USP? Great idea to bet my provisions for old age on them, it seems.
Apropos Wall Street: are you looking for investors or new customers? By now, you've already guessed it: As a well-trained cubicle warrior, prepare yourself a killer elevator pitch. Please don't forget to clean up that elevator afterwards, will you?
Sometimes, you shouldn't stop at a killer elevator pitch. Don't get a life, though. Leading a creative life is so old school. You need opportunities to kill, so declare war on procrastination and start your warfare by dropping a killer presentation onto your customers.
Finally, when you come home in the evening, don't talk to your spouse or your kids. Reading excellent books is so old-fashioned, too! Guess what you need instead? Yes, it's the killer media center - enabling you to obliterate your family life and to blast all of the gadgets of the Joneses (no, I don't know how it kills those devices, technically speaking).

Tired from all that killing? Well, have others work for you and rent a killer, then.

Or get one of these all-time classics for less money than a pack of bullets and expand your vocabulary beyond the realm of death and destruction.

22 ways to say No

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:47:44 +0000

No Entry sign 1 © Melodi TSaying No isn't as destructive as you may think. Actually, saying No means you've already said Yes to something else. By saying No, we're setting limits, to protect that something. But even when you're willing to protect your interests: for many people, No (not Sorry) seems to be the hardest word.

So you finally said No... and ... oh my, somebody becomes manipulative and tries to undermine your decision. It's time to act in self-defense. Below, you'll find a toolbox for self assertion (not a weapons' arsenal, though): If you learn to set limits, how to stay polite and still get respect, you'll not just feel better but actually develop your self further. Plus, you'll gain more time for your interests. Let's have a look at 22 proven strategies how to say No:

Straightforward honesty: Just tell the reason why you can't or don't want to do something. You can train this first with friends and family. Whenever you want to say No, overcome your desire to please everybody and tell the truth. Stay polite but also assertive.
Try some humor: Say, for instance: «I want to spend more time with my blender.» or choose another of 100 potential reasons why. Of course, this only works with friends who appreciate tongue-in-cheek talking, understanding that it's impossible right now for you to present your reasons.
The principled approach: You say «I don't do such things, as a matter of principle», maybe followed by «According to my experience, this kind of things never pays» or more aggressively, «I think it's just plain immoral». If life taught you a bitter lesson already, why make the same mistake again? However, don't refer to principles you don't stand for.
Encouragement: Say «I feel you can do this on your own. As a matter of fact, last time you did it your results were a lot better than mine. I'm looking forward to your solution!» Encouragement is suitable when talking to Mr or Mrs Indecision. A lack of self confidence in others requires a lot of patience on your side, though.
The Magic of the First Name. Don't just say «No» - say «No, Michael.» It's a good opening move to deal with masters of the interruptive «But...» - the kind of people who never let you finish any statement (except for «Yes!», of course). Using the first name pushes the discussion onto a more personal level. It's also a clear signal that you're having serious reservations.
The preemptive strike: You say «Before we begin let me say that I'm not going to have a single spare minute next week, so basically I'm just a lurker here.» oder «Thanks for the invitation! I'm sorry but during the next few weeks I won't have time to attend these meetings anymore, my job yields a lot of stress right now, you know?». This is an emergency brake to be used e.g. at the beginning of a meeting - if you know that somebody will try to take control of your time in front of others, where you're not likely to object.
The High Standards (TM): Just say: «I can't take on new commitments right now, otherwise my existing ones would suffer.» It's an excellent escape from the competence trap: because you perform well, you get more and more things to do which in turn leads to a disappointing performance on your part.
The Flyer Evasion Maneuver: You don't say anything and just walk by. It's the only way to deal with inner city flyer cordons - you've lost as soon as they can make you stop and discuss. It's similar with email spam: never ever answer it, especially when they tell you that by answering you can unsubscribe from a mailing list you've never subscribed to in the first place. You'd only confirm that you'll be answering this kind of emails. That's wonderful - for the spammer who can sell one more responsive email address to his customers.
Queue up (please...): Say «Sure! It's already on my list, I'll take care of it immediately after establishing our subsidiary in Shanghai». If you don't happen to have any business in Shanghai, choose something that is about as tedious. The idea is to name something so important that it's not to be questioned by anybody - not even by suggesting you should do both things in parallel. Assuming everybody is familiar with your pending problems, it may also be sufficient to say «Let's talk about it again as soon as things start to work out a little better here.»
The infinite loop: Just repeat «I know what you're aiming at, but I'm not interested, really.» Again and again, until the other person resigns. Part of the fun is that you never explain what exactly the other person is aiming at, in your opinion. Excellent defense against telemarketers.
Put them on the spot: Keep replying «I understand... What other alternatives do you see?» until she or he runs out of suggestions. Then, you launch a blanket statement: «I'm not sure whether one of these is really suitable. Let's meet again as soon as you've got a little more options.» Useful in dealing with really bad «ideas» that were born before any related problem showed up.
Visitor's No: Just say «A little later maybe, thanks!» or «It's so delicious! I need a small break from eating». Sounds a lot friendlier than «Thanks, no, I'm not hungry anymore», doesn't it?
The Catch-22 tactics: You place the ball in their court by saying «I already promised my son we'd attend this football match together. I can't disappoint him, can I?» or «Sounds a lot more fascinating than what I need to do at the moment. I'm sad I can't join you!»
Partner with their laziness: Simply say «Sure! Please send me an email reminder, I'll reply with the attachments you required.» A great anti-hoarding tactics against human hamsters who just love to impose more work on others, hoarding the results for the day they may become useful. Some day. Maybe...
The Horror Alternative: «I don't feel like watching one more Tom Cruise movie, so how about going through the whole Doris Day DVD box today?». Wonderful cure against that special pest that is perseveringly ignoring all of your real interests, trying to educate you for the better. Instead of Doris Day, choose a topic that is of interest to you - your suggestion might be accepted, after all.
The Cheap Alternative: Your reply is «Frank, I'm terribly sorry I can't assist you during that meeting. However, I could review your presentation slides in advance.» Sometimes, grown-ups constantly asking you to look after them are just tiresome.
The Spanish Inquisition: Become inquisitive and say «I can't make it to our weekly business dinner this evening. Anything else to talk about besides the annual report?», «I got your invitation to an hour-long meeting. Couldn't spot an agenda inside - what do we need an hour for?» oder «Do we really need to spend more time on this subject? Or is there something else we need to talk about?» If somebody is on the verge of wasting your time again, it's time for a reminder - even in Outlook, it's possible to modify the default duration of a meeting...
Time to think it over: Just say «I need to think it over» oder «That's a bit short-notice. I need more time.». Even better: «I need to talk to my spouse first, as soon as we find the time for it.» Of course you haven't got the faintest idea when that may be. By the way: it's never a mistake to think important things over and to discuss them with your loved ones. Never say Yes in impulse when it doesn't feel right.
Applied risk management: «During the last 2 years, I was the only person who did this. I fell ill twice already and nobody could cover for me. Let's delegate this to Michael, otherwise we'll run into the same kind of trouble over and over again.» Choose a proficient nominee here, otherwise you'll suffer from a higher workload than before.
Fatal Incompetence: You say «I haven't got the necessary skills.», «That's not my area of expertise.» or «I'm not really familiar with this, but Frank is.» Excellent for dealing with freeloaders thinking you exist for the sole purpose of assisting them with things they could cope with perfectly on their own.
The sympathy-scam dead end: Just say «I'm very sorry for you.» when somebody specializes on giving you «the look», hemming and hawing like in «I wanted to rent a van like yours, but that's soooo expensive...»
The Verbal Closeline: «What part of NO didn't you understand?». Well, sometimes confrontation is the only language that obtrusive PITAs will understand. Limit this to occasions where NO hasn't been understood twice in a row already, please.

Got any NO story to share?

What are your experiences with saying No? Please tell us in the comment section below about your strategies. What worked? What didn't work?.

Stephen R. Coveys «The 7 Habits» (4/8): Put First Things First

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 08:58:28 +0000

Stephen R. Covey's «The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People» isn't a quick read. It doesn't want to be either. For Covey, success is based on habitual formation of the character - comparable to the cycle of sowing and harvesting and about as time-consuming.

In this eight-part series, I'm going to present the key concepts of the book and what I've learned from them. This is Part 4 of the series.

[Note: If you happen to be a follower of David Allen's Getting Things Done (GTD), the chapter discussed in this posting provides some interesting ideas on weekly reviews and on how to prioritize your next steps.]

An overview of the series can be found here.

&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;

Efficient management

It is easier to learn management than to learn leadership. Leadership is about developing an inner compass, whereas management is about going into the direction suggested by that compass. Leadership is about being effective (knowing and reaching your goals, at all), management is about reaching your goals as efficiently as possible. Covey uses the ladder analogy: leadership must determine against which wall to lean a ladder; management is then about climbing up as efficiently as possible. Putting first things first is about good management, then: climb the ladder as fast as you can and don't let any trivia, friction or resignation stop you. You've defined already what is important using the habit Begin with the End in Mind.

Eisenhower matrix, Covey variantYou don't question your principles minute by minute, even if you fall short of obeying them, sometimes. To explain this, Covey describes our everyday Catch-22 situations by the Eisenhower matrix: depending on whether something is important (or not) and urgent (or not), it falls into one of four categories, or quadrants. If your life revolves mostly around quadrant 1 situations, you're much too busy fighting crises to have some time left for foresighted planning - a vicious cycle. People wasting their time in quadrants 3 and 4 may impress others by looking awfully busy, but actually they've drifted away from their principles because they chose inappropriate centers of their lives. The key to success is to spend as much time as possible in quadrant 2.

How do you cope with a bunch of pressing situations? How can you free some time every day for quadrant 2? Covey recommends that you employ a couple of strategies:

Saying no. However, this will only work if you have a «burning yes» inside, besides that «No». Most people feel quite uncomfortable when they decline wishes or requests made by others; you can avoid bad feelings only if you've established you priorities. Plus, you need to spend your time on realizing them, of course.
Balancing roles instead of managing time. As long as you're driven by calendar entries only, there is hardly a chance that your results and relationships will improve continuously. Rather, Covey suggests that you consider all of the roles you're playing in your life (and those you'd like to play): father, daughter, employee, club chairman... Once you've written them down, start thinking about goals that follow from these roles. You're less likely to forget something important as soon as you start looking at your life from the perspectives of various roles. Bonus: if you need to make compromises, no part of your life will be overlooked..
Weekly planning. By deriving two goals per role per week and by scheduling them for the week ahead you'll have about the right amount of spare time to stay flexible. One week is long enough to realize plans and short enough to allow for quick reallocations of time slots. That's why all Franklin-Covey paper planners you can buy are centered around a view of a week.
Managing people efficiently is a bad idea. Covey tells the story of one of his sons who wanted to break up with the girl he had been dating for a while. So he scheduled a 10 to 15 minutes phone call to tell her. As you may guess, this didn't work that well. Covey recommends to override your schedules under such circumstances. In short: relationships first.
Paying attention to being coherent. Only by considering your principles, roles and goals carefully and by writing them down you're in a good position to maintain a coherent self and to behave with integrity. If you haven't thought about your principles or if you're not reviewing them habitually, you're starting to drift - or worse, to be driven by others. Actually, Covey is talking about discipline here: you've got to be your own disciple and do what you found to be right.
Maintaining a portable system. Whatever tools you use for planning purposes, you should carry them with you all the time. On the bus as well. For reading as well as for writing.

Learning to delegate

You don't need to do everything on your own, but remember there is a good way and a bad way of delegating:

Gofer delegation is a special kind of micro management. Every movement is regulated and will be monitored. Different is synonymous to worse, the only road to success is becoming a slave to a method. Don't dare modifying it - after all, your boss designed it! It's no surprise gofers «never get anything right» and «make» bosses wish they had never «delegated».
Stewardship delegation on the other hand is focused on results, not on methods. There must be an upfront explanation of which results are expected, what are the guidelines, what resources will be available. Everybody involved knows about her personal accountability and about positive or negative consequences, depending on the outcome.

My impression

I like Covey's tool box of roles a lot. That's because I'm getting older and don't want to store everything in my head only. Opposed to a calendar-centric approach, roles are a huge step forward even if they're not as revolutionary as David Allen's concept of contexts. On the other hand, Allen lacks the perspective on the roles we're playing in our lives - maybe his metaphor of flight altitude for thinking comes close (50,000 feet to runway) which seems to be the base for his natural planning model (starting from the purpose of a project and leading down to the very first next step). Also, roles are very helpful for weekly reviews in the Getting Things Done (GTD) style.

Today, 20 years after Covey's book was published, delegation is being taken for granted. Stewardship delegation, that is. Is it? Political correctness has taken its toll: nobody is called a gofer anymore (except maybe in companies that passed a brutal ISO 9000 audition), but de facto delegation has become sort of «I don't care how you get this done». If Covey was to write the book today, the section on Saying no was in for extensions.

Does Covey's thinking still sound reasonable to you? Let me know in a comment below.

To be continued...

Coming next: Stephen R. Coveys «The 7 Habits» (5/8): Think Win/Win. An overview of the series can be found here.

&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;

What is (not) a priority?

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:53:04 +0000

Flourescent Highlighter pens 1 © Craig JewellHow can we be expected to handle priorities if Wikipedia doesn't even define what a «priority» is?

Priorities come in so many flavors: top priorities; priorities A, B or C; urgent or important priorities. Yet they seem to be so elusive that the Wiktionary, too, just tells us: «priority (plural priorities) - 1. An item's relative importance. ...».

