sft sklz @ wrk

WRONG!

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:07:00 +0000

"There are few people who are more often in the wrong than those who cannot endure to be so. "

---Francois De La Rochefoucauld

Years ago, there was a TV show called, "The McLaughlin Group" which starred John McLaughlin. John was a know-it-all genius who specialized in politics and global economics and, every Sunday morning, hosted a panel of guests (who were often corporate CEO's, mayors, governors, senators, and other intellectual dignitaries) to discuss his top ten "issues" of the week. What made this show interesting and hilarious was the fact that John was a stodgy old man, irascible to the core. He was short-tempered, wise, strident, and ego-maniacal. He was not unlike the majority of his guests, and when you consider the fact that he had as many as 6 of these self-righteous and ego-maniacal dignitaries sitting around his conference table to discuss volatile issues---issues which they ALL believed they and only they were experts---it is sounding just like a death-cage match waiting to happen!!

But it gets better. John, in all of his old man surliness, would pose an issue by saying, "Issue number one.....December 7, 1941 was a conspiracy that FDR orchestrated by imposing a steel embargo against Japan." Then he would let his guests answer, or try to answer. As soon as they would begin to utter their opinions, for example: "Well, John.....I think Pearl Harbor was an....." and John would cut off this expert in his/her field by yelling, "WRONG!" Then he'd give his own answer/interpretation of his Issue Number One. Then John would say, "Issue number two, the Neolithic Era was neither Neo nor Lithic." "That's interesting, John, I think that the Neolithic Era was significant because...." "WRONG!" "The Neolithic Era was more Neo than it was Lithic!" And he'd continue to pose more issues, and in the process belittle and degrade his guests by first reminding them how wrong they were, and then would proceed to pound them into the ground with his superior intellect. John became such a hit within pop culture, Dana Carvey of Saturday Night Live used to lead some hilarious skits about him. Look them up on the Net, and you'll see the epitome of what it means to be WRONG!

It's humorous to see a know-it-all get undressed by an intellectual superior, but in real life, when it happens to us, there's nothing funny about it. In fact, it's one of life's most embarrassing and humbling experiences---one, as Francois described in this chapter's opening, that is difficult to endure, let alone admit that you actually deserve it. As I think back throughout history, some of society's geniuses were often wrong, but they somehow endured. Perhaps they have some lessons we can learn.......

For example, we remember Thomas Edison's famous quote about "not being wrong" but rather he "found 10,000 ways to NOT make a light bulb work." It was Edison's attitude and positive perspective on being wrong, that helped him finally invent that pesky light bulb. Then there was Tom Watson, the founder of IBM, who in 1948 said, "I think there is a world market for about 5 computers." WRONG! The computer and IBM obviously flourished (in spite of the fact that they basically gave away their patents to Apple who handed them over to Bill Gates). Wilbur Wright, in 1901, only 2 years prior to the first manned flight at Kitty Hawk, said, "Not within 1,000 years will man ever fly!" I suppose when you add Orville and Wilber together, 2 Wright's do indeed make a WRONG! How can we forget the time when Albert Einstein, the genius of all geniuses said, "I seriously doubt that nuclear power will ever be harnessed by man." WRONG! Of course, nukes are alive and well today, but that power was harnessed during Albert's lifetime and he admitted that he was wrong. Herein lies the strength of a person's character! Admitting that you are wrong, and God forbid, even apologizing for it, is the ULTIMATE in character building and credibility building. Hands down. Period, the end!!

Which brings me to my real life example. Not long ago, I attended a 2-day seminar for higher education professionals. For some reason, these gatherings tend to bring out the worst in the majority of the attendees. They see it not as a learning experience, but rather, an opportunity for them to listen to themselves wax self-righteously while they puff up their plumage in a display of self-proclaimed superiority.

To this end, there was a gent from Houston, who in his mid-to late 50's felt he had seen it all, done it all and knew it all. I say this because when he spoke, he removed all doubt that this was true. He prefaced all of his comments with, "From my extensive knowledge in this subject....." and he'd continue by trying to impress us (to no avail) with his intellectual prowess. Anyway, the seminar facilitators posed a question to the group, to which we were supposed to discuss and debate. I provided my viewpoint, not from an intellectually superior stance, but from a practical, pragmatic and realistic experience.....because I had been tackling that very issue for the past 18 months and had a real-life strategy that proved successful.

When I was finished, the wind-bag from Houston said, "I disagree with that approach. Not only is it wrong, it is foolish. What everyone in the room needs to realize is that approach cannot work, and here is why....." He continued on for 15 minutes, and because he was 15-20 years my senior, everyone was writing down what he said. Needless to say, it was degrading, demeaning and most of all it was irritating because this guy was wrong. I knew it because I had lived it. Most of the folks in the room had not yet lived thru a problem like this, so they were ignorant to Mr. Houston's ignorance. Not only was he wrong in his answers, but he was wrong in the way he countered my point. He lacked tact, he lacked class and he lacked professionalism. But NOBODY seemed to care besides me. So, I sat there and listened. When he was finished, my rejoinder was, "I'd like to respectfully disagree with my fellow Texan (at the time I lived in Dallas, and since I know that the affiliation to be a Texan for those petty, and foolish Texas-Centric dolts supersedes even our affiliation as humans, I knew I'd strike a cord with him and make him listen if only for a few seconds) and I'd like to conclude by saying that his approach was needlessly offensive and sarcastic. I'd only suggest that you remember my experience's details as this conference unfolds for you might find them useful in the end."

Fast forward to day two of our seminar. The presenters, in all of their glory, unveiled suggestions about how we all SHOULD approach our respective conundrums on our campuses, and behold---their suggestions matched mine POINT FOR POINT. It was almost as if, 27 hours earlier, I taught the exact same lesson, to which nobody listened. But now, everyone was mesmerized. As the instructors outlined their theories and instructions that matched mine, I glanced at the know-it-all from Houston, and he wasn't even flinching in regret. I looked around the room at the attendees who took the wind bag's word as the Gospel, not a single person was glancing at him in reproach.

As the discussion and lesson plan continued, our know-it-all -wind- bag couldn't resist and began to question the 3 experts who were presenting. Not that he was defending the fact that he was indeed WRONG! in front of the entire group just 27 hours earlier......I am convinced of the fact that he and everyone else forgot that, for his own ego would surely suppress it and even if he did recall his ignorance, his lack of character would never allow him to admit it. Instead, he questioned our hosts' authority and once again felt he needed to impose his will upon them, and ultimately the entire group of seminar attendees. To which, one of the presenters asked, "Mr. Wind- bag from Houston, tell us about your experiences with designing, developing and implementing this approach at your university." His answer? "Well....I have none at all! I'm speaking from a theoretical stand-point"

All I could do was laugh. But nobody else even noticed or cared that he was WRONG! As the conference continued, and finally ended, he had multiple opportunities to admit he was wrong and to apologize to me. He never did. Less than one week after the end of the conference, I received an email from the conference director who asked me to work with her and her team on designing their next conference because they all liked my approach, my viewpoints and my experiences. Imagine that, I wasn't out to prove anyone wrong, to push my agenda or to make everyone think I was intellectually superior; but in the process I was demeaned and belittled. But, as it always does, Karma settled the score and gave the unprofessional and tactless loser what he deserves----a lifetime of being stuck with himself. And it gave me an opportunity to share my helpful ideas with hundreds of other professionals.

Once upon a time, there was a British Foreign Office researcher, who from 1903 thru 1950 was responsible for assessing the probability of war. At the end of his tenure, he was quoted as saying, "Year after year, the worriers and fretters would come to me with awful predictions of the outbreak of world war. I denied it each time. Having been in this position for nearly half a century, I was only wrong twice!" Well, Mr. "Foreign Office Researcher" you were obviously WRONG!, the consequences, implications and ramifications of your misjudgements were the worst the world has ever endured.....but at least you admitted it. It makes that petty dope from Houston seem even smaller than he really is, doesn't it??

Embarrassing & Awkward Oliver

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:20:00 +0000

"The rate at which a person can mature is directly proportional to the embarrassment he can tolerate."

---Doug Engelbart

One of my favorite episodes of The Simpson's is the one where Homer and Marge are walking into the town's chili cook off competition. As they are about to walk through the threshold of this crowded outdoor venue, Homer pauses and tells Marge to wait. He doesn't want to walk in there without a crowd around him because when he enters someplace all alone, something embarrassing always happens. After Marge convinces him that's silly, Homer walks in with attention diverted towards him.....at that moment an errant Frisbee hits him between the eyes and a vampire bat swoops down and bites his neck. With everyone laughing, Homer says, "Hmmmm that's a new one!" And he proceeds to have a great time at the chili cook off with his family.

The point to this is exactly as Mr. Engelbart described.....Homer just shook off the embarrassment; he in essence is mature. Had he said or done something stupid to try to cover up or counter act his embarrassing moment, he would have dug himself into a much deeper hole. This is the key to overcoming embarrassment: Beware of how you handle it!!

We've all stepped in a big, steaming pile of #2 from time to time, but this story about Oliver will make you wonder if it's not just a happenstance mistake. It will make you consider the fact that embarrassing situations are predestined and ingrained in one's DNA, sort of like Homer Simpson......

Oliver was a semi-big-shot within his company. In spite of his fancy title and huge pay check, he was socially awkward and extremely self-conscious. Because of this, embarrassing situations seemed to "find" him. For example, there was the "Holiday Party Debacle of 2009." Picture a large, private dining room within a posh country club. The table is set with 30 place settings and is regaled with all of the accouterments and fashions of the Holiday Season. Now imagine, seated at the table are 30 important company leaders who are chatting and having fun in the spirit of the season....all of whom are anticipating a delicious meal that can only be had in this, the snobbiest of locales.

Per usual, the boss (Leslie) had placed gift bags on the table, just behind the place settings, as a simple gesture of gratitude to each of her reports. Sitting directly across from Leslie is Oliver, who, as he seats himself, does what his colleagues do and places his gift bag on the floor at his feet. For the next 30 minutes or so, Oliver engages in a conversation with his boss about each other's vacation plans, as well as the perils of tolerating the in-laws during this season of love and peace.

After a very pleasant and agreeable meal, Oliver and his colleagues are roused by Leslie's kind words of gratitude and well-wishes....then she asks everyone to open their gift bags. On command, Oliver reached down to his feet, grabbed his gift bag and pushed aside the green tissue paper. "That's odd.." he thought to himself, "Maybe she's doing a White Elephant with us..." he continued to himself. Oliver then surmised that Leslie, in the spirit of funny gift exchanges wanted to have a rousing round of a White Elephant with her direct reports just one day before the entire marketing division holds their collective White Elephant at their fancy corporate Holiday Retreat.

So, Oliver told himself that he will play along and make the best of it. He then took out a purse from his gift bag and proceeded to "play it up" by holding it on his arm in a very feminine and delicate manner, proclaiming to the group of VIP's that "I would keep it but it clashes with my shoes!" The instant he said that, he noticed a COACH label on the purse and he was sort of struck with a cold chill because there's nothing White Elephant about a COACH purse! Then, he noticed that nobody was laughing at his joke about the purse clashing with his shoes. Fearfully, he looked around the table and saw his peers grinning at him as if to say, "You're such a fool!" "You really stepped in it this time!" "You idiot!"

Then, his eyes fixed on the face of Lorraine, the senior associate VP of marketing......and she had daggers in her eyes, smoke coming out of her ears and fire shooting from her nostrils. Oliver began to worry. Then, in what seemed like 2 or 3 hours, he shifted his eyes toward his boss Leslie, and she looked embarrassed for him. "Oh, Lord...." thought Oliver. "What have I done now?" He looked down at his feet in shame, and he noticed ANOTHER gift bag! It was his gift bag, but how did the one he just opened get placed directly under his feet!!?? As he quickly glanced around the table, everyone was holding up a company gift.....a cheap tie with the departmental logo on it or a cheap Christmas ornament with the company logo on it. Oliver dug into his other gift bag, and it was indeed a cheap tie.

Lorraine, the associate VP of marketing, in a fit of rage said, "Happy Holidays boss, I guess now that the secret is out to the entire world and your surprise is ruined, it is OK for me to confirm that the Coach bag is from me." At which point Oliver handed the purse to his boss and smiled meekly. Oliver publicly apologized for his social gaffe, put his head down and never looked up from his bread plate for the duration of the meal. But during that time of self-repentance and inner seclusion, he kept wondering "HOW IN THE HELL did that gift bag get under my chair!!??" And, more importantly, he wondered WHY did that happen to HIM?!

He thought about how cruel fate made him sit directly in front of his boss. Cruel fate, for some reason compelled the associate VP to bring her gift to this public event instead of bringing it to Leslie in the privacy of her office, for example. Cruel fate also, for some odd reason, forced Leslie to kick the gift bag a good 5 feet away from her chair, so that it was placed directly between Oliver's feet. Sickened by these cruel twists of fate, Oliver simply mired in the fact that he was cursed with bad luck and wished he could die. He felt even worse about himself for the next 3 months because everyone continuously asked him "How's that purse working out with your wardrobe?"

To make matters worse, at the aforementioned 3 month mark, Oliver was in a very long and boring staff meeting with all of the same Holiday party companions and direct reports of Leslie on hand. Oliver had been suffering from a horrible cold, and was high on Musinex and Tylenol. He was "out of it" more than usual, and his runny nose and clogged sinuses were making his head feel like a balloon. Half-way through the meeting, he decided to venture out of the room so he could relieve some of his misery....and as he roamed the hall looking for the facilities, he finally came upon his sought after sanctuary and ducked in. He stood at the mirror and beheld a sight for sore eyes. Red nose, pale complexion, messed hair. He confirmed that he looked as bad as he felt.

So he grabbed some tissue and proceeded to clean house. As he was clearing his sinuses and throat, he laughed to himself because the sound must be awful to those who were passing by. Then he heard the door open and he decided to quickly contain himself, so he blew much more daintily. As he finished blowing his nose, he felt someone standing off to his side, just staring at him. So he turned and to his surprise, it was Lorraine, the associate VP! In his stupor of over the counter ignorance, he said, "Wow, you must really feel silly! I won't tell anyone about this if you don't!! Just slip out of here and I'll take this to the grave!" Secretly, he was feeling like this gaffe of Lorraine's would somehow vindicate him of the purse incident and even the score.

As he proclaimed her gaffe, Lorraine's face turned red. Then in horror, he whipped around to his right and looked for urinals......no urinals.....only shiny stainless steel stalls. His heart stopped beating and he felt like the world was about to end. Well maybe it wasn't the world that was about to end, but his career certainly was. He slipped past the associate VP, and proceeded to the Men's Room. Where he hid for the rest of the staff meeting. While he was in there, he considered soaking his head in one of the urinals. Instead, he once again pondered cruel fate: Why did he have to stumble into the ladies room? Why did he have to make this mistake for the first time in his life at work, during an important staff meeting? Why wouldn't cruel fate allow him to figure out his mistake and walk out undetected? Why OF ALL PEOPLE did Lorraine, the associate VP have to walk in on him?? Why did he have to open his mouth and say that Lorraine must be embarrassed---making his stupid mistake even worse by being completely wrong in his assessment of the situation??

Now, the person who already thought he was incompetent, awkward and inept, and who already hated him for blowing her surprise at Christmas, had confirmed that Oliver was indeed a fool. And, of course, she didn't hesitate in telling their boss all about this latest embarrassment. Shortly thereafter, Oliver noticed that his boss began to slowly stop sending him to "important" meetings, she stopped assigning him high profile gigs and she stopped volunteering him for opportunities that would put him in the middle of situations where he might have an chance to embarrass himself and his marketing team in front of important people. Even though he did his job very well, his career advancement came to a screeching halt. Unfortunately, Oliver's boss didn't see the situation as Mr. Engelbart would.....it is true that Oliver was most likely the most mature person on earth (at least by Mr. Engelbart's terms) but Oliver's boss saw him as merely an awkward, embarrassing fool.

Moral of Oliver's story: When you find yourself ankle deep in a big, steaming pile of #2, don't say anything and don't do anything. Wait until the attention is off of you, then go off to some dark corner to scrape off your show with an old stick.

Asking the Obvious

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 12:37:00 +0000

"He who asks is a fool for five minutes, but he who does not ask remains a fool forever."

---Chinese Proverb

My niece is going through the "Why?" stage of her childhood. Whenever I make a statement, regardless of the situation, circumstances or conditions, she asks "Why?" Last week, I let my guard down and got sucked into her vortex of "Why's?" when I told her to be sure she finishes eating her mashed potatoes. She asked me "Why?" And here is how the rest of the "conversation" went:

"Because your mommy wants you to finish them all."
"Why?"
"She made them just for you."
"Why?"
"Because they will help you grow big and strong."
"Why?"
"Because they have lots of vitamins."
"Why?"
"Just eat the potatoes!!"

Asking questions for the sake of garnering attention ala the 3 1/2 year old girl, is the making for frustration and as well as for both parties looking like the Chinese Proverb's fool. Once I learned to break that cycle by making fun of the situation (Every time she asked me "Why?" about something, I would say "Because you're a fuzzy little monkey!"), my niece learned how to ask questions that produced answers. Now, at the ripe old age of 4, she asks HUNDREDS of questions in an 8 hour period, but they are all genuinely rooted in her desire to learn the answers. In this regard, there is no such thing as a stupid question. And in this regard, the old adage comes into play, "What isn't important is what you learned today, what is important is which questions did you ask today?"

Over the years, I've noticed that some professionals ask questions for a number of reasons. They like the sound of their own voices. They like to draw attention to themselves (like a 3 1/2 year old). They like to seem smart and inquisitive. And finally, they want to know the answer. Sadly, the last example is rarely the PRIMARY reason for their asking. How do I know? Because it is rare indeed that professionals in the workplace ask the tough questions. And by tough, I mean the questions nobody else wants to ask....the questions everyone is afraid to ask.....the dreaded OBVIOUS questions!

The obvious questions are the ones that, if we're not naive, we already know the answer. And if we're not gutless, we'll ask the obvious questions, not because we need to know (we already do), but rather, its because we want to CALL OUT a person or a situation in hopes of putting an insufferable situation to an end. Because those who ask the obvious questions are no-nonsense people who don't placate, toady, or put up with any elephants in their rooms!

Here are two quick examples....

A few years back, I was mired in a 6-hour meeting over the insubordination of 5 employees at my company. Since I was in HR, I was lucky enough to be a part of a "Board" that heard cases of hardship between employees and their supervisors. After suffering through 5 hours of listening to these 5 employees say, "He said, then she said...." I finally did what nobody had the guts to ask: "Did it ever dawn on you people to ever get together and talk to EACH OTHER about your issues, instead of gossiping, conjecturing and worrying about what 'He said' or 'She said'??" The answer....NO! It never dawned on them. So, the last hour of the meeting covered a plan as to how, when and why they will all get together like a group of professionals and work this problem out themselves, like big boys and girls. If only someone asked them this obvious question before we all had to waste precious hours of our lives on silly gossip.

Another situation, about 5 years ago involved a group of people who were planning a corporate-wide retreat. The planning committee consisted of 20 employees who were given 18 months to plan this huge blow-out for nearly 4,000 of their colleagues from all across the country. The site of the retreat for this particular year happened to be Cleveland. The year before that, it was located in Seattle; the year before that, Omaha; the year before that, Boston; the year before that, Chicago; the year before that Jersey City....you'll see where I'm going with this in a second.

During the entire 18 months of retreat planning, EVERYONE on the retreat committee complained about what they anticipated the weather would be in Cleveland. Since the retreat was scheduled to occur in March, as it is every year--- every day, nearly every hour that the committee was together, everyone bitched and moaned that the weather was going to be cold. They worried about the wind messing up their hair. They complained that they would have to wear big coats. They bitched about the possibility that it might snow and they moaned about the chances that it would be cloudy the entire time they were there.

Since I was new to the retreat planning committee, and since I wasn't as hypersensitive to uncontrollable atmospheric conditions, it seemed painfully obvious that these ninnies were neglecting to ask each other the right questions. So, I asked the chair of the retreat planning committee, one of the company's big-time vice presidents: "I can't help but wonder something. It seems that for the past 10 years, your company retreats have been in northern cities. It also seems that everyone on the committee hates cold weather (as evidenced by the incessant complaining). And, since the retreat for next year is scheduled to be in Buffalo, NY, I can't help but ask you WHY DON'T YOU SCHEDULE A RETREAT IN A SOUTHERN CITY AND PUT AN END TO THE COMPLAINING or, simply act like adults and deal with the situation that you have obviously committed yourselves to fulfilling?"

The answer: "I don't know."

Anthony Robbins once said, "Successful people ask better questions, and as a result, they get better answers." Mr. Robbins, I have a question for you: "ARE YOU SURE ABOUT THAT!?"

Job Snob

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 12:23:00 +0000

"I feel sorry for the person who can't get genuinely excited about his work. Not only will he never be satisfied, but he will never achieve anything worthwhile."

---Walter Chrysler

It isn't easy getting excited about a job you absolutely hate and abhor. But if you can't, then the odds are that experience is going to become exponentially abhor- able. So, under the pressure from the fear of facing excruciating pain, anxiety and anguish from a job you hate, you feverishly try to get the heck out---like a rat scurrying to find a way off of the deck of a sinking ship. The fear of that horrible job "taking you down with it" fuels your panic and makes haste in your job search. Rendering you desperate, and at the mercy of taking anything and everything that sounds remotely positive. And, when you awaken from your stupor, some days or weeks later; you realize that you've jumped into a new job that is as bad or even worse than the one you fled.

Sound familiar? Having counseled job searches for 20+ years, I can tell you that this scenario is VERY common. And, the good news is, it doesn't have to be. Here is the main reason why: Believe it or not, the majority of the jobs that these folks are feverishly running from are really not that horrible. You see, the majority of the time, the really "horrible" attributes of these jobs are embellished, blown out of proportion, and even disguised by the "victim's" clouded judgement and jaded perceptions.

I realize that there are many horrible jobs which require us to flee and no matter how you re-frame them with objective lenses, they are still horrible. I'm not advocating that we give those situations a chance. What I am saying is that if you believe you are stuck in a lousy job, that your boss is "doing you wrong," that you aren't treated with respect, that you're underpaid and overworked---whatever the reasons are behind your wanting to leave--I'm asking you to really give it a thorough and objective assessment before you work yourself into a panic and scurry for a way out.

As I mentioned, 9 times out of 10, a panicked and desperate job searcher who feels he has been done wrong by someone has erroneous or paranoid delusions of sabotage. If he's simply take some time to examine, think and discuss (in an objective and unbiased manner) what is bothering him, he'd learn that he can change his "horrible" working environment for the better and not have to deal with his self-inflicted anxieties and worries about how he's a victim who needs to jump ship.