Obviously, they are meant to help us. In David Allen's Getting Things Done (GTD) method, they're one criterion out of four that we use to determine what to tackle next from our list of next actions. David summarized the issue once on his (now defunct) blog:

What on the list, if completed, would positively affect the most things of importance in my world?

In other words...leverage. There are certain projects, certain actions, that if done would be like linchpin events - they'll cause a lot of other dominoes to fall.
(David Allen)

Mind this distinction: the topic here is importance, not order of execution. Priorities have a purpose: we want to be effective (complete the right actions), so we need to know what is worth doing, what would make many other dominoes fall. Whether we actually start the most important actions first, is not inherent in the priority we give our actions.

Let's try find ways to determine «priority» and how to use them.

How to assess «importance»?

If priority is the relative importance of items with respect to others, we need to figure out which kinds of «importance» allow for good, generic ratings. After all, we want to compare actions, based on the results. We can hardly hope for a measurement here, so let's rather talk about assessment, which gives us more freedom.

Coding the priority of an action means to assign our assessment of its importance to it. We can do this by tagging, writing priority numbers beside the tasks, whatever. By comparing priority codes later, we can determine what is more important than other things, without having to go through the whole process again. Yes, that's right: priorities do not really change that often, that's a misconception (for more broken concepts of priority, see below). You can - no: in fact, you should review your assessments and even how you assess actions on a regular base, but way less often than you change e.g. your agendas.

Some options that come to my mind:

Assess the generic importance of actions.
The easiest way to prioritize is to abstain from defining importance and to just assess whether an action is important or not.
One of the most popular prioritization schemes does exactly this. It is commonly attributed to Dwight D. Eisenhower. Depending on whether an action is important (or not) and urgent (or not), it falls into one of four categories, or quadrants (I to IV, see Lodewijk's wonderful sketchcast introducing the Eisenhower Matrix). Next actions can be prioritized according to their quadrant, then:
Quadrant II actions (important, but not urgent) have the highest priority, because you're working proactively on important stuff, thus preventing crises in the future.
Quadrant I represents important and urgent actions, which are slightly less important than actions from II because the crisis (urgency) is already there, you're trying to overcome it and may neglect quadrant II actions, which in turn fosters future crises because you lack time to work proactively - a vicious circle.
Quadrant III (not important, but urgent) actions are nothing we really want to tackle, because they're only demanding, yet not important to us.
Quadrant IV (neither important nor urgent) is the worst category of all, because we're wasting time here on unimportant stuff that not even anybody is waiting for.
Assess the contributions of actions to business growth.
In his Printable CEO series (really excellent PDFs there, by the way!), especially in the Concrete Goals Tracker part, David Seah is rating actions according to how much they contribute to the growth of his business. An action deserves a straight 10 on his scale if «It's life-sustaining billable work!». Other actions rank lower, down to 1 if «It's making a new relationship!».
Obviously, you can assess the contribution to business growth by your own standards, but restricting the possible ratings to 10, 5, 2 or 1 points makes assessment easier. It also allows for tracking your working patterns, so you can tell whether were you 're actually able to follow your priorities.
Assess the exploitation of market share and market growth by actions.
This prioritization scheme originated from within the Boston Consulting Group (see a great introduction into it at Mindtools). Usually, it is applied to products and services, but you can apply it to prioritization of next actions, too, provided that you gain something from your actions. Taking out the garbage, e.g. or other chores are not good candidates for this scheme, because you're rating your actions depending on the opportunities they exploit, in terms of market share and market growth (both can be either high or low). Next actions can be prioritized according to the opportunities they exploit, then.
Stars are actions that help you to preserve and increase an already high market share in growing markets. This is the type of actions that becomes possible after your hunch proved right. As a result, you have less competitors to worry about, you're able to grow and even to shape the future of your business. Obviously the best option to pursue. Let me mention the above caveat again: when we're talking about taking out the garbage, it's neither desirable to increase your market share (by taking over this chore from other family members) nor to participate in a growing market (e.g., by offering this service to people in your neighborhood who can't or don't want to do it) - unless you get something back.
Cash Cows are actions that just exploit your (existing) high market share in markets that don't grow. Cash Cow actions are slightly worse than Star actions because they simply exploit a positive status quo: you're milking the cow. No growth is fostered and your high market share may inspire a false sense of security until it's too late to create something new (by Stars actions, e.g.). A typical Cash Cow action for an SAP consultant would be to accept yet another project offer: since training is very expensive and lopsided, SAP consultants are rare - which means the market share of a single one is relatively high. The overall market, however, is not growing considerably (though revenues are).
Question Marks are actions that increase your low market share in growing markets. It's the type of actions that follow an emerging trend, like starting to sell masses of a new, funny gadget on ebay after you've seen some others succeed with it. That's more innovative than Dogs actions (see below), but also much more risky than Cash Cow actions.
Dogs are actions that will neither increase your low market share nor do they address a growing market. It's just work you won't get noticed for. A typical Dogs action example would be to accept any boring 9-5 job, as long as it pays the rent for your flat.
Assess the need for an action.
While this approach is often used to prioritize buying or acquisition decisions, it can also be applied to actions. A fairly simple variant is a well-known, three-fold distinction:
Essential - actions that must be taken, otherwise an important goal may be missed or substantial damage or harm may occur.
Optional - actions that may be taken to achieve further goals that aren't currently targeted (but will normally be, in a later round).
Nice to have - actions that do not contribute to achieving a goal, but lead to higher satisfaction. Luxury, that is.
This approach can be further refined to cover all levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. It becomes increasingly difficult, though, to attach a single priority code to an action.
Assess the chances of survival, given a specific action.
I hope you'll never be in a situation where your decisions affect life and death, literally. However, extreme circumstances sometimes force people to make decisions without having the option to avoid all kinds of guilt.
The classical concept of a triage is such a case. For instance, the Simple Triage And Rapid Treatment (START) scheme defines the following priority assessments for the evacuation of people to hospitals:

Deceased are left where they fell, covered if necessary; note that in S.T.A.R.T. a person is not triaged "deceased" unless they are not breathing and an effort to reposition their airway has been unsuccessful.
Immediate or Priority 1 (red) evacuation by MEDEVAC if available or ambulance as they need advanced medical care at once or within 1 hour. These people are in critical condition and would die without immediate assistance.
Delayed or Priority 2 (yellow) can have their medical evacuation delayed until all immediate persons have been transported. These people are in stable condition but require medical assistance.
Minor or Priority 3 (green) are not evacuated until all immediate and delayed persons have been evacuated. These will not need advanced medical care for at least several hours. Continue to re-triage in case their condition worsens. These people are able to walk, and may only require bandages and antiseptic.
(Wikipedia)

Priority conflicts and how to solve them

A priority conflict is when your actual order of execution of next actions can't be made to match your priority-based ordering.

The solution is, in fact, easy. Especially for people following the Getting Tings Done (GTD) method. Remember there are four factors that determine your selection of the next action:

Context
The context you're currently in. I've already blogged about what is (not) a context.
Time available
Energy available
Priority

That's four, not just one (priority). This is not meant to multiply your pains, it is just a reminder that priorities alone are not sufficient to make a decision. «Priorities don't care who they compete with.», but you do. When priorities are in conflict, it doesn't mean that your prioritization was buggy. It just means that you aren't in the appropriate context, or haven't got enough time or energy to make the order of execution of your next actions match the priority-based order. And this will happen all the time. Priorities are assessments of relative importance, not of feasibility. Keeping this in mind, your job is to align your order of execution with your priorities; to make corrections; and to monitor your performance, with respect to first things first.

When you feel you're trapped in a Catch-22 situation, check whether this point of view holds true and just accept the facts, if so. On the other hand, maybe you'll find out it's all but a game and that you do not want to play it any longer. Say so. Your desire may be to be everybody's darling or not to become guilty under any circumstances, but sometimes this just doesn't work out. Make a decision instead of staying passive.

Broken concepts of priority

Priority is not an assessment of urgency.
Priorities are an assessment of importance, which is not the same as urgency. You can combine importance and urgency aspects when assessing priorities (the Eisenhower Matrix does exactly this). But once you start to consider urgency a stand-alone criterion, your priority assessments will resemble an ant hill - constantly in motion and impossible to control.
Priorities are not agendas.
Priorities help you with choosing what to do today. But they do not immediately translate into an agenda. When you mention «my priorities for today», did you actually mean that you re-assess the importance of all actions, every day? Kudos if you do, but probably you don't. As a matter of fact, you're just choosing a different set of actions you want to complete today. All priorities assigned to other actions stay unaffected, most likely.
Priority is not a motivational device.
Priority coding isn't meant to be used as a motivational device. As Merlin Mann puts it:

Consider how often you use the "HIGH PRIORITY!!!" flag not as a practical planning tool, but as a way to try and motivate yourself. Is it really the priority that's set to "HIGH" - or is it just your anxiety and guilt about being behind right now?
A lobby is not a priority.
You're trying to organize your priorities with respect to myriads of issues and actions. Don't give in to lobbyists - they're leveling the meaning of each and everything, claiming «importance» of a specific thing only because it exists. You may share the same way of assessing priorities, sure. But you needn't.

For NASA, space is still a high priority.
(Dan Quayle, 1990-09-05)
Projects aren't priorities.
«The Superslim Whackydonk project is our first priority!» No, it isn't. It may be a very important project. A project that rates very high on your scale of priority. But no project ever is a priority. Similar to the urgency misconception, declaring projects as priorities simply means that somebody can't manage his or her resources properly. It's the kind of people who never rate anything as a «nice to have».

What do you think?

What are your ways to assess priorities? Please let me know in the comments below!

GPD: Getting Presents Done

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:49:38 +0000

«Opening Gifts» © Omer Ziv

Holidays and birthdays always come as such a surprise, don't they... ;-) ?

From secular occasions like wedding anniversaries, to Valentine's Day, to New Year, to religious events like Christmas, Layla tul Mehraj, Vesak, Holi or Passover - all around the globe, many people ask themselves every year: how can I make a friend or loved one happy and make or find a special present for her or him?

There are gifts to avoid, gifts you can do yourself (DIY) and appropriate times to start.

Beware: presents to avoid - sometimes

Some ideas for presents are just too good to be true. They look so great at the outset but turn out to be embarrassing disappointments, or even ongoing nightmares. Here's a small selection of them.

Responsibilities
Living beings imply responsibilities. A beautiful plant and even more a sweet puppy may look like the perfect present. Maybe they are. Can the recipient handle the responsibility? Don't be fooled by explicit wishes for pets. Especially with kids, a wish does not imply maturity. Test first. Ask friends or relatives who own a similar pet whether your kid may take care of it, once per week. If you give away responsibilities, you must be prepared to take them back, in the worst case.
Obligations
Frankly, you may think that your buddy Stan is way too fat. Despite that, a one-year gym membership gift probably isn't going to foster your friendship too much. The same goes for any subscriptions to magazines or services that Stan has to continue paying, after the first subscription period expires. Especially if a tacit extension of the subscription is hidden in the fine print...
Your dreams, not theirs
I agree with aunt Marcie: knowing how to play the piano or violin is a magnificent skill. Yes, I know Marcie «nearly» became a professional player. Yes, an excellent musical instrument is a generous present. We all know Marcie is about the kindest person in our whole family.
Unfortunately, some people by all means don't want to become musicians, but astronauts. Same as with pets, Marcie should test the presentee for a genuine desire to learn playing the piano.
Same procedure as last year?
Yet another coupon / pair of socks / diamond ring, he or she likes it soooo much.
Really? What was great two years ago already began to feel a bit stale when it was repeated last year. This year, I'd rather not expect too much excitement anymore. Even if the diamonds have doubled in size, each time. There is hardly anything that gets better by being repeated every year.
Collectibles
Whenever you visit Mike, you're impressed by his fabulous collection of 18th-century champagne glasses. As luck would have it, this incredibly expensive antique shop you know has put a beautiful, old champagne glass on display. Agreed, the price is not what you'd call reasonable, but shouldn't you buy it, anyway?
Well. Are you an expert in this field? No? Then better ask someone who is. Don't pretend to be one. From antique glasses to dinosaur fossils, there is a lot of things that collectors didn't exactly specialize in, despite you thought so. Or counterfeiters did, despite you didn't think so.
«Better than your current one!»
Sally's cell phone is... antediluvian. No calendar, no email, no MP3 playback. How can anybody use stuff that is so... retro? Wouldn't an iPhone be such an improvement over it?
Well - did you notice that Sally keeps her tiny old phone in her tight jeans pocket? Wasn't she complaining to you, lately, how much she hates touch screens because they don't provide tactile feedback? Didn't she choose an inexpensive mobile tariff, exactly suited to her communication needs? Gadget enthusiasts may perform well as tech supporters, but they're sometimes lousy as Santas.
Retro accolades
Chrome, gold, leather... isn't the real stuff made of these, to be enjoyed by those who have achieved something in life? Isn't giving them away kind of an accolade?
Welcome to 2007. Hardly anybody wants to use (refill, clean, ...) a fountain pen anymore. Vintage chrome manual kitchen gadgets clutter the home. Heavy, watermarked letter paper just makes the inkjet printer jam and the ink will bloat. Do you have handy, liquid soap in your bathroom or scented, raw blocks of hard soap, sprinkled with mountain herbs?
There is no appropriate retro present, period. You cannot buy and give away a heritage experience. You can give to your daughter this special item of yours that she enjoyed playing with since she was a few months old. You can give to your 40 year old friend the toy you wouldn't even allow him to look at, 30 years ago. Whether it was just a promotional freebie, cost a few cents or ate up your pocket money of a whole year, decades ago. This is a gift.