One of the ways a person can re-frame his horrible job experience is to think more positively about what he's actually getting out of it. It's a matter of changing your attitude (It think, Therefore I am!). Instead of harping on your sour thoughts, shift into thinking about what your job is actually giving you. If you think objectively enough and long enough, there isn't a job in the world that won't have SOMETHING positive to offer. Take this old fable as an example: "Joe, a college grad spends his days shoveling elephant dung for the circus. Amy, his ex-girlfriend from college passes by and out of shock and disbelief says, 'Joe!! What are you doing?? What has become of you!? You need to quit this horrid job and make something of yourself!' To which Joe replied, "What....and quit SHOW-BUSINESS?"

Cynics would say Joe is a blind and ignorant fool. But maybe he has a plan. Maybe he feels that shoveling elephant dung IS horrible, but in the long run, he plans to work his way up the ladder and one day run the entire circus or even own a circus himself. Maybe he does believe that he is in show-business, and THAT is what is sustaining him through the tough and demeaning times. He could easily throw down his shovel and try to find an accounting job---which will fit his college degree and lend him an aire of credibility with those who pass him by on the street. But is that what he wants in the long run? Should he suffer in the short term and look a fool just so he might have a shot at his long term dream? Remember that old saying...."It takes 18,000 casualties to make a general." Meaning glory and prestige doesn't come without pain, heartache, mistakes and regrets. It's certainly something to consider.

So, we've discussed the type of person who, instead of wallowing in misery or self-pity because her immediate and short-term situation absolutely sucks, she rather looks at the long term possibilities and the potential of good things that might happen if she were to stick it out and be strategic about her future. Now, let's look into the person who, instead of being short-sighted and wallowing in self-pity because there are NO LONG TERM OPPORTUNITIES, actually MAKES those opportunities happen with a little positive thinking.

Once again, I turn to a fable....."There are two shoe salesmen who work for XYZ Shoe Company, Fred and Sid. Fred is asked to take an assignment on a remote island in the Pacific Ocean. He is asked to scope out the territory and report on the possibilities that might exist for shoe sales in that region. As soon as the plane lands, he is greeted by people who are barefoot, and he instantly thinks that this is a "bad sign." As he meets more people who live there, he sees that they have a beach-front lifestyle and not one person is wearing shoes or even acting like they would be remotely interested in considering donning shoes on their feet. Dejected, Fred calls the home office and says, 'I'm coming home.....nobody here wears shoes.' Fred leaves, and just to be certain that the region is in fact un-sellable, Sid flies to a different island in the area and is greeted by folks who are barefoot. Upon seeing the thousands of shoeless people, Sid calls the home office and says, 'Ship me thousands of shoes, there isn't any competition here!!"

You see....its a matter of re-framing. What sucked for Fred will end up being a firing or resignation and the same situation will turn out to be a promotion for Sid. Before you write off your current job, be sure you've approached it from every positive angle, because you never know what you might be missing. One easy way of doing that comes from a pointer that the great Tom Peters outlined in has FABULOUS book, Re-Imagine! In Re-Imagine!, Tom asks us to reconsider our jobs in the way I prescribed, but he takes it one step farther. He asks us to burn out business cards, to toss away our job descriptions (literally in some cases, but since most of us can't go to those drastic measures, we have to figuratively toss and burn) and re-conceptualize what we actually do on the job.

In other words, he's asking us to re-frame what is demeaning, degrading, horrid, boring and awful and re-imagine it in a more positive light. Here is how one person I counseled took Tom's advise and altered his job description. My client was/is a mid-level manager who was/is constantly barraged by his boss with inane administrative projects that involved typing memos, arranging last minute meetings, making travel plans for VIP's.....basically handling boring and demeaning project that his boss didn't want to touch. His boss would dump these degrading assignments on my client without warning and with a salute and a smile, he'd run off to type, file and polish apples!

So, my client decided to take Tom Peters' advice and try to find the silver lining. He altered his job description from "I am my bosses whipping-boy who answers his every beck and call" to: I am my Division's CXFO (Chief Cross-Functional Officer). I facilitate a collaborative team environment by designing cross-functional, just-in-time, value-added experiences that culminate in integrated solutions." Again, a cynic might think my client is delusional and should just quit on the spot. But, like the guy who shovels elephant dung, my client has the big picture in mind, for he works directly for a vice president and in order to learn the in's and out's of a vice presidency, he has to shovel a lot of dung! So, if you were to ask my client to quit his current job as whipping-boy, he'd be sure to say, "What??? And leave the VP suite?!"

Been There, Done That, Sent a Postcard

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 11:27:00 +0000

"March on. Do not tarry. To go forward is to move toward perfection. March on, and fear not the thorns, or the sharp stones on life's path."

--- Kahlil Gibran

Let's face it, moving forward is frightening. There's the unknown. "What will happen to me if I take this risk?" "What if I fail?" Then there's the known. "This is going to be the toughest thing I've ever done!" "I don't know how I'll ever make it through what I'm going to face tomorrow morning!" There's the status quo. "What if I do nothing and just leave this situation as it is?" "What if I run away and avoid this change/growth/opportunity to move forward?" Finally, you have the dreaded regression. "What if I go back to the way things used to be?" "What if I take a few steps back to an easier time/situation....a time/place where I won't have to worry about change/growth/opportunities to move forward?"

If you ask me, its ok, expected and quite normal to fear the unknown. Its healthy to worry about the known obstacles that are blocking your growth or are inhibiting your changes. In fact, a healthy form of motivation can and should be derived from them. For example, do you know a person who rises to the challenge whenever someone tells him/her that he/she can't do something? There are lots of people out there who say, "Just tell me I can't do something, then watch me make it happen!" That's the attitude that is healthy--its full of assertiveness, self-confidence, daring and adventure. They believe that if they give it their best, this daunting task or monumental change just might work out for them. But if it doesn't, they'll go out with their guns ablaze and they'll know that at the very least, they will learn something from their experience that will help them succeed the next time they get a chance to pursue that opportunity for change.

On the flip side, we have the two very unhealthy attributes---Status Quo and Regression. Obviously, if fear paralyzes you, you won't get past "Go" and then you'll be stuck with what you've always had---nothing! But regression, that is a killer! That's akin to moving back home with mommy and daddy at age 45! Regression is all about quitting, giving up and telling the world you just can't hack it so you're going back to your security blanket (a job with lower responsibility, for example). Like Mr. Gibran wrote, we have to "march on and fear not the thorns or sharp stones" in our way, for we can be certain our paths will be lined with them. We have to prepare for those obstacles and keep moving forward, bloody feet and all. To seek a path paved with cotton and foam is futile, and to return to the path's origin to stay in security would be a wasted life.

All that said, some folks have a difficult time fending off the Regression Sirens who constantly call them "back" to a time and a place when life was easy, simple and comfortable. Here is a real life example of someone who, from out of nowhere was tempted by the Siren Song of Regression......

Herbie was a successful senior level administrator with a large university. He began his career and his studies about 25 years ago in Southern California, where he learned his trade in a series of formal internships which then turned into his first paid, full time job. For Herbie, those were the great times of his life. He loved living in SOCAL and he loved his job with the university. He had a great boss (Becky) and the position he had was stress-free because he was very good at what he did. While he was working this dream job, he also studied for and completed a masters degree (paid for by the university). Once he completed his masters, he was promptly promoted---just when he thought life couldn't get any better!!

After living the dream for a total of 5 years, Rome burned. Budget cuts decimated his program and other departments like his, and he was out on the street. He moved to the East Coast, made an even better life for himself, rife with promotions, awards and even national recognition and industry-wide fame. He quickly doubled then tripled his SOCAL salary and was living larger than he could've ever imagined. Before he knew it, he was sitting in a corner office as a VP trainee with plans for a HUGE future!

Then, the phone rang. It was Becky. She told him that Maria, their "old" boss, who had been their director for 25 years (and who hired Herbie as an itty-bitty intern) has finally retired. The long and short of Becky's called involved this punchline, "Herbie, the old gang and I want you to come back and be our director. We want to work with you again, we want you to lead us and we want to rebuild the good times we used to have....only now, you'll be our boss! What do ya say?" In an instant, Herbie's career flashed before his eyes.

As he paused, and searched for an answer to give to Becky, he thought about how she was right---it would be great to "get the band back together" (to borrow a phrase from The Blues Brothers). He thought about how comforting it would be to have a team of old and loyal friends surrounding him at work. He pictured the tranquil SOCAL campus, complete with palm trees and soft breezes. He thought about how stressful his life/job is right now---learning how to be a VP is like strolling on a path of thorns, you know. Then, it hit him......if he returned to the cozy "womb" of his tranquil SOCAL campus, and lived out the rest of his 35 year career in the cushy climes of the status quo, he'd be throwing away everything he worked so hard to achieve since he left them 20 years ago.

His mind then raced towards the thought that, in the past 20 years he'd been able to achieve and surpass every career goal he has held for himself---yet Becky still had the same title she had 20+ years ago. Come to think of it, so did Bill....and Alexi and Jason....and nearly all of his old and loyal friends who would make life cozy for him! Herbie soon realized that the coziness that looked so appealing to him would require him to jump in a time machine and land back in the early 1990's and regress there for another 30+ years. He winced at the thought and instantly came back to reality and to his phone conversation with Becky.

"I appreciate the offer, Becky.....and to be honest, I'm a bit surprised and shocked. I'm going to have to think about this and call you in the morning. I hope that's ok." He hung up the phone, knowing his answer, but out of respect for his good friend, he at least wanted to make it seem like he was honored, flattered and seriously considering this respectful gesture that was bestowed upon him by dear and loyal friends.

Literally 30 minutes later, Herbie received an email from an old SOCAL girlfriend.....someone whom he had not had contact with in nearly 27 years. She was just surfing the Net and found his email address and thought she'd reconnect to see how life turned out for him. He felt a cold rush as the old memories came flooding back. Then he was freaked out......could this be a sign? He wondered if she knew about the job offer. There was no way she could know about that. Was this coincidence? A cruel joke? Then he remembered all of the good qualities his old gal-pal possessed.....then he toyed with the idea of dating her again.....then he shook it off and brought himself back to reality. The reality of his CODE.

You see, Herbie lived by a CODE, something that helped him stay focused and directed and on that thorny path of growth. He vowed to never, ever go back to anyone or anything once he and they decided it was time to part company. His CODE stated that he must leave what is in the past in the past. Old girlfriends and old jobs are like old tax returns, you leave them in your files for 3 years, just in case you have to refer to them, but after that you toss them in the trash. This is all metaphorically speaking of course, and it doesn't mean that Herbie can't remain friends with these folks or keep in touch.....it just means he cannot and will not ever try to relive what had already been terminated. Even if he didn't terminate it. Even if he didn't want it to end. Even if he'd, deep down inside, like to return. To move forward, he must never go back.

Although he can't go back, he can LOOK back. Which he often does, for he lives by the words of Soren Kierkegaard: "Life must be understood backwards; but... it must be lived forward."

Worthy of Imitation

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:46:00 +0000

"Courtesy is a science of the highest importance. It is, like grace and beauty in the body, which charm at first sight, and lead on to further intimacy and friendship, opening a door that we way derive instruction from the example of others, and at the same time enabling us to benefit them by our example, if there be anything in our character worthy of imitation."

-- Michel Eyquem de Montaigne

Courtesy in the workplace involves so many variables---there's not texting during meetings; not interrupting a speaker with a cell phone call; taking your moldy food out of the break-room refrigerator; not swearing; showing up on time for a meeting; and keeping your radio's volume low lest you disrupt others in the surrounding cubicles. Then there's courtesy at a much deeper level, which might come in the form of deference towards elders or those with senior titles. Or having the courtesy to help a colleague with a difficult task---without being asked.

One of my personal favorite forms of courtesy at work is chivalry towards the female persuasion---if you're a young man, have you ever held the door open for your female boss? Have you ever been caught in the moment wondering if you should or shouldn't---because if you do hold the door open, you fear she might think you're being a sexist pig who believes women are of a weaker gender and are incapable of opening their own doors---but if you don't hold the door open, then she might think you're a sexist pig who thinks only of himself and has no class, tact, or respect for women. UGH! Its difficult to master the politics of deeper-level courtesy, there's no doubt. But I have a serious issue with the rampant display of disrespect and discourteous behavior at work that indicates many of us have problems with even the most basic forms of consideration for others.

Comedian Rodney Dangerfield once said, "You know how to tell that you're a very courteous person? When you're alone, and you fart and you still say 'Excuse me'!" A crude example, perhaps, but its funny mainly because most people exude a malodorous aire from both ends and never apologize or beg forgiveness even in a crowded room. Obviously, the preferred form of extended courtesy is hygienic---if you have a lower bowel issue, you should leave the room. If you can't and a 'mistake' happens, then you should immediately apologize or excuse yourself. Basic, common courtesy---fundamental good manners---right?

A recent study conducted in the workplace revealed that only 30% of women and 15% of men washed their hands after visiting the restroom. We are all fairly educated about the negative implications of walking around with fecal matter on our hands--we know that bacteria from feces causes listeria monocytogenes, e coli, and dozens of other nasty diseases and ailments--yet, according to multiple studies, we still don't wash our hands.

Recently, my good friend Sal told me about how his 2 year old son came home from school and sang a song about washing his hands. It went like this, "Wash, wash, wash your hands---get them nice and clean---up and down---and all around---and fingers in-between!" I thought that was wonderful. It warmed my heart and reminded me of my pre-school hand-washing song, although my version was a bit more politically incorrect (it was the 70's, what do you expect): "Oh, a sailor travels to many lands---anywhere he pleases---And he always remembers to wash his hands---so he don't get no diseases!" It doesn't matter HOW you are trained to be courteous, all that matters is that you remember and you make it a part of your lifestyle! But I digress. Back to Sal's 2- year- old son.

When we were together last week, Sal's boy had a slight cold. As he had a big sneeze coming on, he immediately turned his face away from us and sneezed in his sleeve! He said, "Excuse me." He blew his nose with a tissue, threw it in the garbage and he washed his hands after he handled his dirty tissue. I nearly wept because of the hope that all will be well with our future society. For just the day before, while at work, my colleague Ralph, a 58 year old professor also had a cold. As he sat at our small conference table, he sneezed directly into the center of the table, without covering his mouth. He proceeded to clear his sinuses, and with the loudest and most guttural and repulsive sounds, he swallowed whatever he cleared out of his nasal cavities.

Then, the swallowing action caused him to cough a mucus-ey and rattling reverberation that sounded like part of his lung was coming up---so he pulled out a handkerchief, spit in it, blew his nose in it, folded it up and placed it back in his pocket. When he was finished, he reached into our bowl of pretzels and grabbed a big handful. I am focusing on sneezing and coughing and hygiene because I am part of a "Task Force" that is working on containing the spread of H1N1 at work. As I sat there in the middle of Ralph's mucus-laden lack of courtesy, I was reminded of the millions of dollars my employer, and thousands of other employers across the country, have spent on this H1N1 effort.

As I roam the hallways of my employers buildings, I notice floor-to-ceiling posters with pictures of adults washing their hands, and tag lines reminding us that we need to wash with soap and hot water. I see stickers on our restroom mirrors once again reminding us to wash our hands after using the potty. In the dining area, there are napkins and table tents espousing the virtues of not sneezing on other people's lunches. And finally, in the break rooms, there are signs that tell us to stay home if we have a fever, are vomiting and/or have diarrhea.

How pathetic. How sad. When I think about the opening quote and consider that courtesy involves asking yourself if there is ANYTHING in our characters that is worthy of imitation, I seriously wonder if we can't get a handle on personal hygiene, how can we possibly handle something like conscientiousness? Enough said.

There's an old Japanese Proverb that says, "An excess of courtesy is discourtesy." I can sleep well at night knowing we'll never be in danger of abusing that rule.

Atlas Shrugs at Altruism

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:46:00 +0000

"If any civilization is to survive, it is the morality of altruism that men have to reject."

---Ayn Rand

During my days of commuting to LA from Chicago (so I could work on my UCLA doctorate), I was sitting in an aisle seat near the front of the plane.....row 11 if I recall correctly. To pass the time that it takes to load everyone on board, I took out my copy of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Reading with one eye and watching for reactions of passers-by with my other eye (because I knew this book would upset folks), I noticed 25 cold stares, 11 frowns, 3 eye rolls and 1 guy accused me of being a communist!!

Now, if you are not familiar with Ayn Rand, the opening quote of this chapter most likely hit you between the eyes and threw you into an uncontrollable fit of hyperventilation. You might have immediately thought to yourself, "That Commie Bitch! How can she say something like that!?" Don't worry if you did react that way, you most likely weren't alone. Many people misinterpret her writing because they don't quite understand her philosophy (or care to learn it).

If only the ignoramuses on my flight to LA took time to read Ayn's literature, they'd understand that she's not about communism at all, she's about free-market capitalism, about becoming all you can be by competing your way to the top, and she's about knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive and deductive logic. Which means that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self-interest; that the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights and that the role of art in human life is to transform man's widest metaphysical ideas, by selective reproduction of reality, into a physical form—a work of art—that he can comprehend and to which he can respond emotionally. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall reading about free market capitalism, rational self-interest, and reproducing reality into a work of art in the Communist Manifesto.

Now that you know a little bit about Ayn's M.O., let's revisit her opening quote. The operative words, upon which I'd like to focus, have to do with "rejecting the morality of altruism." At first glance, her quote seems a bit harsh. After all, if we reject the morality of altruism, then we'd be living in some sort of selfish society whereby the Have's would be trampling the Have Not's. Right? Political Correctness, Social Justice, Mandated Entitlements and Level Playing Fields would no longer exist if altruism was rejected! Right? Not exactly. These are common knee-jerk reactions to Ayn's quote. But if you focus on what the "morality of altruism" really means, you'd realize that altruism done out of the kindness of your heart, under your own free will is completely different than if you are "shamed" into being altruistic---say through an affirmative action mandate, fear of being labeled a racist, an entitlement tax or an EEO lawsuit.

Feeling compelled, or being pressured to act altruistically (and not of your own free will) is what Ayn is saying can and does impede the growth and development of civilizations, organizations and individuals. Here's a real life example of how someone was "guilted" into feeling altruistic for a "hardship case" and paid for it dearly in the end.....

Jackson was an average middle manager who just sort of barely squeaked by in life. He simply came to work, punched in, did what he was asked to do and punched out. A typical clock-watching chair moistener. By trade, Jackson was a paper pusher who processed loan applications for a large lending firm. His job was pretty boring until one day, Sylvia entered his life.

Sylvia was interested in a job with Jackson's large lending firm. She wanted a job as a mortgage lender in one of their 300 locations world-wide. She didn't care where she worked or what she did....she just wanted a job NOW because she had been out of work for 9 months and she was feeling anxious and desperate---for obvious reasons.

The first thing Sylvia did was answer an ad that she had seen online. However, her application was sloppy and incomplete, so she never received a response from HR. As a result, the second thing she did was pay a personal visit to HR to find out why they never bothered calling her. After she threw a tantrum in HR, and was asked to leave, Sylvia went home and researched their employees in her hometown office. She was able to obtain the name of the hiring manager for the open mortgage lending position, and she proceeded to email and call the unfortunate man 3 times a day for 5 weeks! Of course, the hiring manager never responded, and when he learned that Sylvia had been hanging out in the company lobby and was also waiting for him in the parking lot at lunchtime, he decided to pursue an unofficial restraining order by having security escort her away from the complex each and every time she was recognized on the premises.

After she had been stopped and escorted off of the company's property 6 times, that is when she conducted more online research and noticed that Jackson graduated from her alma mater. She promptly sent him an introductory email, to which he responded; and unknown to him, he was befriending this unstable sociopath! Soon after, they had a few phone meetings which Sylvia used to explain her background and her aspirations of becoming a teammate of Jackson's, she used martyrdom and stories of victimization to convince him to make an appointment with her so they could talk about how she might get back into the applicant pool.

To clear the way for his new "charity case," Jackson spoke with security and informed them that she would be meeting with him for official business and they should allow her that right. Which they did. All the while, the hiring manager and HR didn't know Sylvia would be making company visits. To make a long story short, out of "Moral Altruism" (Sylvia used guilt and shame to manipulate him), Jackson began personally lobbying and networking inside the company for Sylvia. He passed along her resume and set appointments with potential hiring managers so he could espouse her virtues---all on his work time. Why did he do all of this? Because he felt morally obligated to help her, and he felt his employer wronged her severely and its discrimination against her was horrid. That's what he said when he had to explain to one of his VP's why Sylvia was harassing her the we she harassed the original hiring manger!

To make matters a wee-bit worse, Jackson did the unthinkable. In the ultimate form of job search altruism, he actually applied for an open position for Sylvia!! Yes, he completed an online application using his name, but he populated the qualifications fields with the info from her resume! All in the hopes that HR and the hiring mangers wouldn't know it was Sylvia who was really applying-- and as a result she would get past any "discriminatory" blocks that have been set up against her! Of course, it was a matter of time before HR found out that Jackson applied for 3 jobs and the qualifications were Sylvia's. Jackson's manager was alerted, HR intervened and he was fired on the spot. Ayn Rand's point about moral altruism made ever so clear!

You see, Ayn's philosophy about Objectivism rejects both faith and "feeling" as sources of knowledge. Rand acknowledged the importance of emotion in human beings, but she maintained that emotions are a consequence of the conscious or subconscious ideas that a person already accepts, not a means of achieving awareness of reality. In her words, "Emotions are not tools of cognition." Too bad someone didn't explain that to Jackson while his emotions (shame, guilt, etc.) were fueling his Moral Altruism and driving his career into the the ground.

I'll leave you with one last quote from Ms. Rand from Atlas Shrugged: "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." There is no doubt that Jackson felt he truly was being heroic, and doing good for Sylvia was making him happy---but reason and logic were not absolutes and this nice guy truly finished last.

Great Job! (Smirk)

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:46:00 +0000

"Such labored nothings, in so strange a style,
Amaze the unlearned, and make the learned smile."

---Alexander Pope

Ah....labored nothings that make the learned boss smirk, laugh under his breath or worse yet, gives you a pat on the head and sends you off to bed with a warm glass of milk. Those of us who've been patronized, demeaned and placated by an over-demanding boss know all too well what Pope means by "labored nothings." As if the labored nothings aren't bad enough, what's worse is the smile that the "learned" boss flashes at us as if to say, "Oh, you poor thing....that was a nice try, but the bottom line is you suck and I will still have to do the job myself because you just can't hack it. No run along and go play with the kids who are down at your level and leave the grown up responsibilities to me."

No matter how compassionate, caring, supportive, or developmental you think your boss is, the odds are that he/she has problems with your work ethic, work style.....everything. It might not be enough to call you on it during an annual review or a supervision meeting, but the odds are pretty good that your work style and work ethic probably leave much to be desired. And your boss probably realizes how hard it is to alter or change these aspects of a person and as a result, leaves it alone.....sort of.