Do It Yourself (DIY)

Good news: you don't need to buy presents. Many websites offer ideas for do-it-yourself presents. Some inspirations:

Make-Stuff, for presents that can even be made of things that you've considered garbage so far.
See Cory Silverberg's list of Homemade Valentine's Gifts.
Scan this discussion at lifehacker.com for ideas.

What to do, 4 weeks before

Pull out your list of gift ideas. The one that you started last year. The one that received a tiny note whenever you heard somebody express her enthusiasm about something. You didn't start such a list, last year? Grab an index card, then, and write down all names.Carry it with you, all the time.

Consider Learning, Being and Doing, nut just Having. Opportunities to learn something, be something or somewhere, or to do something can make better gifts than just physical stuff.

Configure searches and email notifications at shopping and auction sites like ebay. Sometimes, you know what would make the perfect present, but you simply can't find it anywhere - maybe it's out of stock or not manufactured anymore. Have automated assistants watch out for you.

Start collecting coupons. A few weeks before special holidays, flyers and local newspapers abound with coupons from stores. Though it's mostly a waste of time to scan all that paper throughout the year, it may pay if you do it now.

Start practicing DIY. You don't want to give away your first try at something, do you? Do you know a pro whom you can ask?

Scrutinize stores once, at an unusual time. Avoid the shopping frenzy and scan the shops extensively (but only once) for the things you want to buy. Learn about the average prices, learn to tell real bargains from alleged ones. Just behave as if this was shopping for real, but instead of buying, grab for your index card (see above) and note down best and average prices of all the gifts.

3 weeks before

Start shopping sprints. For the sole purpose of checking prices (and, potentially, buying), revisit the stores you found. Rush through them and check prices. If you see a bargain, buy the gift and remove it from your index card.

Verify your assumptions, in a discrete fashion. You shouldn't send greeting cards for their 5th wedding anniversary only to be told their divorce was half a year ago. Your cute niece may no longer be interested in Barbie. An all-you-can eat night at your favorite Texmex restaurant might no longer be great fun for both of you if your old friend's stomach can't handle Jalapeños anymore.

Tag your media. If photographs will be part of your present, you'll need the good shots. For digital photographs, your software may provide a tagging or labeling feature, so use «gift» or the name of the upcoming holiday as a tag. Stick Post-Its to the back (!) of printed photographs. The same goes for audio CDs containing tracks you may want to combine into a holiday mix.

2 weeks before

Buy it at an online auction, now. Don't be tantalized on the tenterhooks of postal issues and slow financial transaction processing, until the last minute.

Find a hiding place. For a few ideas, see here.

Buy gift bags, beautiful wrapping papers and cards. Now. Believe me, you can't do this last minute and you don't want to pick the awful remaining ones.

Last minute

Be unusual, go astray. If your cultural background is Asian, visit European style stores, and vice versa. Choose opportunities for shared fun, from mom-and-pop stores, not from dedicated gift shops. Pick Mexican beer, colourful asian cooking ingredients, French cheese, German Sauerkraut, US-made peanut butter or whatever present augurs well with respect to trying it out together.

Be familiar, stay homey. Try to remember how you first met that special person. Chances are you had tremendous fun together from things that weren't that exclusive, hard to get or expensive. Get these things and give in to nostalgia. Or fake them in a tongue-in-cheek fashion.

Be him or her. Donate to a cause the presentee has tried to make others donate to, possibly in vain. Ask the organization receiving your donation for a small photograph or postcard that shows what the donation will be used for. Put this and the contribution receipt into an envelope. Voilà, your present.

More?

Do you have more tips for Getting Presents Done? Please let me know in the comments, below.

Archiving: learn from Sergey Mikhaylovich Prokudin-Gorsky

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 10:18:49 +0000

Alim Khan, by Sergey Mikhaylovich Prokudin-GorskyHave a look at the photograph to the right (click to enlarge). It depicts Alim Khan, 31 years old.

I find his colorful vestment really enjoyable. Doesn't the image look like a folkloristic picture taken in a country far far away? Actually, it was. In Bukhara, Uzbekistan.

Besides its originality, the wonderful colors and the solemn atmosphere, there doesn't seem to be anything too special about this photograph.

Until you learn that Alim Khan was the Emir of Bukhara. When he became 31, the world saw the year of 1911.

This photograph is nearly 100 years old.

Actually, these three photographs are nearly 100 years old. Photographer Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorsky (1863-1944) used a hand camera that produced three images within 3 seconds, filtered by red, blue and green, on a single Ilford glass plate that he had slightly processed before use. To obtain a photograph like the one shown here, you need to overlay the three pictures properly, similar to how your TV produces color images by displaying red, green and blue dots.

Prokudin-Gorsky also designed special projectors to be able to show his photographs to audiences throughout Russia. His goal was to make others familiar with all aspects of life in what was the Russian Empire and to preserve the memory for generations to come.

What we can learn from Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorsky?

There are a couple of obvious and not so obvious lessons for you here:

Account for a processing of your data that you don't even dream of today. Prokudin-Gorsky didn't know about computers, they were invented a generation after he took the pictures. Yet his glass plates can be scanned and processed now.
Keep your data, especially your valuable memories, in accessible, well-documented formats to allow for easy conversion and processing. Batch-convert them every 5-10 years into the best available, open, free and lossless data format that will be available by then. Make this a habit. When you're dead and gone (sorry for mentioning this), there is nobody going to convert your bulk of data in proprietary formats you've collected over your lifetime. Even if there was, there may no longer be the software or computers to do so anymore. But your descendants may feel the same fun looking at your stills and videos as we feel today when we look at vintage pictures.
Avoid Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) and anything else that restricts your access to valuable data you have produced or bought. If Prokudin-Gorsky had used DRM to «protect» his images, we might not be able to enjoy them today. Maybe the data would have vanished, the technology provider either having shut down its respective services or experience itself being shut down altogether.
This is especially true for bought content. Google cancelled paid video downloads, technically annihilating all videos bought by their customers so far (With a refund, sure. What's the price of your memories?). The BBC chose the DRM-ridden iPlayer by Microsoft as their vehicle for viewing their content via the internet (and you thought you could save historic moments forever!). Where will Flickr be, in 2107? Google? Microsoft? Apple? And all of their websites and proprietary technologies, designed to lock you in? If DRM had been imposed on recordings a hundred years ago, none of the beautiful vintage shellack recordings you can find at the Internet Audio Archive would be available to you. Legally, that is....
Don't think any data was too banal to be preserved. Account for a usage of your data that you don't even dream of today. This is a hard lesson. Many people tell you e.g. to delete the photographs you don't like and to just keep a few good ones.
In the age of digital photography, this is hardly necessary and you should not do it. Why? Look at more pictures by Prokudin-Gorsky, like Production of Artistic Casting or The Bakalskii Mine. See? At the time they were taken, they just showed some hard, dirty, everyday work. By now, they tell us much more. And the banal stuff will enable uses you don't dream of today.
Look at what Blaise Agüera y Arcas can do with a bunch of (sometimes) lousy snapshots: reconstruct a 3D view of places from Flickr photos (by the way, Blaise helped to reconstruct Prokudin-Gorsky's pictures). My prediction is that within a few years, you will use software that reconstructs 3D views of people from all the images you've got of them, allowing you to watch them age (or become younger) as you pull a slider right or left. If you delete a seemingly meaningless snapshot today, your father's 3D virtual head might miss a part of his right ear a decade later.
Don't use special archiving media or software. Use what you work with anyway.
Well, Prokudin-Gorsky's glass plates were only writable once, I admit. But he used standard Ilford plates that he slightly improved for better sensitivity to red. He stored them and carried them with him for the rest of his life. He didn't have any special, proprietary, alienating backup solution.
In contrast, how many backup «solutions» have you come across in your life? A couple of, I bet. And they're all the same:
1. When they enter the market, the devices are insanely expensive.
2. The media are incompatible among vendors.
3. One year after you bought a «solution», you realize that you can't back up all of your data anymore on one backup medium. You need to waste your time on choosing, splitting and distributing your data.
4. Acquiring sufficient amounts of media becomes more and more expensive over time.
5. 3-5 years later, the respective backup technology is outdated and insufficient, despite all of your investments (that exceeded the price of a huge, decent hard disk by far) and the pile of media in your drawers, filled with important data you'll soon be unable to recover.
There is only one real solution: take what you use anyway. For a while to come this means hard disks. Buy a backup hard disk that is twice as big as the one that hosts your important data. Copy your data to it, regularly and in many versions (if you absolutely need to save space, try using rsnapshot under Linux or a Windows equivalent that uses NTFS junctions - ask an IT pro to help you with this). Don't use proprietary backup software, data compression, encryption or anything else that might prevent you from accessing your data. After 3-5 years, recycle: buy a new backup hard disk that is twice as big as your current backup hard disk; dispose of the hard disk hosting your data and replace it by the old backup hard disk. When hard disk prices permit, buy a second backup disk, back up every month to it and lock it away in a bank safe, as an off-site backup.

Interesting what a 100 year old photograph can teach us, isn't? I'm looking forward to your comments, below.

Protect your inbox (5): Dispose of yourself

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 08:50:03 +0000

«Vieanna» © Ian WoodsHere's a disclaimer: I wrote this posting because I'm fed up with spammers, telemarketers and nosy companies that try to squeeze out each and every bit of information they can get from me, be it for resale, preparing unsolicited phone calls or mailing me their boring newsletters.

This article is for you if you feel the same. If you're looking for support in becoming Mr Fraud, please go away. And when you've read this posting, stay aware that everything mentioned here is available to everybody, and there is always somebody who may or even will try to use it against you. I recommend visiting the Digital Identity Forum for more thorough discussions of identity issues that go beyond practical aspects.

The fifth part of this mini series on protecting your inbox shows you how to maintain temporary inboxes that yo can dispose of at any time, whenever they start getting abused.

By default, please don't trust in identities you find online. As a matter of fact, this posting was written by my dog.

Get a disposable persona

So you run out of ideas how to call yourself in yet another annoying online registration form, and Donald Duck doesn't isn't funny enough anymore?

Try a fake identity generator like Fake Name Generator. Select your preferred gender, your country and the naming style and get a new identity immediately, like:

Otis T. Mcneill
3534 Benedum Drive
New Paltz, NY 12561

Email Address: Otis.T.Mcneill@mailinator.com

Phone: 845-255-9347
Mother's maiden name: Espino
Birthday: September 18, 1970

Visa: [deleted by me]
Expires: 7/2009

SSN: [deleted by me]

Use disposable mailboxes

The easiest and most anonymous way: Using the Mailinator service, you can simply give out email addresses like george.bush@mailinator.com without even registering these addresses (or yourself). Anybody can look up the content of that mailbox at the Mailinator website (no password, no registration required). Downsides: no attachments, no POP / IMAP access, you can't receive HTML mails, everything is public.

2Prong spits out a new, weird email address whenever you visit their site. The address is auto-copied to your clipboard (works under Linux, too) for your convenience. Does not handle HTML mail or attachments, though. As with mailinator, everybody can inspect any mailbox.

Spamgourmet is a bit different: upon registering a user name, e.g. «orpheus» and a valid email address you can invent an unlimited number of email addresses like knownspammercorp.number.orpheus@spamgourmet.com. Exactly number emails to this fake account will be forwarded to your valid email address. Afterwards, all further email is blocked. HTML mails and smaller attachments are supported. Obvious shortcoming: If spammers know your user name («orpheus», in our example), they can spam you until you change it or use Spamgourmet's advanced prefix feature.

At about.com, Heinz Tschabitscher has listed more alternatives. You can find even more providers at the Open Directory page for that topic.

Get a disposable phone number

Free services like Privatephone provide you with a simple, anonymous voicemail account (10,000 messages may be stored) that can be checked online. You can also configure the service to email you after each call, or just use their web frontend to check who called.

For handling international calls for (nearly) free, via local numbers, you may mish to try Jangl's offer. Currently, they support calls to and from more than 30 countries. Jangl is currently free, but I expect them to charge their users sooner or later.

If you're willing to invest a monthly fee, Privatephone and services like Tossable Digits give you disposable phone numbers plus some more convenience features, like call forwarding and call screening. Some providers like MyAdBox specialize on additional support for selling gods, applying for a job etc.

UK residents might be interested in Privacy Numbers, a service that issues phone numbers for free that re-route all calls to your landline or cell phone. I guess the respective callers pay an additional fee, but I'm not familiar with special phone numbers in the UK. Safe Talk (Staysafe) wants you to pay for a similar service: at the time of this writing, upon sending an SMS to them, they charge you £ 1.50 for answering with a temporary phone number that you can hand out to everybody, having all calls re-routed to your real cellphone number for one month. Their website claims you can cancel the service at any time or extend it beyond that month, but there aren't any links to further details.

David Berlind over at ZDNet.com has written an excellent summary on disposable phone number services, including a list of providers.

Expensive: disposable address

If a simple PO box won't do, there are virtually hundreds of companies offering virtual office services or even temporary office space. In my opinion, renting temporary office space is not an option for most, it's just too expensive.

Yes, there are services that simply provide prestigious mail addresses, e.g. London, Berlin (or other German cities) or Beijing. Most of these providers also open, scan and email letters, forward your faxes etc. - but lets face it: you'll pay a a lot for such a facade. Better stick with a local, virtual office service provider.

My advice

Use free services only. Avoid extensive configuration options. And keep in mind that most providers have their own agenda - don't hand out data to them that you wanted to be kept private in the first place.

More?

If you enjoyed this posting, you'll probably like the rest of this mini-series on protecting your inbox, too.

Protect your inbox (4): Go async!