The "sort of" I am referring to here is manifested as a passive/aggressive and demeaning smirk, smile or laugh. Or maybe its not so passive, maybe you notice your boss acting/speaking in a down-right arrogant or patronizing manner. Here's a real life example of someone's "learned" boss who made made light of his best efforts......

Harvey was a middle manager who worked liked a dog with the hopes of one day moving into senior management. He put in long hours, kept focused on his job, and produced more than anyone else in the company. In his colleagues' eyes, he was a superstar who accomplished more in one day then the majority of them could handle in a full week. Harvey was also a star employee (in his colleagues opinions) because he never used a sick day and he always pitched in to help his coworkers get their jobs done.

For nine years, Harvey tried and tried to "get ahead" but his boss would always give him an "excellent" review (he needed a distinguished rating in order to be eligible for promotion). For nine years, Harvey would ask his boss what he needed to do in order to be graded as a distinguished employee, and for nine years, the boss would say, "You have to do something for me that I don't know needed to be done. Or you have to create something that I didn't realize we needed." Harvey would accomplish all sorts of wonderful things (in his opinion) but his boss would merely snicker and smirk.

When confronted about his inflexible and horribly unrealistic performance grading system, Harvey's boss would say, "Harvey, you're doing what is asked of you, and not much more. You do an excellent job of completing your job early. You do an excellent job of helping your coworkers. You also do an excellent job of out performing everyone on staff. But what you don't understand is all of that is expected of an excellent employee! Those who don't know any better think you're God's gift to employees, but you're not quite that remarkable, you're simply excellent."

So, whenever Harvey did something HE thought was great and he noticed his boss smiling and smirking, he now realized his boss was merely thinking, "You still don't get it, Harvey! You and your colleagues might think you're great, but you haven't given me something I didn't know I needed." In other words, he wasn't impressing the "learned" people.

Here's the million dollar question: How can we "unlearned" trilobytes ever impress the "learned" ones so they never smirk at us with pity again?

The answer is kind of simple, and it is one that Harvey used to earn that elusive distinguished rating (after 10 years of trying). Harvey, like the rest of us must reframe our thinking about what we need to do to be successful at our jobs. We need to think about what we have to do in order to make our bosses successful at THEIR jobs. We need to think about what our bosses need but don't have---we need to consider how we can develop, attain or innovate something that will fill a gap in their lives and will make them look like geniuses. In other words, walk a mile in their shoes....find out what is holding their jobs back, what obstacles need to be eliminated? What resources do they need to really make a difference? Find it out and then go make it happen!'

Even the smaller accomplishments will seem significant to your boss. You'll notice, instead of an arrogant smirk, a recognition reflex---an appearance of surprise, shock, intrigue and astonishment because you thoughtfully considered the big picture and have moved outside of your silo and into the more "meaningful" world of your supervisor's goals and objectives. Your boss will feel understood, respected and overwhelmed by your ability to comprehend his/her needs and your willingness to look out for his/her well-being and success. You'll be making yourself indispensable!

Its kind of like being married---in order to have a happy marriage, you (if you are of the male persuasion) have to be 10 steps ahead of your wife's needs and expectations. Bring flowers home and all you get is a "thanks." But wash the dishes and feed the dog so she can watch CSI Miami with her new found free time and you've become an instant hero. That's the difference between an "excellent" and a "distinguished" spouse. The same approach works wonders with your boss.

I'm not saying you need to give your boss a foot massage and bring him chocolates every Friday, but the simple gestures that are inherent in making him look good is 99.9% of what you'll need to turn around his opinion of your work ethic and your work style. So stop trying to amaze your "unlearned" self and start working on making your boss look good--you'll instantly become part of the "learned" crowd!

Scaling Veneris Mons with Huey Newton & Mona Lisa

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 11:26:00 +0000

“Defining initiative is like describing the Mona Lisa’s beauty to someone who’s never seen it. It’s difficult to describe, but when you see it, you understand without a word.”

---Dr. T. Tylor Behrens

What exactly IS initiative? As managers and leaders, we know we want it. As employees who are hounded by these managers and leaders to take initiative, we pretty much know we don't want it. But why? What's so awful about initiative? Is it the fact that it is so open, arbitrary and subjective in nature? Is it because it can equate to doing more work? Maybe because taking initiative involves taking risks---risks involved with venturing into the unknown, risks involving failure and risks of being fired for following the wrong initiatives. Come to think of it, maybe its because taking initiative means you'd have to be strong of will, strong of mind, strong of body and assertive, aggressive and determined. The answer is all of the above with an emphasis on the last statement--the aggressive and strong part.

Over the years, I've been forced to ram heads with non-initiative types, folks who are staunchly anti-change, anti-growth, and anti-assertive. They would be content sitting in their cubes humming "Let it Be" all day, just moistening their chairs and watching the clock spin round and round. Asking these folks to take imitative is like asking someone to scale Veneris Mons for me. For those of you who aren't up on your inter-stellar geography, Veneris Mons is the tallest known mountain in our solar system, rising above the Venus landscape at 90,000 feet, making it 3 times taller than Mt. Everest! As if that weren't daunting enough, Venus is 24 million miles away from our home, so just getting there would be a hassle, let alone attempting to reach Veneris Mons' summit. Seems impossible to a mere mortal, but to someone with initiative, the impossible becomes a question of "Why not?"

Unfortunately, the "Why not?" crowd is much, much smaller than the "Hell no!" crowd. Not entirely because of fears of failure or a lack of creativity or a non-existent self-worth......the reason for not taking initiative is usually much stronger than those "excuses." I'm describing a fundamental aversion to taking initiative that has its roots in socio-cultural and socio-political beliefs against what it actually stands for. I'll come right out with it: Initiative at work is capitalism's ugly step-sister.

Huey Newton, the racist revolutionary who co-founded the cowardly Black Panthers in 1966, once said that, "we have to kill capitalism" in order to stop racism and, as a positive by-product, to kill whitey. Now we're getting somewhere---but you are probably wondering what racism has to do with someone taking initiative at work. Well, deep down at the core of motivation for taking initiative, words like, guilt, social justice, equality for all, level playing fields all rear their ugly heads. For you see, in the minds of those who believe "everyone must win equally and nobody should ever lose," initiative leads to competition, competition leads to entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship leads to innovation, innovation leads to capitalism, capitalism leads to success and success of someone makes losers of everyone who hasn't won.

Its the losers like Huey Newton who then start gutless "revolutions" because they feel like they've been left behind by more assertive, innovative, productive and useful members of society. Instead of getting in the game and competing, they feel their lot in life is to hold down the competitive capitalists so they don't seem like the huge losers they really are. You know, if Huey wasn't killed in a bad drug deal, I'd swear he currently has a seat on an economic cabinet in the White House.....but I digress.

Instead of contemplating the mission to Venus, instead of taking the initiative to make it happen, someone like Huey (and his guilt ridden sympathisers who feel over achieving is the curse of Caucasian capitalism) would instead "rise up" and make others "hear their voices" by blowing up the space ship that had been developed or by calling someone at NBC or CBS or ABC and spinning a news story about how some people with initiative are leaving "poor" or "black/brown/yellow/red/green" or "gay" or "hermaphrodites" out of this space project and are making them look bad and are making them greater have not's than they already are---thus necessitating the stoppage of such an extraordinarily ambitious effort. Far fetched? Check your federal de-regulation and anti-trust laws. How about EEO or Affirmative Action? Hiring for color, not hiring for color. Squelching growth. The point is, competitive capitalism is evil---it doesn't treat EVERYONE fairly. And initiative, creativity, free-thinking and assertiveness all lead to evil.

Now, as a manager/leader, how can you motivate an employee who believes in her core that initiative is evil, to get off her duff and start producing and innovating? Its tough indeed. Scare tactics don't work---General Eric Shinseki, Chief of Staff for the US Army once said, "If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less." Point well taken for the innovative thinkers, that's enough to get them up and at 'em. For the Initiative is Evil crowd, you'll get nothing but a yawn. Not changing is GOOD it won't insult anyone's self concept!

Once upon a time, not so long ago, a friend of mine (Betsy) was challenged by his staff of 30 employees. She was responsible for motivating them to produce, but they weren't. They were very lazy for the most part. They would do their expected job duties and nothing more.....needless to say, their productivity plateaued and stagnated for a very long time. When Betsy was approached by her boss about picking up productivity, she tried everything to motivate her team. She tried monetary bonuses and incentives for "making higher numbers." No results. She tried giving them extra vacation time as a reward for increasing their numbers. Nothing. She tried giving them more responsibility and freedom to create their own work environments, job duties, even have a say about how, where and when they can get their jobs done. More flexibility and freedom not only didn't work, it made the situation much worse.

Baffled, Betsy tried to find out what was wrong. Her employees told her the following:

1) "I don't like taking initiative for my own personal output....I'm not sure if what I'm doing is the right thing and I don't want you to surprise me with a bad review or a firing if I don't do what's right."

2) "I just want you to tell me what to do and I will do it."

3) "I don't like being a show-off and trying to make more money than my coworkers is showing off."

4) "I don't want to compete against my colleagues. Its stressful and I don't want to steal good ideas from them, making them feel pressured to come up with something better is cruel."

At this point, Betsy couldn't take any more. It was obvious NOTHING would motivate them to perform at a higher level. She was asking Huey Newton to scale Veneris Mons---it wasn't gonna happen!

Sadly, as General Shinseki predicted, Betsy's team quickly became irrelevant. All, but one of her 30 reports were let go over time and replaced with virile go-getters. Yet another arrow in the quiver of the anti-capitalists, the martyrs who despite being "good" employees were fatalities of capitalistic initiative. Unfortunately, these lessons don't inspire or motivate folks to become producers, the opposite is true.

As managers and leaders, the best we can do is to continue to describe the virtues of the Mona Lisa to people who've never seen it and who never want to see it, as something that is beautiful and useful. The Mona Lisa, like initiative is a mystery---its difficult to initially find its hidden beauty, but over time it becomes an acquired taste. It's been said that Da Vinci carried his Mona Lisa with him everywhere he went, and it was next to him as he layed dying. The Mona Lisa's beauty and value, in large part, comes from the credibiltiy and respect of the person who originally created and owned it. Like initiative, its true worth will only be seen and valued if/when you as a leader has the credibilty and respect of the beholders.

Nobody Gains, Nobody Loses

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:24:00 +0000

"When I was in the private sector, I hated competition, but I recognized that it made me work better."

---Alan Greenspan

This profound quote came from the Chairman of the Federal Reserve for the United States of America, the (0nce) most powerful nation to have ever graced God's Green Earth. This profound quote.....where the only logical and rational response is DUH!!! C'mon, Alan....that's the best you can say about competition? The operative words in Greenspan's belch of nonsense are these: "was in the private sector." Notice how he WAS in the private sector, hated competition and bolted for the bastion of inclusion, social justice, fairness and lack of accountability while having no fear of EVER being asked to compete---GOVERNMENT. That said, here comes my $1M rhetorical question (excuse me while I pull my soap-box over here): Is there any wonder why the U.S. of A is, at an annual compounded rate, exponentially losing its power, its economic dominance and its status as a global force?