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:37:42 +0000

«Brokenness» © col_adamsonIf you want to be distracted from your work, give in to chatting, instant messaging (IM), phone calls or meetings. These are the ultimate productivity killers, because they suck up all your attention, break your flow and turn you mind into an enchained tiger wanting to be set free. They're synchronous communication mediums: you «need» to react immediately. Opposed to that, media like email (and letters, do you remember them...?) work asynchronously: you decide when to react.

The fourth part of this mini series on protecting your inbox shows you how to limit information that jumps on your desktop, staring at you, demanding immediate response or action.

Synchronous communication garbage

I'll deal with three common, time-wasting, synchronous types of office nags that clutter your inbox here:

Instant Messaging (IM)
People dropping by
(Invitations to) Phone conferences and meetings

1. Instant Messaging (IM) receives a lot of praise, up to the point that its use gets highly recommended already for teenagers. While it's true that IM can be a wonderful tool to build your social network or to overcome barriers when your hearing is impaired, your office is not likely a good environment to use IM in the same manner as you do at home. IM creates yet another inbox, and it's best to avoid it.

Your office is your workplace. When you need a short break, spend 5 minutes at the water cooler to connect with others. Using IM at work to increase your efficiency or awareness (whatever that means) is like putting a bowl of candy on your desk to lose weight.

If an issue is urgent, make a phone call and avoid IM communication hassles like a lack of empathy, misunderstood irony, or the inability to get at the core of an issue quickly by rapid question / response feedback cycles.

If an issue is not urgent, send an email or arrange for a meeting.

In any case, uninstall your IM client from your office computer.

2. People dropping by aren't always a pain, sure. As a matter of fact, you can easily tell the performers and networkers from the pain-raising kind, the traders in gossip, people in permanent idle mode, deferrers, and oh yes: this special guy who keeps on asking you «for advice», only to counter your goodwill by his comprehensive explanations of what he tried already (including your suggestions) and what worked (nothing).

Did you ever think of your door as of yet another inbox? It is! Here's what you can do about the types of unwanted input described above:

Remove visitor chairs from your office.
Be straight, even blunt. Never ask them How are you? but How can I help you?
Tell them you're quite busy at the moment and insist on making an appointment. Get specific about time, place and duration and stay inquisitive about their proposed agenda. Repeat ad nauseam, whenever that person enters your office.
Suggest that they obtain professional help (with whatever occupies their mind). You're not a pro (with respect to their issues). Period.

3. Try to decline invitations to phone conferences or meetings. Opposed to what people think, meetings and phone conferences are not about talking. They are about decision making and planning. Brainstorming is not a tool, it's a bad idea.

Group calendars are inboxes, too. Try to block as much of your calendar as possible by scheduling repetitive tasks. You don't need to lie here, so use descriptive subjects. Any open space in your calendar is an invitation to drop a big, fat, 1-hour-default-duration meeting request there.

If somebody really needs you attending his meeting, wait for that person to call you. If you can't decline such invitations, try to make sure there is a productive (and early) end, providing you with decisions and action items.

Mark Horstman and Michael Auzenne provide invaluable advice on this issue in their Manager Tools Podcast series. For instance, listen to the episodes Effective Teleconferencing - Part 1 of 2 and Effective Teleconferencing - Part 2 of 2 (hint: the mute button is not your friend) as well as How to Handle Agendas in a Meeting (Part 1 of 2) and How to Handle Agendas in a Meeting (Part 2 of 2) (hint: a big, visible clock can work miracles).

Educate your colleagues (and yourself)

It seems some people simply can't distinguish between synchronous and asynchronous communication. Do you know somebody who always calls you up to complain that you haven't yet replied to the email she sent you, 30 minutes ago?

Tim Ferriss, author of «The 4-Hour Workweek: Escape 9-5, Live Anywhere, and Join the New Rich», has a great way to highlight the difference. Since he wants to read his email only twice per week without looking rude, he set up an interesting autoresponder. When you mail him (or one of his assistants), you get an instant reply that runs like this:

Hi All,

In an effort to actually get work done, I am checking email once every 2-4 days. If you need a response soon and have my number, please call me. I actually prefer phone for quick decisions. My assistant will be reading your email in the meantime.

Cheers, and here's to life outside of the inbox!

Tim

P.S. I read all e-mail personally, but I cannot always reply, especially with involved how-to questions. Thanks for understanding, and I appreciate your e-mail!

OK, your colleagues might frown upon the if-you-have-my-number part, so better leave it out... Anyway: readers are told that email is an asynchronous medium and phone calls are for urgent matters. Perfect!

If you can't uninstall your IM client from your office computer, rename your accounts or set at least your status appropriately. Choose status «Busy» or «Do not disturb», instead of «Offline» (nobody believes you're offline the whole day). Name your account «EMERGENCY! John Smith» or «URGENT! John Smith» to indicate what type of contact you consider appropriate.

More?

If you enjoyed this posting, you'll probably like the rest of this mini-series on protecting your inbox, too.

Blog Action Day

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 22:00:00 +0000

Why should I care?

It's just some used paper. I mean: the world won't perish because I throw it away, will it?

«Paper Ball» © Davide Guglielmo

Well...

Your family may not care...

It's just some used paper.

Your neighbors may not care...

It's just some used paper.

Your block may not care...

It's just some used paper.

Your city may not care...

It's just some used paper.

Your country may not care...

It's just some used paper.

Nobody needs to care.

It's Blog Action Day. Please choose to care.

Protect your inbox (3): Goodbye RSS

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 08:32:00 +0000

«Rabbit Bread» © swruler, «Feld1» © carlsonimkellerJust kidding...

But please consider what Al wrote on his blog (saw this first as a guest posting on Stephen's great HD Biz Blog):

it is now commonplace to have hundreds of emails in the inbox daily. There are 120,000 blogs created every day. Clearly, there exists information overload, and the only way to rise above the noise is the ability to add true knowledge. Information still needs to make an impact at the knowledge level, but the management of information is getting harder. This is evolution of the Information Age, not revolution.
(Al)

Knowledge is to information as bread is to grain. So - do you need to make bread from grain yourself if all you want is to eat bread? No. Why, then, would you want to pick all the news grains from all RSS fields across the world, when all you want is the big picture?

The third part of this mini series on protecting your inbox shows you how to stay up-to-date in the blogosphere without tracking each and every RSS feed out there yourself. It's definitely not meant for Robert Scoble or others who want or need to be the first to know everything about anything (you can find out How Scoble Reads 622 RSS Feeds Each Morning and then use, e.g., LinkedFeed to find more interesting RSS feeds to subscribe to, just in case you're lacking other challenges in life).

If your goal is no longer to become the fastest harvester of feeds, but rather a connoisseur of fresh news bread, the solution is easy: go find your favorite bakers. As there are myriads of specialty bakeries, there are many types of RSS feed processing sites:

Portals (so-called aggregators)
Aggregators, well... aggregate. They can also aggregate other aggregators. A prominent example is popurls which presents, among others, also links from RSS buzz detectors (see below).
Actually, aggregators are web portals in disguise, presenting windows into parallel universes without really connecting them. Looking at an aggregator doesn't make you any wiser than looking at the tickers on TV. It's slightly better than navigating to all included sites by hand, but otherwise, no gain. Stay out of these.
RSS channelers
Channelers actually aren't news bread bakers. They're specialized grain vendors. Have a look at Technorati Topics for an example: you can find channels like Entertainment, Technology or Politics where new blog entries dealing with the respective topic flow by, in an endless stream, unrated, unfiltered.
Besides weeding out all other types of grain, there isn't much knowledge added in that process, though. To be precise: subsuming postings that are tagged with a fleeting number words under a stable, broad category name is what is done here. As long as you can live with such a broad category, RSS channelers at least save you the time for maintaining a list of interesting, related tags to watch.
RSS buzz detectors & creators
Buzz detectors spot emerging trends, based on a simple assumption: wherever more and more blogs are discussing something, a trend is about to emerge. Actually, the blogosphere has been derided as an echo chamber, where most postings are just referring to referrers who referred to something that was referred to by somebody else who referred...
Most buzz detectors focus on a niche. Gabe Rivera's Techmeme is a good example for a technology-centered buzz detector: for every trend, you get a headline and a short snippet taken from one blog posting, plus a list of links to other blog postings that discuss the same trend or buzzword. More examples of niche buzz detectors are the celebrity-centered WeSmirch, aptly subtitled «Automatic Dirt Digger», and the politics-centered Memeorandum.
There are extremely specialized buzz detectors, such as Frank Westphal's Rails Rivva (for software developers interested in using a specific framework of a specific programming language) or Gabe Rivera's Ballbug (exclusively for afficionados of the U.S. Major League Baseball). At the other end of the spectrum, there are very generic buzz detectors that also operate as channelers: see Tailrank, BuzzTracker or Megite, for instance.
Some buzz detectors are also buzz creators: Rojo allows for voting on blog postings. It's like Digg for blogs only.
Border Crossers
Border crossers transcend the blogosphere and connect it to other worlds.
For an example, look at Sphere, which can be thought of as a combination of Google News and Technorati Topics: for each current buzz or topic, you get links to newspapers or other traditional sources, plus a side bar pointing you to related blog postings.
For a border crosser to be able to connect two worlds, there must be a common ground between them, obviously. In other words: border crossers can only connect via topics that the shared universe is aware of. Sadly enough, this means the Law of Raspberry Jam applies here. On the other hand, blogs rather discuss news than to create them, so the blogosphere can serve as a nice commenting add-on to whatever other world (I expect to get flamed for this nonchalant role attribution to blogs).

Protect your inbox (2): Scrub your RSS subscriptions

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 10:04:17 +0000

«Pipeline Perspective» © Michael KelleyRecently, SpiKe of Organize IT sounded a bit worried, asking: Simplifying Our Lives: Is It A Lost Cause? Looking at RSS feeds, he said:

imagine that your job requires you to be knowledgeable on a subject, are we not potentially skipping useful information and therefore losing out to those who are able to take in dozens of feeds?
(SpiKe)

Today, in my mini series on protecting your inbox, I'll present more techniques how to deal with RSS feed overload. They are based on having your RSS feeds processed, that is: feed items get scrutinized and (sometimes) filtered out, to improve your reading experience.

The tool I'll use is Yahoo Pipes, a graphical editor that allows you to have any news item grabbed from your feeds, checked and even modified, if you wish. Yahoo Pipes looks a bit techy at first, but relax: I'm providing ready-to-use filters that you may use out of the box and even clone and manipulate, too.

I suggest you get a bit familiar with Yahoo Pipes by watching an excellent intro video first. It's really fun and you'll understand within minutes how you can build your own pipes.

Simple Example: filter unwanted postings

I guess many of my readers are subscribed to David Allen's GTD forum newsfeed at http://www.davidco.com/forum/rss.php. If you aren't a member of David's GTD Connect service, you can't read the postings that have a «Members Only:» prefix: following those links just gets you to nag screen.

Enter Yahoo Pipes. Using the most simple filtering of the title by keywords, by dragging and dropping we can build a simple pipe that:

Retrieves the original feed, http://www.davidco.com/forum/rss.php
Filters out all items that match a certain criteria, in our case: «Members Only:» as part of the posting title
Pumps out the scrubbed feed, ready for subscription.

Within the Yahoo's graphical pipe editor, this looks quite trivial:

Filtering "Members Only" items from GTD forums feed

If you don't want to build this pipe on your own, you can find it published at Yahoo Pipes. Just subscribe to the Inofficial, Nonmembers 'The David Allen Company' Feed (RSS link) or visit the Yahoo page for this pipe where you can find links to add this feed to your preferred RSS reader, or to clone and modify it.

This style of filtering is useful for cleaning your favorite feeds from

repetitive, useless stuff - postings like «...of the week», «One year ago on...», «Best posts in ...» etc.
news about technologies that are irrelevant to you, e.g. postings about Outlook, Blackberry, Mac OS X, Facebook, Moleskine, etc.
annoying parts of a mixed RSS feed, like postings of an author who doesn't contribute much of value, opposed to others contributing to the same feed

Also simple: A news is a news is a news, blocked

When you use feed aggregators, search engines or other services that compile an RSS feed for you, you may be familiar with this: the services all find the same postings, over and over again.

Here's an example of what you can do with your del.icio.us subscriptions feed. The major problem with del.icio.us subscription feeds is that they deliver the same links over and over again, because the very same good articles and websites get bookmarked by hundreds of people, and your feed consists of the bookmarks of others. Again using another simple filtering of the links compiled by del.icio.us, we can build a pipe that:

Retrieves the original feed, http://del.icio.us/rss/subscriptions/Evomend_EN
Filters out all items that contain the same link as another, earlier item
Pumps out the scrubbed feed, ready for subscription.

Within the Yahoo's graphical pipe editor, this also looks quite trivial:

Filtering duplicate links from my del.icio.us subscription feed

Again, if you don't want to build this pipe on your own, you can find it published at Yahoo Pipes. Just visit the Yahoo page for this pipe where you can find links to add this feed to your preferred RSS reader, or to clone and modify it.

Caveat

While using Yahoo Pipes is fun, there are a few downsides:

It is possible to mix a lot of RSS feeds into one, but the resulting feed becomes slow.
For some online feed readers, like Google Reader, the resulting fetch times can sometimes become so big that your reader thinks there was a problem. As a result, you don't see new feed items or can't even subscribe to your mixed feed because the reader tells you it wasn't «valid».
It is not possible to process website content easily.
Forget about retrieving e.g. the articles your del.icio.us subscriptions link to and creating a feed having article teasers.
You can spend a lot of time fiddling with pipes.
It's a perfect example of how to become what David Allen calls an «organization groupie». Just browse the pipes repository to see whether somebody else has done what you need, but don't spend too much time trying.

Want more?

There are more postings in this mini-series.

Protect your inbox (1): RSS feed frenzy and blog carnivals

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 06:13:15 +0000

The Great Wall, by Herbert Ponting (1907)
The Great Wall concept was revived again during the Ming Dynasty following the Ming army's defeat by the Mongols in the Battle of Tumu in 1449. The Ming had failed to gain a clear upper-hand over the Mongols after successive battles, and the long-drawn conflict was taking a toll on the empire. The Ming adopted a new strategy to keep the Mongols out by constructing walls along the northern border of China. Acknowledging the Mongol control established in the Ordos Desert, the wall followed the desert's southern edge instead of incorporating the bend of the Huang He.

Unlike the earlier Qin fortifications, the Ming construction was stronger and more elaborate due to the use of bricks and stone instead of rammed earth.

As Mongol raids continued periodically over the years, the Ming devoted considerable resources to repair and reinforce the walls.

(from: Wikipedia article on The Great Wall)

Are you devoting considerable resources, too, to protect your time? Are you getting more and more sophisticated in your fight for an empty inbox?

And does it turn out to be as futile as the Great Wall ultimately proved to be? Do you have to retreat, step by step? Too many hordes of spammers and other time wasters raiding your northern schedule territories, establishing strongholds in regions that belong to you, at least in theory?

Well - what if actually they aren't raiders, but came at your invitation?

In this mini-series on inbox protection, I'll describe how you possibly opened the gates to some time-wasting scourges - and how you can close the gates again.

RSS feed frenzy

You're subscribed to many (many!) RSS feeds. No big deal? I know. You don't need to read them all. You'll just scan the headings. Sure...

Face your fears of missing something. The truth is: somebody else will always be faster than you. Trying to stay ahead of everybody is like pretending to be the fastest gunslinger in town. There's no such thing as a retired gunslinger. They always get shot in the end. You aren't a gunslinger. You've got real work to do that is different from ~~pulling a trigger~~ pressing a Refresh button all the time.

There are several ways of avoiding the RSS feed frenzy. Of course, you've found your favorite few famous feeds that you want to follow every day. That's ok. To track a myriad of other feeds, day by day (or even hour by hour) is not ok.

You need to reduce or to filter those feeds. My first suggestion in this mini-series is: visit blog carnivals, instead of clicking on every RSS subscription icon within your grasp.

What is a blog carnival?

A blog carnival is like an elaborate table of contents of a magazine.

The host of the carnival sets the topic and solicits appropriate article submissions. Most carnivals are published on a monthly base. Authors submit their posting URLs and possibly a short teaser.

The respective host selects what will become published and finally turns all acceptable submissions into a list posting on his own blog: an item for every article presents the author, the hyperlinked title of heror his posting and (in most cases) a short teaser. That's why the result pretty much resembles the table of content pages of a magazine.

Blog carnivals are an easy way to stay up-to-date with respect to a given topic.

Pros and Cons

Blog carnivals have several advantages. To name a few:

somebody else has already filtered out garbage postings and repetitive stuff
submitters of articles are in peacock mode: they aren't famous yet, so they submit the better samples of what they've written
emerging trends become visible at an early stage, when more and more bloggers start to post about such topics
compared to searching by a tag and finding dozens of more or less unrelated, arbitrary posts, reading carnivals provides you with compilations of articles that actually share similar concepts
you get multiple points of view on the same topic, at the same time
being a compilation of teasers turns a carnival into a nice preview of what you can expect from the articles

There are also disadvantages. For instance:

there is no A-list blogger who submits postings to a carnival (but you're subscribed to their feeds individually anyway, aren't you?)
not all carnival hosts are careful editors and publishers, some accept just about anything
carnival contents are a few days older than what you can find using services like Technorati, since carnival hosts need to grant sufficient submission deadlines

My favorite carnivals on personal development

The tag line of Evomend is «Timeless resources for personal development». As an example: what blog carnivals do I skim (in alphabetical order, no ranking implied)?

Carnival of Career Intensity is hosted by David V. Lorenzo. This carnival is prototypical: a clear layout helps you to scan for author, title, link and teaser. As David says, he is looking for «posts that add value to careers of my readers».
Carnival of Leadership Development is hosted by Mabel and Harry who add short teasers as provided by the respective posting author. Topics are: business, training, leadership, entrepreneur.
Carnival on Personal Power publishes plain author / title / link items that are easy to scan. Topics are: personal power, self development, motivation, self improvement.
Made to be great - personal development is compiled by Alan Torres and presents, in addition to authors, titles and links also short teasers, as provided by the authors. Topics are Law of Attraction, positive thinking, goals, money, healthy lifestyles, inspirational.
Personal Development Carnival is unique, since it is hosted in a rotating fashion by volunteer bloggers. Topics are: personal development, self-help, health, wealth, wisdom, spirituality, prosperity.

There is a wealth of more than 2.500 blog carnivals covering hundreds of topics listed at blogcarnival.com. You can search the database by category or by keyword.

Enjoy! And if you come across great blog carnivals on personal development that aren't listed at blogcarnival.com, please let me know in the comments.

Want more?

There are more postings in this mini-series.

3 limits of mental RAM you should know

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 04:41:12 +0000

«Headache» © by Pedro VeraAt the core of David Allen's Getting Things Done (GTD), you'll find the statement that you should get all of your commitments out of your head and into a reliable system because your head is not a reliable system.

There are numerous myths about memory, like one can keep 7 +/- 2 things in the short-term memory; memory uses images; or: linking with bizarre images is best for memory. They're simply not true and may give you an unjustified feeling of security. Why?

Here are 3 reasons why your «mental RAM» isn't a reliable GTD system:

Emotions impair your memory
While connecting information to emotions is a technique for memorizing something that is recommended everywhere, this usage of emotions has its downsides, as described in Wikipedia:
The mood congruence effect means information becomes the stickier the more it incites a mood similar to that you're currently in; additionally, being in a negative mood fosters remembering mostly negative information, too. Should you try to be positive, then? No - to make things worse, there is a Catch-22: trying to be brave and positive in a sad situation may also impede your memory.
At your workplace, you may not always have time or opportunities to enwrap yourself into the «necessary» emotions.
The mood-state dependent retrieval effect links your mood during memorization to your mood when you try to remember. The more congruent your feelings are at these moments, the better you can remember things.
Can you deliberately feel the same way, during both memorizing and remembering an information, any time, at your workplace?
The different effects of thematic vs. sudden appearance of emotional stimuli represent another reason why your mental RAM is not a reliable system: you remember things better when an evolving story helps you slip into the desired mood. You remember things worse when stimuli arrive in an uncoordinated, disruptive, sudden manner - as is common in many workplaces.
Chemistry impairs your memory
You may do well at memorizing things after having a cup of coffee. It may even slow down memory decline. However, caffeine may increase your so-called Tip-Of-the-Tongue (TOT) experiences when you can afford them least: caffeine increases the number of those desperate moments when you know that you know something, but just can't remember it right now because you're bombarded with unrelated information - as is common in many workplaces.
Medication (e.g., against pain, mental problems, hormonal problems) can have numerous side effects on your memory, as package inserts reveal. Most prescriptions do not represent your choice, so your memory may be impaired by whatever you need to swallow, possibly over a prolonged period of time. It's arguable whether you're able to work at all under such conditions, but chances are you will (need to) work.
Chemotherapies and similar, extreme treatments are known to produce what patients call «chemobrain» or «chemofog»: serious troubles with word finding, memory, multitasking, learning and processing speed.
You'll hardly ever go to work during such treatments, but when you're struggling to get as many things done on your own as possible, you don't want to be at the mercy of a brain that just can't handle too much, at that moment.
Multitasking impairs your memory
Checking emails and Instant Messaging (IM) while taking an IQ test lets you perform worse than people who smoke marijuana during the same tests. As an employee, you may not have any other choice here but to monitor your inbox for your boss's mail.
Constant distraction leads to stereotyped learning by habit and routine: you can't apply what you've learned to other situations, because multitasking alters the way you learn: it does not activate the regions of your brain that are responsible for learning by understanding. Plus, as in computers, the brain simply halts one task while working on another - you just think you're multitasking. The telling results in experiments: students using IM, cell phones (especially text messaging) or MySpace accounts get lower grades (Bill Klemm lists the scientific sources).

Like it or not: you need a reliable system, and it must exist outside of your head. Otherwise, tasks and responsibilities may fall through the cracks.

Some suggestions I can offer, as additional postings:

@Computer: Declare your software independence, Part Two

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 04:55:34 +0000

The goal of the Ported Open Source Software (POSS) label is simple: to point you to applications that you can safely install on any of your computers and use it for years to come, whether you're online or not, whether you switch to a new operating system or not, whether you can afford buying a new machine every year or not.

In The second part of this mini-series, I'm listing the packages that I'd never want to miss on the systems I use. It's a limited, subjective selection and I'd love to hear from you, in the comments below or via email, about great software that meets the 4 POSS criteria (for details on the POSS criteria, see the first part of this series).

Keep in mind that the goal is not to provide a list of software that exhausts the features of a single operating system to the max. If I was to adhere to clichés and stereotypes, I'd throw out many software packages because they were allegedly too ugly and clumsy for Mac users, too restricted and patronizing for Linux users, and too long winded and complicated for Windows users. In short: I'd never list anything. Instead, I follow my experience that tells me most Mac, Linux and Windows users can tell good software from bad and know how to make their personal tradeoffs.

IMPORTANT NOTE: the creators and the maintainers of the software listed here probably don't even know the POSS concept at all, let alone endorse it. Attaching the POSS label to the software packages listed below is (currently) just my personal decision.

Internet

Mozilla Firefox for Browsing the WWW
Mozilla Thunderbird for Mail, News, Syndication (RSS, Podcasts)
Azureus for BitTorrents
Capivara for synchronizing directories and files locally or via SFTP and FTP

Office and Organizing

OpenOffice.org for Texts, Spreadsheets, Presentations
AbiWord for Texts
GanttProject for Project Management
FreeMind for Mind Mapping
JPasswords for storing passwords
Docco for personal indexing/searching TXT, ODT, ODS, SXW, PDF, HTML, DOC, XLS
GenealogyJ for maintaining GEDCOM-compatible family trees (real Unicode support)

Graphics

The GIMP for editing Bitmap Graphics
Inkscape for editing SVG Graphics

Audio & Video

Audacity (plus plugins) for multi-track editing Audio data (WAV, MP3, FLAC and more, using plugins)
TV-Browser free Electronic Program Guide (EPG)
VLC media player (suggested by SpiKe, thanks!)

Work & Development

Eclipse for Java-related Development
JXplorer for LDAP Management
jEdit for editing text files and source code
VIM for editing text files and source code (suggested by Rafael Bugajewski, thanks!)

@Computer: Declare your software independence, Part One

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 09:00:00 +0000

Chances are that you, during your career, have used a lot of different software packages, running under several operating systems. I did, too. Much of my data needed to survive all infrastructure changes, over the years. I had more than my fair share of data loss, data corruption, vendors going out of business, insane upgrade schemes & costs and the like.

Saving my data from annihilation has always been, in the end, my job. Sometimes, import features assisted me with migrations. Over the years, things kept speeding up, and I learned the meaning of interoperability, that is: how to find the least lossy, daily transformations to carry data from one application to another and back. Meanwhile, even that isn't fast enough anymore.

Open-Source Software (OSS) alone is not sufficient to cure this disease, because many OSS applications suffer from platform lock-in: While you're on a Windows machine, you don't have that handy Linux application available. While you're working on a Mac, that nifty Windows application is unavailable. While you're working under Linux, WINE can't run the very Windows application that you'd need. While you're on the Web, file sizes are too big to work efficiently. And so on, ad nauseam.

That's why I've come to cherish excellent open source software that tears down those walls by simply running under various platforms. Running. Not just «being portable», but actually ported: applications that you can safely install on any of your computers and use it for years to come, whether you're online or not, whether you switch to a new operating system or not, whether you can afford buying a new machine every year or not.

I've decided to coin a new term for that kind of software and explain what it means in this posting. In part two of this mini-series, I'll list some great software packages that meet the criteria.

So, what is Ported Open Source Software (POSS)?

Goals of the POSS concept

The goal of the POSS concept is to provide the average, mainstream software user with sane advice on what Open Source Software (OSS) can be used on all mainstream platforms he or she uses during the day. Targeting the (perceived) mainstream means, in this case, a focus on software that gains the widest media coverage, too: software developed on the PC, for users working at the PC, running under wide-spread PC operating systems.

POSS Requirements, v0.3

Ported Open Source Software (POSS) satisfies the following four requirements:

OSI-approved License
The license that covers the software is an open source license approved by the OSI.
Platform Affirmation
For each release, executables are always made available at the same time for all supported platforms.
Data Conditioning
All stored data processed by a given release of the software can be processed and stored again by any other platform-specific executable of the same release. If interfaces are needed (like, e.g., database drivers), they're available for all supported platforms, at no extra cost.
Mainstream Compliance
For each release, executables are available for at least Linux, OS X (TM) and Microsoft Windows (TM).

Shortcomings of the POSS concept

The concept of POSS has some shortcomings that should be considered carefully before giving praise to it:

Platforms for running POSS need not be OSS. That's because the POSS concept is a limited subset of the OSS concept, not a viral license.
The concept of a mainstream is arguable. E.g., it could be said that embedded systems are somehow much more mainstream than PCs, at least by the sheer numbers of deployed units.
Mandatory support for operating systems comprises only Linux, OS X (TM) and Microsoft Windows (TM). That leaves out e.g. BSD or Free DOS. An additional label like POSS+ could be created that covers software for 3+ operating systems, but currently I'm not pursuing that option.
Downward compatibility with respect to the data persisted by a software is not required. My focus here is on working on different systems at the same time (synchronous aspects), not on maintaining historical data (diachronic aspects).