(The rhetorical question continues): Is there any wonder why the Obama agenda is seeped in apologies about the U.S.'s past dominance, is destroying the value of our currency by expanding the debt by $4 TRILLION in less than one year, and in raising taxes and controlling salary limits so the "wealth can be spread around a little" (his campaign quote)??? The answer to those rhetorical questions is a collective NO. There is no wonder. The hidden agenda (hiding behind social justice, equity, inclusion, etc) is this: Kill Competition. Kill Capitalism. Plain and simple. Don't allow the successful to become more successful and let the fruits and the spoils trickle down. No! Hold back the successful, bring them down into the dirt with the losers who have no intention of competing for prosperity.

We're seeing it on a massive government scale, but as Obama would be the first to tell you, this 'movement' has been alive and well in our society for decades. As our Community Organizer in Chief, Obama is bringing the concepts of Trophy Kids, No Grades in School, and Hooray For Everyone out of the hapless community shelters and failing schools and into the competitive world of global economics. And our competition is loving every minute of it. For you see, competition won't go away simply because you decide to roll over and play dead or assume the missionary position and let your competitor have his way with you (as Obama is doing). The French have been trying this tactic in the theatre of war for centuries. It hasn't worked yet, although they do enjoy being in the missionary position. In baseball, the Chicago Cubs have conceded for more than 100 years now, but nobody has felt sorry for them and let them "have" another world series championship. As of 2009, the Cubs are not only submissive losers, but as a business entity, they are financially bankrupt. Hopefully, you're getting the idea here.

I can tell you that in today's workforce, generally speaking, the younger generations are not "getting the idea." But who can blame them? They've been raised to believe that competition is the evil precursor to capitalism---both spawns of Satan! They attended high schools where bell-curves are adjusted so nobody fails. Or worse, they attended grade schools where grades were not given, lest the kids self-concepts become bruised. They also could have been coached in soccer leagues to "not try to win" ---that the purpose of playing soccer is to get exercise and have fun. Worse yet, they might have spent their time in pee-wee football or baseball leagues where they don' keep score and everyone who plays gets a trophy!

Recently, a colleague of mine vented because he had failed horribly and miserably with an attempt to stir-up competitive juices, foster innovation, and inspire initiative within his ranks. He wanted to provide his employees with an opportunity to feel what its like to work without boundaries, to feel the exhilaration of creative freedom, to innovate on a whim, to motivate themselves and others, to inspire each other by attempting to exceed their own personal bests and to out perform each other. It was a radical difference from their assembly-line approach that the last management team had instilled upon them, so my pal Wally truly believed that his idea would free them of their routines, their boredom and their feelings of insignificance and lack of accomplishment.

Boy, was he wrong! From day #1 every single employee complained that:

1) They didn't know what to do. (Instead of creating their jobs/careers in their own images, they gave up and waited for someone to TELL them what to do with every hour of their days.)

2) They didn't know what it meant to "innovate." (Instead of using their creative ideas to free themselves from their rote job assignments, they believed being creative was too difficult, too time consuming and too exhausting.)

3) They didn't like the lack of structure. (Instead of seeing this as an opportunity to run with the freedom to make significant contributions and take a command of their career paths, they felt that not having goals set for them meant that they would try something and fail---and they were not equipped to fail. They wanted to be sure they never failed and couldn't be blamed for anything that went wrong.)

4) They didn't like "competing" against each other. (Instead of motivating each other to work harder---as Greenspan so astutely pointed out---they felt they wanted to down-shift and not "steal" good ideas, leaving a co-worker with none. Seeing the good idea market as a zero sum entity and not wanting any of their coworkers to "lose" in competition for great ideas, was the final death blow to Wally's attempt to inspire and motivate his team.

So, like the failing schools that don't grade their students, the pathetic community organizing programs that provide hand-outs and not hand-ups, and the woeful scoreless football games, and the tournaments that give trophies to everyone who participates, Wally's direct reports opted for the non-competitive and unaccountable environment over the evil competitive one.

Wally took this crushing blow as a signal that was loud and clear: We're a group of quitters.....we're happy with being quitters because its comfortable, safe and fair for everyone involved. Nobody gains anything, but most importantly, nobody loses. Maybe this last statement will one day replace "In God We Trust" on our currency. Or better yet, let's incorporate it into our corporate mission statements and ultimately, add it to the Seal of the President of the United States!

Absolute and Perfect Tedium

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:02:00 +0000

"There's none less free than who does nothing and has nothing else to do."

---Robert Frost

Don't get me wrong, its great to have nothing to do.....BUT it 1) seems nearly impossible to arrange; 2) isn't all that attractive once we've had it for a while; and 3) the folks who have absolutely nothing to do are usually in life's dire straights. So, it seems to me, when it comes to "having nothing to do" it can be extremely elusive to those who desperately need it, but it can also be deadly in large doses. I'll never forget my vacation to Kauai a few years ago. I was surrounded by nothing but beautiful scenery and was literally thousands of miles from all of my responsibilities. But I couldn't do nothing. I couldn't sit still. I had to sight-see, go somewhere, learn something. Just doing nothing isn't in my blood. I'll rest for an hour, but after that the stagnation of doing nothing does indeed seem deadly to me.

Deadly? Of course! We are a social animal---humanfeelings, not human beings---and when we literally have nothing to do, it means we have no responsibilities, nobody is around us, and worst of all nobody needs us. For those of you who are inundated with responsibilities and are barraged with the needs of others, having nobody around might sound like a desirous proposition. It can be in small doses. Oscar Wilde once said, "The only thing worse than being talked about is NOT being talked about." We're humanfeelings, we need others to need us. We need responsibilities, to feel like we belong to the greater social group---no matter how much we complain about being too busy and too needed, we'd wither and die without it.

Socrates called "the tedium of living" the poison of all poisons, the very venom which is opposed to all nature. In Dance and the Soul, Socrates described "the tedium of living" like this: "The tedium of living is not the passing ennui, or the tedium that comes from fatigue, or the tedium of which we can see the germ or of which we know the limits; but that perfect tedium---that pure tedium that is not caused by misfortune or infirmity, that is compatible with apparently the happiest of all conditions---that tedium, in short, the stuff of which has no other second cause than the clear-sightedness of the living man. This absolute tedium is essentially nothing but life in its nakedness when it sees itself with unclouded eyes." OK, tedium in Socrates interpretation doesn't come from doing nothing as much as it stems from self-reflection. I ask you this---what usually comes from sitting around doing nothing? Self-absorption, self-reflection, self-pity, tedium!

Not long ago, I was walking to a meeting in downtown Anchorage, Alaska. It was mid-October and snow was gently falling. As I turned a street corner, I noticed a Native Alaskan laying on his back, sleeping in the middle of the sidewalk. It was 2pm and the streets were busy with foot traffic. It wasn't a "typical" time of day that you'd see a homeless person sleeping on a sidewalk, but nobody seemed to care, they just stepped over or around him. I stopped inside the small, family owned store which was directly adjacent to the sleeping man, and I asked the shop-keep if he'd consider calling for some help for the man outside his store.

He said, "Oh, no......that's just William Henry. He has nothing better to do, but he likes attracting attention to himself and he likes to feel "included"---that's why he doesn't sleep in an alley or stairwell. Isn't he silly!? But I'll tell you something else.....I admire him because he has nothing to do but to sleep the day away." And then the store owner went on to ring-up a customer's purchase. Interesting......William Henry was known and accepted as the homeless person who wanted to have an identity as the guy who sleeps on the middle of the sidewalk during the busy day. He wanted people to talk about him, even though he was on the fringe of oblivion and of the forgotten.

And even though it appeared he had nothing to do all day, William Henry's personal calendar always reminded him: TODAY---Go sleep on the sidewalk so I'm not alone. Even he had avoided absolute and pure tedium--though he was free of most responsibilities, when he looked at himself with unclouded eyes, he saw he was not alone and that was all that mattered to him.

The Blame Game

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:05:00 +0000

“If you can keep your wits about you while all others are losing theirs, and blaming you. . . . The world will be yours and everything in it, what's more, you'll be a man, my son.”

---Rudyard Kipling

A good friend of mine, Elizabeth gets blamed from time to time and it drives her crazy. She wouldn't care so much if it really was her fault and she deserved it---she can take that. The problem is, when she is blamed, she is never in the wrong. To make matters worse the blamer is usually a shallow, self-righteous, cry-baby who throws a massive tantrum and gathers so much negative attention to the situation, everyone believes Elizabeth is at fault before she can even defend herself and her honor.

Even worse is the fact that these self-important cry-babies are what I like to call "Fancy People" and because they have lots of money and "Fancy" friends, Elizabeth can't tell them what she really thinks of them because she'd be out of a job. So, like the rest of us who have been wronged by the blame of a fancy person, she has to sit there, take it and say "I'm sorry!"---even though she never did anything wrong.

It just isn't fair. But she does keep her wits about her, she keeps her cool and in return, she keeps her job. If she were to lose her cool and rip the blamers throat out with THE TRUTH, we all know the "Fancy Person" wouldn't be able to handle it---not emotionally, not psychologically and certainly not intellectually. His/her "Fancy" world would come crashing down, for how could anyone possibly be challenging his/her stance on anything? How dare anyone correct him/her? How could anyone have the nerve to stand up to him/her? Being appalled and feeling utterly disrespected by Elizabeth's ability to contest their incorrect notion of blame, the "Fancy People" would not hesitate to pick up the phone and talk to her President/CEO and the Chairman of the Board (all of whom are probably good friends), just to get her fired.

There have been 4 instances in the past year, that I know of where "Fancy People" got their undies in a wad about something Elizabeth dropped the ball on----even though it was THEY who screwed up. Elizabeth is smarter than she looks to these "Fancy People" and she never interacts with them outside of email. When they have their usual unrealistic demands and they try to dump them on her with a phone call, she tells them to email the details to her. If they call at 1am on a whim with some completely inane idea that they want 1,000 people to complete by sunrise, she makes them type it out and put it in writing. Even when it comes to scheduling phone meetings, she makes sure all set-up communication is in writing.

Now, being so "Fancy", these "Fancy People" forget why she is adamant about email communication. As is the way of the "Fancy People" they blurt out demands and unrealistic expectations on the fly, forgetting half of what they belched out and why. When its in writing, Elizabeth has them by the short and curly hair. Recently, one "Fancy Person" called Elizabeth's boss (he didn't call her directly of course) and he chewed him out telling him how incompetent Elizabeth is because she "dropped the ball" on something "important" (important to only the Fancy Person).

Elizabeth caught wind and called the "Fancy Person" to confront him. He told her that he wanted her to work on a project 2 weeks ago when they communicated last, and she blew it!! In addition, when they communicated 6 months ago, he had another project for her and she never followed up with him. He was PISSED!! Elizabeth was reading the stirng of emails between them as the "Fancy Person" was having his tantrum. There it was in black and white, a message from the "Fancy Person" stating, "It's too late to get to work on this project for this summer, but let's shoot for next summer." That was 6 months ago, and he was saying that they can't get anything done on their project at that time. Wait until next summer. Clear.

The other email she read pertained to the "dropped ball" from 2 weeks ago. There it was in black and white, Elizabeth emailed him exactly 6 months later reminding him that they needed to get re-connected. She had also seen that 6 months ago, she asked him to call her regardless of the fact that they can't get anything done for a while. She offered him days/times to call and asked for his reply. He NEVER responded. Hmmmmm......sounds like a dropped ball to me! The other incident 2 weeks ago was a response to her request to re-connect. When he got her email at 1:38pm, he wrote, "I'm in town right now....in fact, I'm across the street from you. Come over here, there are 20 people I want you to meet."