POSS artwork

Please find below some POSS logos and banners, for your convenience. If you want to support the concept, feel free to download the graphics. Use them wherever you feel its appropriate and please add a backlink to this page.

If you don't (yet) feel like supporting the concept, please let me know why, in the comments. I've deliberately labeled this thing "v0.3".

Stephen R. Coveys «The 7 Habits» (3/8): Begin with the End in Mind

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 08:56:19 +0000

In this eight-part series, I'm going to present the key concepts of the book and what I've learned from them. This is Part 3 of the series.

[Note: If you happen to be a follower of David Allen's Getting Things Done (GTD), the chapter discussed in this posting will show you an interesting approach to defining goals in your life from the 50,000 feet perspective. If you're more interested in the lower levels, this posting probably isn't for you.]

An overview of the series can be found here.

&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;

Leadership vs. management

Among other examples, Covey uses the ladder analogy: leadership must determine against which wall to lean a ladder; management is then about climbing up as efficiently as possible. If the ladder is leaning against the wrong wall, even excellent management is bound to arrive at disappointment. Before the physical creation of success (management), there must be the mental creation. Everything is created twice: first in the mind, and second in reality. Beginning with the end in mind means to do the first creation well, to develop a leadership habit.

Leadership is harder to learn than management because it is harder to discover your own center instead of simply centering oneself the agenda of others, bowing in to «circumstances» or overcoming old habits. Your center is where your security, guidance, wisdom and power flow from. Bogus centers tie your life-support factors of security, guidance, wisdom and power to external things and events and thus turn you over to manipulative forces. Examples of bogus centers are

your spouse
your family
money
work
possessions (physical and immaterial, like prestige)
pleasure
friend-or-foe thinking
churches
selfishness

Some of these centers of life look quite common and innocent. What's wrong, e.g. with centering your life around your family? Covey says it introduces a strong dependency. If our sense of emotional worth comes primarily from family traditions, family culture or family reputation, our feeling of security depends on that and is threatened by the same things, too. You don't even need to consider mafia-style family bonds to see why wisdom and good guidance don't necessarily flow from family traditions. Finally: when you happen to be separated from your family for a while, where does your power come from? Similar conclusions apply to the other bogus centers as well.

Your center should instead be based on principles, and Covey shows a way how to find and define your own center. It starts with becoming aware of the roles you play in life, of the responsibilities and the goals related to them: father or mother, neighbor, professional roles, and so on.

As a thought experiment, Covey suggests that you imagine your own funeral ceremony. Imagine the people attending it. They have come to know you as somebody who fulfills one or more roles in their lives. What do you want them to say about you, in the end? About your character, your contributions, your achievements? Write your own eulogy. Use your imagination to get in touch with your values.

The personal mission statement

As soon as you know you what you want others to say about you when they look back on your life, you are ready to define your center. It's easier to do when the result is a personal mission statement - security, guidance, wisdom and power are needed most for actions, less for static pondering. Use affirmative statements:

be personal: there is no use in talking about othersor mankind in general.
be positive: your mission statement is not about what you want to avoid, but about what you want to achieve.
be present: talk about what you want to do now, not what you should have done in the past or will do, «some day».
be visual: your mission statement shall inspire you, so use words that fuel your imagination. and give you a foretaste of success.
be emotional: your mission statement shall be uplifting.

Think broadly about your roles. Wherever you repeatedly encounter various people, a role can be detected. Assume you'd only have one more year to live. Imagine things like wedding anniversaries, retirement scenarios and other milestones in life and you'll find even more to think about: what would you like to be able to say about yourself, by then?

The resulting personal mission statement will be the script you wrote for your life, superseding any other scripts that you've come to accept so far, be it from your parents, environment, genetics or from society.

My impression

When you want to think about your goals and purpose in life, it's helpful to widen your perspective by thinking in roles. Covey somewhat overstretched it, though: he suggests that you extend this approach to your family and to whole companies. It's quite common, e.g. to write down mission statements for companies, but they're hardly effective. I'm neither convinced that two or more people really understand a shared mission statement in the exact same way, nor that they follow its path over a longer time.

That being said, it's fun to try out the Mission Statement Builder.

See the next part of the series: Stephen R. Coveys «The 7 Habits» (4/8): Put First Things First . An overview of the series can be found here.

&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;

Pareto's open secret

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 04:52:11 +0000

Wikipedia summarizes the Pareto Principle like this:

The Pareto principle (also known as the 80-20 rule, the law of the vital few and the principle of factor sparsity) states that, for many events, 80% of the effects comes from 20% of the causes.

To some people, this seems to suggest:

20% efforts => ~~80,~~ 90, 99% results! WOW!

It is easy to fool yourself into believing all that matters were those 20%. Once you believe that, however, the Pareto Principle becomes kind of a voodoo ritual: «Hey, just find the 20% of your actions that really matter. Pin them down (pun intended) to make almost all of your dreams come true.»

A few frustrating experiments pass by and disappointment kicks in, because the Pareto Principle apparently just doesn't «live up to its promise». So the 80-20 rule must be «useless», because it can't «tell» you where to pierce the doll.

Take one step back to become aware of how fixated one can become on the 20% part of the rule. Just find those 20%, the most promising actions that target.... ummmm: what exactly do they target?

Where did the 80% part go? It nearly vanished. Well, anyway it's just a negligible deviation from complete fulfillment, isn't it?

The 80-20 rule, however, is about looking at your goals first, before taking action. The first step is to condense

100% of your goals=
must haves + essentials + nice to haves + crazy ideas

80% of your goals
=
must haves + essentials

To put it in a nutshell: boil down the flimsy soup of goals to an 80% concentrated stew that will give you the power and wisdom to act effectively.

That's the open secret of the 80-20 rule. It starts with the «80», and so should you.

My favorite 5 personal development blogs

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 09:00:00 +0000

Priscilla Palmer tagged me to contribute a list of my top 5 favorite personal development blogs to her Personal Development List. Her list is already very comprehensive and I've found several pointers to great sites I did not know yet.

Well then, here's my list:

Problogger, by Darren Rowse
Darren is blogging about - blogging. Doesn't sound like «personal development»? It is, due to his laid back, factual style of writing that is skipping the common hard selling lingo.
zen habits, by Leo Babauta
Leo is a father of six, a busy guy and a phenomenal blogger. I wonder how he manages to get that many high quality postings per week out of the door. One day, I may discover that secret...
Made to Be Great, by Alan Torres
For a moment, forget that worn out and ironic appeal of the word and let me say that Alan is nice, really. Besides his own insightful postings, he compiles the Made to Be Great Personal Development Carnival.
Steve Pavlina's Personal Development Blog
Steve's site contains a tremendous wealth of articles. His style is energetic and straightforward, almost like a steamroller. You may not like everything he writes, but everything is genuine, for sure.
The Happiness Project, by Gretchen Rubin
In short, Gretchen is about the only blogger I know who can post both about household chores as well as about sex tips - and not lose credibility.

That's it, for now. Google Reader tells my that I'm subscribed to about 100 feeds now, so take this list with a grain of salt.

[2007-09-05 Update: Priscilla's List has stabilized meanwhile, so here it is:

Aaron Potts at Today is That Day
Adam Alexander at Adam’s Peace
Adam Kayce at Monk at Work
Adam Khoo at Adam Khoo’s Philosophies and Investing Insights
AgentSully at Life Learning Today
April Groves at Making Life Work For You
Argancel at C’eclair (for those who speak french)
Ash aka Mr. Biggs at One Powerful Word
Al at 7pproductions.com
Alan Torres at Made to Be Great
Alex Shalman at AlexShalman.com
Alexander Kjerulf at The Chief Happiness Officer
Alexys Fairfield at Unraveling The Spiritual Mystique
Albert Foong at urbanmonk.net
Amber at Random Mangus
Amie Ragan at Psychology of Clutter
Amy Hedin at There is no Maximum to Human Potential
Andrea Learned at Learned on Women
Andrea J. Lee at Money, Meaning, and Beyond
Andy Wibbels at AndyWibbels.com
Anita Pathik Law at Power of four Way
Anna Farmery at The Engaging Brand
Antonio Thornton at AntonioThornton.com
Ariane Benefit at Neat & Simple Living
Ask Lucid at Ask Lucid Spiritual Development
Barbara Sliter at Creatorship
Belle Wong at Abundance Journal
Bill Perry at Lucid Blog
Billy Smith at The Organic Leadership Blog
Blogfuse at LifeDev
Brad Isaac at Achieve It
Brian Clark at Copyblogger
Brian Kim at briankim.net
Brian Lee at geniustypes.com
Bob at everyeveryminute
Cam Beck at ChaosScenario
Cara Lumen at The Success Magnets With Cara Luman and Your Second Wind Blog
Carlon Haas at Possess Less Exist More
Chris Cree at SuccessCREEations
Chris Marshall at Martial Development
Chris Owen at Pink Apple
Christine Kane at ChristineKane.com
Clyde at Feeling Good
Colin Beavan at No Impact Man
Conceive, Believe, Achieve at Conceive, Believe, Achieve
Craig Harper at Motivational Speaker
Curt Rosengren at Occupational Adventure
Cyres at Cyres Matters
Damian Carr at Soul Terminal
Daniel Sitter at Idea Sellers
Darren Rowse at Problogger.net
Dave Schawbel at The Personal Branding Blog
Dave Schoof at Engaging the Disquiet
Davers at Language Trainers Blog
David Allen at The David Allen Company
David Bohl at Reflections on Balance
David Fitch at David Fitch.com
David Richeson at 360 Degree Success
David Rogers at How to Have Great Self Confidence
David Seah at David Seah.com
David Zinger at Slacker Manager
Dawud Miracle at dmiracle.com
Dean Lacono at Law of Attraction for Beginners
Debbie Call at Spirit In Gear
Debbie LaChusa at 10 Step Marketing Collection
Debra Moorhead at Debra Moorhead.com
Denise Mosawi at Destineering.com
Des Walsh at Thinking Home Business
Devlyn Steele at Tools To Life Guide
Dick Richards at Come Gather Round
Dominic Tay at Personal Development for Winners
Don Simkovich at Hey Don
Donald Latumahina at Life Optimizer
Donna Karlin at Perspectives
Donna Steinhorn at Rethinking
Dr. Charles Parker at The Core Psych Blog
Dr. Hal at Northstar Mental fitness blog
Drew Rozell at Drew Rozell.com
Dwayne Melancon at Genuine Curiosity
Edward Mills at Evolving Times
Ellen Weber at Brain Based Business
Emily G. W. Lilly at The Science of Waldorf Education
Emmanuel Lopez at The Adventures of Motivatorman
Ellesse at Goal Setting College
Elly Jolly at Jolly Life Coaching
Enoch Tan at Mind Reality
Eric Napier at Quotation Collection
Erin Pavlina at Erin Pavlina.com
Frank Kanu at Frank Uncovers Excellence in Leadership
Frank Roche at KnowHR Blog
Galba Bright at Tune Up Your EQ
Gilad Buchman at Sigsug
Gleb Reys at Personal Development Ideas
Grayson at Modern Worker Blog
Greg Butler at Life as Art
Greg Frost at ChargedAudio.com
Gretchen Rubin at Happiness Project
Gustav at Success-is-in-you.com
Guy Kawasaki at How to Change the World
Gyanish at Diethack
Halina Goldstein at The Inner Travel Journal
Hilda Carroll at Living Out Loud
Heather Goldsmith at A Creative Journal
Henrik Edberg at The Positivity Blog
Honman at Open Your Mind to Prosperity
Inkedmn at The Cranking Widgets Blog
Itzy Sabo at Email Overloaded
Jacklyn Ker at Inspiring and Empowing Lives
Jason and Michael at Black Belt Productivity
Jason Ivers at A Miracle a Day
Jason Womack at Fit and Effective
Jay White at dumb little man tips for life
Jean Browman at Transforming Stress Into Power and Cheerful Monk
Jeff Lilly at Druid Journal
Jeffrey Phillips at Think Faster
Jennifer at Goodness Graciousness
Jenny and Erin at Jenny and Erin
Jeremiah Owyang at Web Strategy by Jeremiah
Jerry Hart at Blue Print to emarketing
Jerry Lopper at Personal Growth
Jessa at clairvoyantGuidance.net
Jim stroup at Managing Leadership
Jim Walton at Black In Business
JoLynn Braley at The Fit Shack
Joan Schramm at Accelerating Momentum
Joanna Young at Coaching Wizardry
Joanne at I’m Happy Fish
Joe Vitale at Dr. Joe Vitale at Zero
John Pratt at John Pratt International
John Place at John Place Online
John W. McKenna at The Leadership Epidemic
John Wesley at Pick The Brain
Jon at Join The Secret
Jonathan at Smart Wealthy Rich and Freelance Folder
Jory Des Jardin at Pause: Meaningful Work
Josh Bickford at Reach For Magnificence and Reach for Magnificence
Josh Kaufman at The Personal MBA
Judy Martin at The Work/Life Monitor
Julia Rogers Hamrick at Julia’s Blog: Journal of the Journey Home to Eden
Julie Bonner at Declutter It
Kailani at An Island Review
Kammie Kobyleski at Passion Meets Purpose
Karen at Journey with Water Learner
Karen Lynch at Live The Power
Karen Wallace at The Clearing Space
Karl Moore at Karl Blog.com
Karl Staib at Karl Staib.com
Keith Ferrazzi at Never Eat Alone
Kevin Kinchen at Creative Power of Thought
Killeris at Attitude, The Ultimate Power
Kim and Jason at Escape Adulthood
Kim George at Doing What You Can Do
Kirk Nugent at Kirk Nugent.com
Kirsten Harrell at Ipopin
Krishna De at Biz Growth News and Todays Women in Business
K.L. Masina at Be Conscious Now
Leah Maclean at Working Solo
Laura Young at The Dragon Slayer’s Guide to Life
Lee Nutter at bmindful
Leo Babauta at Zen Habits
Life Reflection at Universe in a Single Atom
Linda Salazar at Awaken The Genie Within
Lisa Braithwaite at Speak Schmeak
Lisa Gates at Design Your Writing Life
Lisa Van Allen at Finish Strong
Liz Strauss at Successful Blog
Lodewijkvdb at How to be an Original
Lola Fayemi at Real World Spiritual and Personal Development
Lorraine Cohen at Powerfull Living
Luciano Passuello at Litemind.com
Lucid at Spiritual Suggestions
Lyman Reed at Creating a Better Life
Lyndon Antcliff at LyndonAntcliff.com and Cornwallseo.com
MT at MindTWEAKS
Maddy at Illuminated Minds Want to Know
Malathy Badri at Laws of Universe
Manny at Success Books
Maria Garcia at Get Organized Now
Maria Palma at The Good Life
Marianne Williamson at Journal
Mark at The Naked Soul
Mark Forster at Get Everything Done
Mark LaPierre at The Winding Path
Mark McManus at Build Your Life To Order
Mark W Shead at Productivity 501
Martin Avis at Kickstart Daily
Matthew Cornell at Matt’s Idea Blog
Meg Haworth at Life Lessons From Your Soul
Melanie Benson Strick at The Success Blog
Merlin Mann at 43 Folders
Michelle at aMusing My Genius
Michelle Moore at Happiness Blog
Michael Port at The Think Big Revolution
Michael Vanderdonk at TOACH Performance
Mike Janssen at Opgestroopte Mouwen
Mike St. Pierre at The Daily Saint
Mr.Wang at Mr Wang Says So
My Everyday Planner at My Everyday Planner
Nancy Tierney at Unconditional Confidence
Neil Patel at Quick Sprout
Nic Askew at Monday 9AM Blog
Nick Smith at Life 2.0
Nneka at Balanced Life Center
Organize-It at Organize-It
Pamala Slim at Escape From Cubicle Nation
Pamm Larry at My Spiritual Dance
Patricia Singleton at Spiritual Journey of a Lightworker
Patti Digh at 37 Days
Paul at Paul’s Tips
Paul Piotrowski at Self Help Wisdom
Paula Kawal at Paula Kawal.com
Peggy Payne at Peggy Payne’s Boldness Blog
Peter at I Will Change Your Life
Peter Aldin at Great Circle
Peter Haslem at Necessary Skills
Phil Gerbyshak at Make It Great
Philippe Matthews at Shockwealth
Priscilla Palmer at Personal Development Demands Success
Raymond Salas at Zenchill Powertools
Real Modern Man at Real Modern Man
Reg Adkins at ElementalTruths
Ricardo at Wake Up Tiger
Rich Schefren at Strategic Profits
Rick Cockrum at Shards of Consciousness
Rick Cooper at The PDA Pro
Ririan at Ririanproject
Rob at 7Breaths
Rob Cooke at Leave the Office
Robert at Compassionate Council
Robert at Myselfdev
Robin Skeen at Robin’s Reflections
Robin Yapp at Yapp 3.0
Robyn McMaster at Brain Based Biz
Roger Von Oech at Creative Think
Rolf F. Katzenberger at Evomend
Rosa Say at Managing With Aloha Coaching
Ryan Marle at The Alpha Project
S.J. Yee at Personal Development for the Book Smart
Sam at Aquire Wisdom and Live with Passion
Scott Adams at The Dilbert Blog
Scott Berkun at Berkun Blog
Scott Bernadot at Keeping The Secret
Scott Ginsberg at Hello, My Name Is Blog
Scott H Young at Scott H Young
Scott McArthur at McArthur’s Rant
Self Pursuit at Self Pursuit
Senia at Senia.com Positive Psychology Coaching
Seth Godin at Seth’s Blog
Shane Navratil at Zoomstart
Shauna Arthurs at Breathing Prosperity and Follow Your Path
Shaheen Lakhan at GNIF Brain Blogger
Simone at Dynamic Living
Simone and Mandy at Outfit Inspirations
Slade Roberson at Shift Your Spirits and Spiritual Blogging
Sleeping Dude at How to Wake Up Early
Sonora Jayne Case at Positive Realities Coaching
Spike at Organize It
Stephanie and Jeffrey at Brains on Purpose
Steve King at The Green Geek
Steve Olson at Steve-Olson.com
Steve Pavlina at stevepavlina.com
Steve Roesler at All Things Workplace
Stephen at HD bizblog
Steven Aitchison at Change Your Thoughts
Surjit at Gurushabad
Susan Sabo at Productivity Cafe
Suzanne Bird-Harris at Learning Curve Coaching
Ted Demopoulos at Blogging For Business
Terry Starbucker at Ramblings From a Glass Half Full
Thom Quinn at Qlog
Tim Ferris at 4-Hour Workweek and Lifestyle Design Blog
Tim Taylor at My Agapic Life
Tom Peters at Tom Peters.com
Tom Spanton at TRCoach
Tom Van Brunscot of Transformation Economy
Tony Chimento at Living Forward
Tony D Clark at Success From The Nest
Torlink at You Create Reality
Travis A. Sinquefield at Disorganizational Behavior
Travis Wright at Cultivate Greatness
Trizoko at Trizoko.com
Trevor Gay at Simplicity is the Key
Troy Worman at Orbit Now!
Tuck Self at Rebel Belle Blog
Tupelo Kenyon at Tupelokenyon.com
Ubertech at Geeks Guide To GTD
Vera Nadine at Vera Nadine.com
Vickie at Contemplate This
Wally Bock and his real-life management insight at Three Star Leadership
Wan Qi at Meditation Forum Mantras
Wild Bill at Passionate Blogger

and these collaborated sites:

]

What is (not) a GTD context?

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 09:30:00 +0000

A key asset of every practitioner of Getting Things Done (GTD) is her or his set of Next-Action (NA) Lists.

NAs are not dumped into a single ToDo list. Instead, each list is focused on a given context that allows you to complete the action. According to David Allen, a context describes the tool, location or person that is required to be able to complete an action.

@Home, @Office, @Phone are typical examples. When you arrange your NAs like that, you're obviously in a much better position as soon as you're in the respective context and want to know what you should do now.

But what exactly is a context, and what isn't?

Types of contexts and how to handle them

During my last weekly review, I've had a look at my NA lists and I wondered what types of contexts exist. Here's my list, please add a comment below to share additional types. Here we go:

People
Examples: @Joe, @Mom and dad.
Usually, this list takes the form of an agenda. Such lists are real life savers when your stress level is extremely high and you need to fly by autopilot.
Roles and service providers
Examples: @Boss, @M.D., @Delivery/FedEx/UPS.
Better distinguish between roles and individual people, even when you're at very good terms with them.
Locations
Examples: @Desk, @Home, @Office, @Club, @San Diego Office.
Places you stay at on a regular base.
Errands
Examples: @Walmart.
Recurring event agendas
Examples: @Weekly sales meeting.
Recurring idle time spans
Examples: @Morning coffee, @Gym, @Jogging, @Commuting.
Please consider Leo Babauta's advice on establishing calming routines and keep some idle time spans free from any todos. Sometimes, idle isn't really idle.
Allocated time spans
Examples: @Reading, @Creative.
Christian Eriksson points at an allocation example and Keith Robinson presents a similar idea for creative work.
Required resources or tools
Examples: @Online/Web, @PC-Offline/Mac anywhere, @Phone/Calls, @Email, Merlin Mann even lists: @Google
It's not just the resource, but also the flow state when using it. Steve Pavlina criticizes GTD for requiring him to maintain lists like @Phone, saying he doesn't want to «scramble actions from different projects together». That's throwing out the baby with the water. GTD is not about staying focused on a single project, GTD is about avoiding task switching. When your projects look very similar to each other, batching similar tasks avoids task switching; completing a single project under such circumstances would involve more switching among more diverse task types.
[2007-09-05 Update: See this posting on the David Allen forum for anecdotal evidence.]
Habits
Example: @Home.2Minutes.
Chores and resolutions. Since it is hard to remember especially the minor ones, a list comes in handy.

Fake context types

Actions or Projects
Unfortunately, Merlin Mann initially listed actions like brainstorm, decide, print, read, write, schedule, refactor under «actionable contexts». David Allen doesn't call them contexts; when he talks about reading, e.g., he doesn't even mean an allocated time span (see above), but just a folder containing the actual items (articles, memos, printed emails, whatever). A better option than calling the above contexts would be to ask yourself: in which context will I be able to brainstorm, decide, print, read, etc. The answers will be different for each type of action. You won't bring your complete reading folder everyhere, that's a myth. And you can't just «print» everywhere: your boss isn't pleased when you print your private stuff in the office; your friends may not have any mac-compatible software installed on their Windows machines; your parent's printer may not be a color inkjet. So there is a hidden context here.
Singular Events (opposed to: recurring events that have agendas, see above)
«@Vacation in Greece» isn't a context, but a project. Put this on your project list and fill the next actions into the appropriate context lists or calendar pages. Your calendar and your errand list are valid in Greece, too...
Available time or energy levels
Brian Kei Tanaka talks about short-time and long-time contexts equating short-time with a low energy level requirement: @Computer, short However, on the whole there are three factors that guide your choice of the next task to be completed: priority, energy level, available time. Turn one of them into a context and the other ones become second-class citizens of your reliable system. E.g., you may have plenty of energy left - will you tackle the longer tasks only and miss the important short ones on the other list? If you want to track such factors, it's better to add extra columns to @Computer, to hold your assessment of priority, required energy level, and required time.
Priorities
Using contexts like @Urgent, @Important, or @A/@B/@C is an indicator that you've fallen back to traditional «time management» methods. It's not helpful to know that a next action is urgent if you can't act upon it where you are right now.
Invariant time spans
What about using @Today, @AM, @PM and the likes? Bobby Sullivan seems to suggest an Outlook category like Today was also a GTD context. While his category hack is great for planning the daily workload, his assumption isn't correct. Be sure not to confuse invariant time spans with contexts: planning to complete a next action within an invariant time span does not turn that time span into a context. It's easy to see that you're not always in the same place at the same time of day.

If you tend to have a lot of these, read Merlin Mann's advice on slashing contexts; it reminds me of the software development danger that Bertrand Meyer called Taxomania (IT-specific link, beware), the excessive desire of building classification trees for the only purpose of classifying.

The intersection problem and how to solve it

When you see two or more context candidates for a next action, you've bumped into the intersection problem. Hardly any given set of contexts is free of intersections. For instance, assume you may make phone calls @Home, @Phone or @Office. To which list will you add, e.g. «Call Jim and arrange for meeting next Thu»?

There are various ways to tackle that problem. Here's my list of strategies in the preferred order of application:

Favor the generic context over the specific one
Add «Call Jim and arrange for meeting next Thu» to @Phone, because that category is more generic and you need to check @Phone when you're @Home and @Office anyway. If you haven't got @Phone yet, create that list now.
Obviously, this does not work if your company does not permit non-business calls from your workplace.
Merge contexts
if your boss does not like when you make private calls from your workplace, and you don't have a cell phone anyway, then cancel the @Phone list and merge its content («Call Jim and arrange for meeting next Thu») into the @Home list.
Favor frequent contexts over rare ones
Choose the context you're in more often. Is that @Home, @Phone or @Office? Adding «Call Jim and arrange for meeting next Thu» to it increases the chances that you'll get to see this task earlier. Of course, seeing does not mean completing.
Favor permanent contexts over temporary ones
Assume you're a freelancer who mostly works at the customer's site, in an office that is temporarily yours. «Call Jim and arrange for meeting next Thu» goes into @Home, because that saves you the transfer form @Office to @Home when your contract ends.

What are your suggestions for dealing with contexts? Let me know in the comments, below.

Successful meetings, or: The Great Commandment of Communication

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 10:00:01 +0000

You've completed the room reservation in time. You've arranged for coffee and beverages. You've set up the agenda and mailed it in advance to all participants. All feedback has been incorporated, of course. All flip chart supports are loaded with fresh pads of paper.

As a true follower of Getting Things Done (GTD), you've tracked all those tasks as next action items and completed them, over time. You think you've also dealt with the 20,000 feet perspective on that little meeting project; covered all areas of your responsibilities.

Then the meeting begins. Discussion starts. After a while, you feel like you'd rather be amidst a bunch of howler monkeys during their mating season. Why isn't anybody listening?

Maybe, you've missed some of your responsibilities. You have dealt with facts, space and time, but maybe you were not paying enough attention to the

Great Commandment of Communication:
You shall listen fourfold and you shall speak fourfold.

Fourfold listening and speaking

There are dozens of communication models, starting from a simplistic «Sender S sends message M to receiver R» scheme to sophisticated theories covering the most subtle nonverbal expression of mental states.

Simplistic models aren't that helpful. Elaborate ones could give you guidance if you got enough time to apply them thoroughly to analyzing and mastering the respective situation. The problem is that you never get that time, though.