Of course, Elizabeth had a packed schedule with lots of commitments......in fact, she was even going to a dinner meeting that would tie her up until 9pm. It was a bad day for her, so she sent the "Fancy Person" an email and he never responded to her request to talk or meet the next day, before he left town. The very fact that Elizabeth didn't drop everything and go running to the "Fancy Person" was the real reason he was mad. She's sure his thought process was, "How on earth could she possibly have something more important to do than to fulfill my every command?" Therein lies the TRUE problem......Elizabeth can't stand "Fancy People"---she's not impressed with their money or their status or how important they think they are. She likes people who treat her and others with respect and dignity.

She won't answer to every whim, she won't jump at every demand, she won't be anyone's whipping boy or lap dog just because they are "Fancy People." She treats everyone with the same dignity, respect and courtesy she'd want them to show her so when a "Fancy Person" comes barging into her office with an unrealistic demand, she politely asks them to make an appointment to talk to her. Nothing wrong with that, its what everyone else does, why isn't it good enough for the "Fancy People"?

Back to the blaming story, after she was ripped a new one, Elizabeth, knowing the truth felt empowered with all she needed to know. She didn't get angry or offended by this "Fancy Person's" crudeness (if she did she would have had every right because he was offensive). She knew, deep down, she was right and this guy was nothing more than an idiot. It turns out, while he was screaming at Elizabeth, he mentioned that he "is a busy business man and has no time for people who drop the ball. I'm running TWO bankrupt companies and as a result, I'm of significant importance."

Elizabeth wasn't surprised that both of his companies are bankrupt! As Kipling says, for this "Fancy Person," the world and everything in it is not really his, and he's certainly not a man! He's a blamer.

A Friend in Need is Jealous Indeed

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:35:00 +0000

"For not many men, the proverb saith, can love a friend whom fortune prospereth unenvying."

---Eschylus

"One thing I've learned in life is that true friends are hard to find," said my co-worker Nelly. "Maybe its because I choose the wrong friends, I'm not sure what it is. But all I know is that as I become more successful, my friends become fewer in number." Some people are good at keeping friends, no matter what happens in their, or their friends lives---others just seem to lose them. I'm of the contention that we are victims to the luck of the draw, we might find a loyal friend who isn't susceptible to the Green-Eyed Monster (jealousy) or we might not. Either way, I'm convinced that jealousy plays a HUGE part in deciding which of our friends truly are just that.

If you don't believe me or Eschylus from the quote above, then try Aeschylus, the ancient Greek playwright from 450 BC wrote, "It is in the character of very few men to honor without envy a friend who has prospered." After reading that quote, my co-worker Nelly said, "I wonder if Eschylus and Aeschylus were friends---if they were, they wouldn't have engaged in a silly competition to out-do each other---and they most likely would have remained friends a long time." She's probably right, but competition isn't always a prime motivator in friendships gone wrong. Sometimes, envy in friendships is derived from the fact that one person HAS something that the other doesn't---even if the HAVE NOT doesn't want to try to obtain it. It's just the mere fact that the jealous person doesn't have what his/her friend does.

Nelly could really relate. Over the years, she moved out of state and lived in a warm, sunny climate. She lost a few friends because of that. It wasn't the distance that killed the friendships, it was the fact that she was able to take a risk and move away---that scared and offended some of her friends. Then, she earned a masters degree, and lost the friends she had who only earned bachelors degrees. Next, she got a "fancy" job and traveled the world....more friends, jealous of her ability to travel to Hawaii, Paris and London every month, dropped off the face of the earth. Fast forward a few short years, and Nelly now holds a doctorate degree. You guessed it, the heard got thinner. At this point, she was only down to a handful of "friends."

A few years after she earned the doctorate, she got married in Tahiti, she bought a 6 bedroom house, had 3 kids, and was promoted twice---all in that order. When the dust settled, she was surrounded by many of life's gifts and blessings. But she had NO friends. They were all gone. While she was enjoying Manna from Heaven, many of her friends were not so fortunate. Some couldn't get a date, let alone find a husband. Others who were married, had trouble conceiving a child. Some had the same dead end jobs they've had since they knew Nelly in high school. Others lived in dingy one room apartments. Many were unemployed. It was obvious that Nelly had blown them away in the accomplishments area, but Nelly never held that over their heads. Like a true friend, she always offered to help them, but they would never return her calls or emails.

It even got to the point where Nelly, hoping to hang on to some of her life-long friends (of 25 years), wouldn't tell them about her promotions, or travels or even 2 of her children's births. It was sad, but she knew she couldn't share her life's joys lest she lose her long-time friendships. Then it hit her---if she can't share her life with them, they obviously aren't true friends. If they can't be happy for her, and if they choose to feel intimidated and jealous, then she will have to let them go. Which is what she did. She stopped reaching out to help them, and she stopped calling and emailing just to say "HI."

She felt hurt and all alone---this person who is loyal to the end, had been rejected by those who she thought felt the same way about her. She thought after being through so much for 25 years meant something to them---but she was wrong. Jealousy won out over loyalty. Some people would argue that what Nelly is going through is a "female issue" and successful women have this sort of intimidation factor which renders many of them successful and single for their entire lives. It might intimidate some men on the dating scene, but for the most part, this is an issue that is not gender biased.

One day, not long ago, Nelly met a colleague named Ned who had the exact same problem that she did. He lost 15 friends over the years, and maybe gained 1 or 2 casual acquaintances along the way. Nelly and Ned have become good friends---true, they don't have 25 years behind them---only 25 months, but at least they have each other when they feel like there is nobody for them outside of their homes. What helped cross their paths? A workplace discussion of William Penn's essay from 1693, entitled Some Fruits of Solitude. In his essay, Penn wrote: "The jealous are troublesome to others, but a torment to themselves." Indeed they are, Mr. Penn....indeed they are.

Diversity's Double Standard at Work

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:51:00 +0000

"When people are forced to interact, their prejudices diminish."

---Muhammad Ali

I met "The Champ" once, in 1988 while I was walking through O'Hare Airport. It was perhaps the lowest point of his career, if not his life. He was standing off to the side of the concourse, holding pamphlets. Nobody was standing near him, everyone just kept passing him by. Being a rabid fan of all sports, I instantly recognized him and approached.

I shook his hand and said, "Hi Champ! I grew up watching you fight, and I thing you're still the greatest." He smiled weakly, the slight signs of Parkinson's Disease were beginning to take root. I asked him what he was doing in O'Hare all alone and he gave me one of his pamphlets and said that "Islam is the true religion of God" and he asked me if I was interested in "signing up." I told him I was baptized Lutheran, was studying Judaism and had always believed the Egyptians had it right when they worshiped RA, for without the sun we would not be standing here talking right now. In short, I told him that at the moment, 3 religions were enough.

He looked dejected because he hadn't been talking with anyone all morning, and during the time I stopped to see him, he had no additional visitors. He said in his soft, wispy voice, "Oh well, how 'bout an autograph then?" He read my mind, but I felt bad because he had to ask me.....I really felt sorry for him. He asked me my name, I told him "Troy" and he said, "Pretty-Boy Troy! That's how I'll sign it!" And so he did. I put my arm around him, thanked him for all the years of entertainment he provided (simply for beating the crap out of people, but its entertainment nonetheless) and I walked away with my autographed Islamic propaganda. I looked back, and saw The Champ slump down in his chair, waiting for someone else to recognize him......

Since the point in time when he lost his "power" and "usefulness" Ali was isolated and alone. What I encountered that day was not The Champ, he was simply a black man pushing pamphlets on people.....and in the pre-September 11th days, they were everywhere. He wasn't noticed because of the prejudice of everyone around him. Nobody wanted to bother with another black man hassling them for their money and their time. So they just kept walking. I saw past that, and because of it, I experienced a very enjoyable 25 minutes alone with The Greatest of All Time. Not many people can say that.

We are all racist and prejudice to some extent. Black, white, brown, beige, yellow, red or green---we're all guilty of it. And its a shame just how many opportunities we miss out on because of our "guiding fictions" about others. The workplace is no stranger to discrimination, and a colleague of mine, Luke, has many sad stories to tell.......

Luke, is a middle-aged Caucasian who is completely color blind. He grew up in neighborhoods of mixed races and judged people on their integrity and their work ethics---as a supervisor, that is what he is paid to do. He is a caring and very helpful person who offered assistance to everyone in every kind of situation. Even though he was so helpful and caring, he was almost always rebuffed by folks who were Black.

There was a time when he offered to mentor some young, new hires who were all Black---he was shunned by all three. All 3 chose Black mentors even though they were not half as successful or as well connected or as experienced as Luke. He once offered to help change the tire of an elderly Black coworkers car, as she struggled with it in the company parking lot. She refused his offer and waited for a Black colleague to join her and help. He often volunteered to help folks (Black and White) with minor things, like stay late and help them finish a project, carry their luggage to the waiting cab out front, or sit and eat lunch with them if they were alone.

EVERY time he made a simple gesture of assistance or friendship like the ones just mentioned, the White colleagues would accept and his Black colleagues would pretend they didn't hear him, look at him like he was crazy and not respond, or completely reject him outright. There was a time, when Luke was sitting in a meeting with 5 of his black colleagues. He was the only Caucasian in the room. One asked a question about managing problem XYZ, and Luke answered, reminding them that he had 15 years of dealing with XYZ. Everyone just looked at him. Then, another colleague entered the room, sat down and was bombarded with questions about how to handle problem XYZ. The person who just entered the room and sat down gave the same answer that Luke gave. This time, EVERYONE in the room responded with "THANK YOU! "YOU SAVED US!" "WE WERE WONDERING WHAT TO DO!"---The newest colleage to enter the room and sit down was also black.

Luke couldn't understand what he began to call reverse discrimination. It would be one thing if it happened only occasionally, but EVERY time he reached out to EVERY Black colleague?? And it wasn't just him, he later learned.....other White colleagues reported similar experiences when they too tried to show warmth and compassion towards others who were not of a like racial makeup.

So, after months and years of failure and rejection, Luke became unfeeling and uncaring. He decided that he was finished making a fool of himself, and he stopped making an effort to be 'color blind' and unprejudiced. When he saw a colleague of color in need (a very same colleague who rebuffed his offers to reach out in the past), he just kept walking. He helped only his Caucasian colleagues.

That was 10 years ago and these days Luke is bitter about his continued experiences with the self-imposed isolationism of minority groups in his workplace. For many years, he heard all of this lip service about "diversity" and "inclusion" "color blindness" and "social justice" but he was naive and didn't realize what it really meant. In Luke's mind, and in many other Caucasians experiences, all of that meant, "GIVE us our share and leave us alone. We want nothing to do with you once you GIVE us our share."

This is how White folks treated Ali. They took their share of entertainment from him, then pushed him aside (at least until he made his "comeback" appearance as a torch lighter at the 1996 Olympics). Luke's problem of understanding "diversity" stems from the fact that if truly working and living together isn't really what it means, and he and other White colleagues will continually be rejected while trying to make that happen AND the REAL definition of "diversity" involves GIVING others what they believe they are entitled to and then get the hell out of their faces---he and others like him have decided to not give but rather, to give up.

The Greatest of All Time, didn't get it quite right on the race relations front, prejudices don't diminish when we are interacting with each other---sometimes they are inflamed and exacerbated by the very same folks who crave and mandate "diversity."

What's In a Name Tag?

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:09:00 +0000

“I'm conducting a seminar on multiple personality disorders, and it takes me forever to fill out the name tags.”