For practical purposes, I've found that I can get the most out of a discussion when I focus on four aspects of each message, whether I'm listening or talking:

Facts and Data
When we speak, we love to assume that we just tell the facts. As listeners, we take pride in perceiving ourselves as gold panners, patiently looking for the fact nuggets in the sands of Blah. Facts and data are an important aspect of every message. But they're just 25%.
Self-disclosure
When we speak, especially in meetings, we also love to assume that we behave just like a news anchorman or woman, «delivering» a message. But we're doing much more, were also talking about how we feel today; whether we're relaxed or fraught; happy or angry (or indifferent); wide awake or tired. As listeners, we can sense these status indicators - if we choose to listen to this quarter of the message, too.
Relationship
When we speak, we express how we see our relationship to our listeners, too. Do we talk on a par with our listeners? Do we look down on them? Up to them? Do we express friendship? Appreciation? Do we keep our distance? As listeners, we may be eagerly waiting for signs the speaker cares about our relationship. It is easy - but not recommendable - to ignore this part of a message.
Appeal
When we speak, especially in meetings, we're urging the listeners to do or to think something as well. As listeners, we usually can sense those underlying appeals and we may even feel uncomfortable if we can't figure out the 25% of a message that tell us what somebody «wants» from us.

The Great Commandment of Communication in Meetings

Just consider this: everybody has their personal preference on what aspect of the communication matters most in any given situation. Any speaker may prefer one of the four aspects. Any listener may do so as well. This yields 4 x 4 = 16 possible combinations of speaker-listener preference combinations, any time. Had we chosen a more complex communication model, that number might even be a lot bigger.

Anyway, 16 combinations are already too many to deal with in an improvisational fashion. Think about the commandment before the meeting: You shall listen fourfold and you shall speak fourfold.

Facts and data are what you want to obtain most eagerly in a meeting. When listening, don't miss good facts and data just because you're craving for signs of one of the other three aspects, or worse, because you feel your ego was hurt by another aspect of a message. When you're the speaker, remember that most people hunger for factual information, so don't make them play bullshit bingo. There are people (like Mr. Spock, of Star Trek fame) who are nearly incapable of focusing on anything but facts and data, whether they're listening or speaking. Take that into account, if you happen to have a coworker like that. They are not rude by intention, they mean to serve you well.

Self-disclosure in meetings isn't very popular, but despite that, quite common. It's just sometimes not presented in the ways you'd expect it as a listener. E.g., how many times have you been hit by somebody else's cynicism in a large meeting only to find that the very same person deeply cared for the issue when you talked to them in private? That's because cynicism is an indicator of pain, of values that have been hurt. In case you know the TV series House, M.D., you've seen that behavior and background exposed by the protagonist. If you're the speaker, be more straightforward with expressing values and attitudes, instead of being ironic. If you absolutely disagree with the very purpose of the meeting, say so in advance, but only once and shut up during the meeting.

Relationships are used and abused throughout any meeting. Speakers may try to coax or force others towards things their listeners otherwise would never ever consider doing. That's clearly manipulative. Keep in mind that relationships have been established before the meeting and will last, hopefully, after the meeting, too. Mark Horstman and Michael Auzenne have compiled hours and hours of podcasts teaching why it pays to and how to build strong relationships over time, so you can and will benefit from them when you're in need. Big meetings are not occasions to shape relationships, but to make good use of them and to strengthen them; this applies to any kind of relationships, as master networker Christine Comaford-Lynch explains in a recent interview with Tim Ferriss. As a speaker, express your appreciation for your listeners. As a listener, keep in mind that while you may disagree with the hot topics at hand, the relationship will last beyond that meeting. It is probably more effective to use an excellent relationship for convincing somebody in a one-on-one meeting than referring to it in front of a whole group.

Appeals are, for some, the very reason to attend a meeting at all. As a speaker, it may be your goal to get your message out. As a listener, you may want to see your interests covered and safeguarded by the speaker; some listeners won't even stop questioning everything until the speaker abides. In general, meetings abound with appeals, so there is no need to encourage you to come up with them or to recognize others making them. Instead, what most of us need is to pay more attention to the Win-Win game. All too often, alleged «wins» rather look like sham-packaged disadvantages. Consider in advance and carefully what your listeners will actually be satisfied with; when you're the listener, try to figure out whether there is actually something to gain for you. But beware: often, infamous tactics like the Red Herring are used to divert your attention from considering actual benefits, so that a a bad option looks more appealing. Keep out of the muddy waters of such tactics. When in doubt, learn from the current Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, how to appeal to others without appealing (no pun, but koan intended); research on YouTube for some interviews that feature him.

Try this

During the next meeting you're attending, note down the three most provocative statements you get to hear. Also, note down those of your statements that others feel strongly about, in a positive or a negative sense.

Then, review what you were hearing or saying in terms of

Facts and data you were presented or presenting,
Self-disclosure by yourself and others,
Relationships and how you and others saw them,
Appeals that were made by you and others.

Do your findings explain some of the trouble in that meeting?
Let me know your findings and your opinion in the comments below!

Credits

Considering these 4 aspects of communication is commonly credited to Friedemann Schulz von Thun, a German psychologist (yes, he is still alive; but no, unfortunately his immensely practical books haven't yet been translated into English). He calls his model the Square of Communication.

Stephen R. Coveys «The 7 Habits» (2/8): Be Proactive

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 20:41:28 +0000

In this eight-part series, I'm going to present the key concepts of the book and what I've learned from them. This is Part 2 of the series. An overview of the series can be found here.

Between stimulus and reaction: Being proactive

Humans can decide how to react to a stimulus, while animals can't. Thats what Steven Covey considers to be the biggest difference between them. It's his explanation of responsibility: response-ability, the ability to choose your response. Our responses are (well, should be!) the outcome of applying our unique human endowments:

self-awareness - we can be aware of who we are and what we do;
imagination - we can find new answers;
conscience - we have an innate ability to tell right from wrong;
free will - due to our self-awareness, we can decide how to respond.

There is more to it: we needn't wait for a stimulus, but can take initiative instead. Being proactive means both in Covey's view: the responsibility for what we do and taking the initiative. If we choose to believe in determinism instead («It's the fault of our genes / parents / environment»), we turn ourselves into reactive victims.

Reactive thinking leads to a multitude of negative symptoms:

Self-awareness degrades to awareness only of what «people» say about us - which is not impartial. Others have their own views and interests (of the moment) and project them onto us, unconsciously. If we accept these projections indiscriminately, we do not see ourselves but rather a distorted image, like in a crazy mirror room.
Language abounds with phrases that suggest a lack of options. «I can't», «they don't let me», «that's how I am» are typical examples.
Making the decisions that control our lives becomes the responsibility of others.
In the end, being powerless becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. When somebody keeps on talking and thinking about being powerless, he or she loses a lot of energy. The environment, too, starts to believe that a self-proclaimed «victim» is better not be relied upon. Which leads to a reinforcing «I told you so. They won't let me...»

Augment your circle of influence, become influential

Covey's character ethic is different from superficial positive thinking. Looking at reality first makes all the difference, before choosing a response. The 7 Habits don't deal with a «positive attitude». Instead, Covey insists on a simple question: what's next - even if we may be sobered by that look at reality. Even if we're about to loose confidence.

So you won't find instructions for the permanent smile in his book, but a clear distinction between whats feasible and what isn't:

The circle of influence, versus
the circle of concern.

By default, our circle of influence is only a subset of our circle of influence. Proactive people handle this gap much better than reactive ones.

Reactive people focus on everything they're concerned with, whether they can influence it or not. Being «concerned» but feeling helpless is a common result. Thinking circles around terms like fault and guilt. Around things one could not, can not and will not have. Around having to do something. As a result, the circle of concern increases, but the circle of influence decreases like a muscle that doesn't get used a lot.
Proactive people don't react like that to reality. They focus on their circle of influence. On keeping their promises and standing by their commitments. On what they want to be and what they want to become. They're actively pursuing the enlargement of their circle of influence. This way, they shape the circumstances instead of complaining about them.

The first three habits (Be Proactive; Begin with the End in Mind; Put First Things First) all belong to the category of private victories. They're increasing our direct control within our circle of influence.

Fostering indirect control, influence on others, in short: public victory is the aim of the following three habits (Think Win/Win; Seek First to Understand, Then to Be Understood; Synergize). Instead of complaining about others who don't do what they ought to, learn to compensate for their weaknesses. Covey sees a lot of potential here, especially in supporting executives. Put your anticipatory skills at work and demonstrate that you can be relied upon. Solve problems and watch your circle of influence grow.

Whenever you have no influence at all (it happens a lot less than you may think), reactive thinking doesn't make sense or may be dangerous, even perilous. For the moment, being powerless must be accepted, but freedom be preserved. As an extreme example, Covey tells the story of Austrian neurologist and psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, who wrote down in his autobiography (Viktor Frankl Recollections: An Autobiography) what he experienced in a Nazi concentration camp. Frankl preserved his inner freedom by realizing that his tantalizers had more liberty (options to choose from), but it was him who actually had more freedom (will power to actually make choices).

My impression

The strong points of the chapter on proactivity become apparent wherever Covey highlights that there is a huge difference between thinking like a victim and actually being powerless. Being powerless must be accepted, as Covey shows, but it can and must be conquered because giving in is even worse.

At the beginning of the chapter, a certain presumptuousness towards animals surfaces. Humans aren't that superior. Animals, too, transcend the simple stimulus-response scheme depicted by behaviorists.

See the next part of the series: Stephen R. Coveys «The 7 Habits» (3/8): Begin with the End in Mind. An overview of the series can be found here.

4 steps to reduce confrontation and anger: A cure from 1951

Rolf F. Katzenberger — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 03:52:01 +0000

You've probably been there: despite your best intentions a conversation turns sore with anger or even into a heated dispute. How could anybody be so stubborn and tenacious? The behavior you'd like to see just vanishes somewhere on the horizon. How could things get so out of hand?

If you're assuming, in principle, that your counterpart is quite reasonable, «in general», then there is hope. Precisely because you might have nearly forgotten that assumption.

The concept I'll describe was written down in 1951 by Paul Helwig, a German psychologist, philosopher, stage director and screenplay writer. Later, Friedemann Schulz von Thun (a psychologist, too) added several practical extensions to it.

Let's see the 4 steps that can mitigate an acute controversy. Even better, you can avoid many a conflict if you turn applying these steps into a habit!

Step 1: Name that annoying behavior

Square of values, step 1...but don't tell, of course. This should be the easiest step, because when we're really annoyed, the perceived cause of it is at the tips of our tongues.

Imagine this, for example: You get the impression that somebody is constantly dangling after you for decisions. He or she seems incapable of making even the most basic decisions, or unwilling to make them. All the peanuts are brought to your attention.

For the sake of this example, let's name this «dependence».

Step 2: What would be the opposite, equally annoying extreme?

Square of values, step 2Now think of the exact opposite of the annoying behavior, the one that's equally annoying.

How would you call the behavior of somebody who never asks you before he or she decides? Even when you're affected by the decision? Even if it was up to you to make that decision? Let's call this behavior «always going it alone».

«dependence» and «always going it alone» are two sides of the same coin: each one is basically an overcompensation of the other one. If somebody gets the impression that she or he annoyed you by dependence, they will maybe avoid consulting you at all, even when they should. If somebody gets into a heated argument with you for always going it alone, that person may decide to specialize in dependence behavior, starting tomorrow.

Step 3: What's the grain of truth within the opposite extreme?

Square of values, step 3So you don't want to see «dependence» being replaced by «always going it alone». If always going it alone is an exggeration of something good, how des that good thing look like?

In our example, let's call this grain of truth «decisiveness». Decisiveness is good behavior, for sure. When exaggerated, it becomes always going it alone.

Step 4: What's the grain of truth within the anoying behavior?

The million dollar question: the behavior that's annoying you is an exaggeration of what? What behavior becomes «dependency», when exaggerated?

Lets call it «seeking advice». A good thing to do.

Suddenly, we can see two desirable behaviors, «seeking advice» and «decisiveness», that obviously must be balanced. Both can be exaggerated. Consider this: somebody who gets on your nerves by exhibiting «dependence» may only be «seeking advice» from you.

That's the core idea behind Paul Helwig's Square of Values, as rendered by Friedemann Schulz von Thuns: by default, annoying behavior probably isn't sick or abnormal, but just too much of a good thing.

Which explains all the harshness of some conflicts. When people get the impression that they're being considered stubborn or even mentally challenged, they are less likely to stay relaxed and open-minded. We started out assuming, in principle, that your counterpart was quite reasonable, «in general».

Square of values, step 4Successful communication depend on your willingness to acknowledge that your counterpart is quite reasonable, in general. In our example you might say:

«I like it a lot when you want to team up with me for figuring out solutions to tricky problems.»
«Thanks for asking me what I think about it.»
«Thanks for asking! Two perspectives on the same issue may be helpful.»

Then, show a path of development that leads from the annoying behavior to the desired one. This can be any of the two behaviors that must be balanced. For instance, you might want to say something along the lines of:

«Whenever we talked, I felt your suggestions were well founded and immediately applicable. May I ask you for a favor? Since you're really good at making this type of decisions, I'd like you to take on that task completely on your own for, let's say, the next three weeks. We'll review the outcome together, then. Of course we can talk anytime about the tricky stuff, too.»
«When we talk, most of the time it seems I can't spot any substantial things you haven't already checked and covered. I'd hate to give you the impression that you need my OK for just about everything. Lets keep up the fun of discussing and talk mainly about the tricky stuff. For the rest, I really trust in your judgment!»

Want more?

Ummmm... unfortunately, the works of Paul Helwig and Friedemann Schulz von Thun are available in German, only. There are English alternatives, however.

If you happen to speak German, see Schulz von Thun's book titled "Talking to each other", Miteinander reden, 3 Bde., Bd. 2. See the classical (well, 1995...) Messages: The Communication Skills Book by Matthew McKay, Martha Davis, and Patrick Fanning if you'd like to read a recommendable English book on communication skills.