---Anonymous

Few things irritate me more than obsessing over name tags. How many billions of dollars each year are wasted on planning, organizing, arranging, writing, printing and policing name tags for corporate meetings and national conferences? That was a rhetorical question, but the answer is: probably multiple billions! I have met people who were actually HIRED because they specialize in developing name tags for special events, and they spend their corporate days running their printer 24/7, as the Senior Coordinator of Name Tag Operations!

Sadly, more than 60% of all name tags are never used because their "owners" don't show up to the event like they said they would. This wasteful abuse of name tags has to end! One funny thing about name tags is they're usually printed for events where 90% of the people on hand already know each other. Another interesting observation is that name tags are redundant---if you are close enough to read someone's name tag, that person is most likely already telling you his/her name. So what's the point of the name tag, then? Is it so you can cross-reference and fact check to make sure the name the person is telling you matches what's in writing? I, for one, take the person's word for it and find no need to verify.

As if the wastefulness and the marginal usefulness weren't enough, the DOGMA is downright nauseating. The world is rife with name tag gurus, czars and nazis---all of whom are at the ready to mandate and dictate your name tag usage. If you make a gaff or a faux pas, or if your name tag is not framed in a fancy lanyard with ribbons hanging from it----then there will be hell to pay!! Take this tripe as an example of name tag "etiquette" from a popular name tag czar (My smart-ass comments are in CAPS):

Names should appear on the tag in the order of first and then last name. (REALLY? HOW NOVEL.) In most cases titles, or honorifics, are not included on a name tag. (UNLESS YOU'RE THE "ALL BEING MASTER OF TIME, SPACE & DIMENSION.") There may be an exception for this in specialized conferences or events. (LIKE THE "NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ALL BEING MASTERS OF TIME, SPACE & DIMENSION.") It is appropriate, and often necessary, to show an affiliation on the name tag. The font indicating affiliation, and any logos, should be smaller than the size used for the person's actual name. (THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE I LOVE MYSELF MORE THAN I LOVE MY COMPANY.) The purpose of a name badge is to easily convey the name of person wearing the badge. (ITS MUCH EASIER THAN SAYING, "HI, MY NAME IS FRED.") Affiliation is secondary information.Use as large a font as possible to display the name. Avoid using italics or cursive print as these can be difficult to read. (ESPECIALLY FROM ACROSS THE ROOM!) Names should be displayed in large, dark capital letters. (USE FLASHING LIGHTS AND GLITTER WHENEVER POSSIBLE.) Block letters are easily readable. (I DIDN'T KNOW THAT!) When handwriting a tag, be sure it is legible. (THAT'S A GREAT IDEA, BECAUSE I USUALLY WRITE ILLEGIBLY AND I'VE BEEN WONDERING WHY NOBODY EVER TALKS TO ME!) Use as much of the white space on the badge as possible. If pre-printing name badges, use a simple large font. Start with 45-point font and see how it works on your badges. Reduce font size incrementally until the names are easily viewable in the space allowed. ( I THINK USING A 100 FONT FOR YOUR FIRST NAME ONLY, LEAVING NO ROOM FOR ANYTHING ELSE IS THE WAY TO GO.) Name badges should be worn on the right side shoulder. (OR YOUR FOREHEAD FOR EXTREME EASE OF READING FOR THE PERSON WHO IS GREETING YOU.) Traditionally when greeting someone new, reach out your right hand to initiate a handshake. (THAT'S A GOOD TIP....I NEVER LEARNED HOW TO SHAKE SOMEONE'S HAND, I'M GLAD I READ THIS.) A name badge situated on your right side will naturally be in sight. (NATURALLY, BUT SO WILL ONE ON YOUR FOREHEAD.) Straighten your name tag if it becomes crooked. A crooked tag shows disrespect for the event and conveys a sloppy personality. (IT'S OK TO BURN THE UNITED STATES FLAG, BUT THEY'LL BE DAMNED IF YOUR NAME TAG IS GONNA BE CROOKED AND DISRESPECTFUL!!!) If you are carrying a purse, place the purse over your left shoulder. This will avoid accidentally covering the name badge. (OH, THAT WOULD BE HORRIBLE!) Do not bring your own name badge. (I USUALLY CARRY MINE IN A GOLD BRIEFCASE, ALONG WITH MY VERY OWN CRYSTAL CHALICE.) Many event coordinators use name badges to easily identify those invited to the gathering. (THAT'S A GOOD IDEA! WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THAT!!) A name tag that does not fit the standard for the event may make you look like an uninvited guest. (NOTE TO GATE CRASHERS: BEWARE OF YOUR NAME TAGS NOT FITTING IN!!) If the event presents you with a name tag, wear it. (IF YOU DON'T, THE NAME TAG NAZIS WILL SLAP YOU WITH A FINE AND THROW YOU OFF THE PREMISES.) Your name badge will help put other attendees at ease and make you more approachable. (EVEN IF YOUR FLY IS OPEN AND YOU HAVEN'T SHOWERED ALL WEEK.)

See what I mean? Inane, isn't it? Recently, however, I changed my mind about name tags. It was when I was visiting my 2-year-old son in pre-school. It was his second day, and I was just checking in to see how things were going. Per standard operating procedure, parents can peek in, but they shouldn't be seen, lest they ignite an "I wanna go home" tantrum. As I peered through a crack in the door, my name tag world was turned upside down. I actually learned that name tags DO have a USEFUL side to them. They CAN be used in a way that isn't ego-centric. They ARE used in a cost effective manner. And they do not necessarily have to be steeped in dogma, pomp, and circumstance!!

As I peeked through the door at the room full of 2-year-olds, I noticed that they were all wearing name tags. But interestingly, they were exhibiting the complete opposite of what our guru dictated as the proper etiquette rules. They were handwritten (relatively illegibly) and they were slapped crookedly on the kids BACKS! Of course! If you want to remember a toddler's name, and you need to read his/her name tag, it should be on the child's back, because that is the part of a toddler you actually see the most!! Brilliant! Finally, a logical, rational and reasonable use for name tags......I stand corrected!

Act Like a Leader, Not a Manager

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:43:00 +0000

"Divorced from ethics, leadership is reduced to management and politics to mere technique."

---James MacGregor Burns

Recently, I read a BusinessWeek article about leadership---written by the great Warren Bennis. In his article, Mr. Bennis reminded us of this story: "The first time Franklin Delano Roosevelt met the actor Orson Welles, the President graciously said, 'You know, Mr. Welles, you are the greatest actor in America.' 'Oh no, Mr. President,' Welles replied. 'You are!' When we consider all FDR lead this nation through---the depression, WWII, welfare, social and civil rights development---all while diligently hiding his polio from the world; lest he be seen as weak and incapacitated----we understand what a great actor he really was. Yes, this feebly man with an ailing and degenerating physical frame always acted strong, stern and tough when in the public eye.

What if FDR didn't act like the leader we needed him to be, both physically and mentally? He would have been a mere manager who, according to Mr. Burns, would be advocating techniques and not initiating political reformation. Were FDR's notions about acting like a leader driven by ethics or was it something else? Maybe it was vanity that motivated him to hide his feeble physical frame. What we do know from history is that his values, morals and in many regards--his ethics, had driven him to act like the strong leader he was. With FDR, his moral compass was straight, he believed in America's strength and he strove for a peaceful world order. The only "ethical blemish" he has on his legacy consists of his knowing the West Coast would be attacked by the Japanese, so he moved our fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor. You know the rest of the story.

Was that move unethical? Should he have warned the nation of an impending and immanent attack instead of moving the fleet farther from our borders and not saying a word? Was it unethical to allow the US to enter the war via the defenseless slaughter of 3,000 boys? Or was his tactic of making martyrs out of the victims the motivation our nation needed to leave apathy behind and get involved in a world war that was going to pull us in sooner or later? Some say this "unethical" move by FDR altered history forever, for he was leading by politics and not managing technique. On the flip side, Neville Chamberlain, Prime Minister of Great Brittan could have ended WWII before it began. But unlike FDR, Chamberlain let his "ethics" motivate him to placate and appease Hitler---thus Chamberlain was a manager of techniques and Hitler walked all over him. You know the rest of the story.

So, we move now from the glorious, super-human leadership efforts of WWII into the apathetic, vain-glorious, half-assed efforts of the contemporary business leader. Not long ago, Joey, a "leader" of a small department in a large corporation was charged with establishing a corporate training program about ethics. Joey was given the unenviable task of developing a 7-week long training and development program that would teach all of his company's employees (1,348 of them) the ins and outs of ethics in the workplace. His company's training and development team would deliver and teach the class, but Joey, having an academic background, was tapped with writing the entire program.

So, with a team of subordinates on hand for assistance, Joey gathered his group and got started. The first thing he did was sit everyone around his computer and they Googled "ethics syllabi" in the search engine. Up popped dozens of examples of course outlines, syllabi, lesson plans, etc. Then, he proceeded to cut and paste all of the aforementioned materials into his personal Word documents. He told his support group to "look and learn" about how time, effort and money is saved when "you're burdened with a large project you don't want to deal with!!"

His team sat in shock as they watched their boss, plagiarize ethics information for their ethics program!! It was the ultimate hypocrisy! A few of them walked away and others dropped off of his team the next day. At that instant, Joey lost credibility and lost his designation as a leader. He acted like a lazy oaf and an unethical slime-ball. Soon after, his boss caught wind of Joey's alleged unethical leadership practices. Joey's boss, an ethical leader himself, loved to follow Ronald Regan's advice: "Trust but verify," so he took the accusations lightly and waited to see the results of Joey's work first hand.

When the time came for Joey's boss to review Joey's work, he TRUSTED that Joey turned in work that was his own. He TRUSTED that Joey didn't compromise his or the company's ethics, values or morals when compiling the documents for this project, so he talked Joey through it, page by page. It turned out, while his boss was VERIFYING Joey's honesty and ethical morals, Joey couldn't provide details about the information that he turned in as his own work. In short, Joey failed his boss's test and he confirmed that the accusations about Joey's unethical plagiarism was true. As a true leader, Joey's boss fired Joey---and earned greater credibility and trust from the company's rank and file employees.

Acting ethically will give you strength to make tough decisions and will enable you to stand up in tough times. You gain this strength from knowing that what you are doing is right, and nobody can challenge you on that. When you are acting like an ethical leader, you'll be driven by what is right and true---you'll never cower, placate or appease anyone for the wrong reasons. If only Neville Chamberlain had an opportunity to read this chapter in 1936.

There's no WE in TEAM!

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:58:00 +0000

"A team with a star player is a good team, but a team without a star player is a great team."

---Bill Bethel

While growing up, I had trouble understanding this quote. I thought everyone needed at least one star player in order to truly be great. The 1920's had the Yankees, with perhaps the greatest collection of star players to ever take the field---and they did just fine. Then there were the Pittsburgh Steelers of the 1970's, the 49'ers of the 80's---both teams chock full of hall of famers, and they were great teams. Closer to home, I followed the Chicago Bulls of the 1990's....they had MJ. Enough said. When he was playing (and not retired), they won 6 championships, and they were GREAT. When he retired twice and wasn't playing, they came close to winning 3 championships, but they DIDN'T---they were a GOOD team.

So, I didn't get Bethel's quote at all. Every team needs a "Franchise" player, someone who will carry the team on its back, someone who will bring fans to the stadium just to see him play, and someone who will serve as the foundation upon which other key team members will be acquired and trained. Like all things in life, we learn through experience, and as I experienced teamwork through team sports and then through becoming a manager, supervisor, leader in the workforce, it was painfully obvious that many "star players" are more trouble than they're worth.

One of my managers from the past used to walk around mumbling under his breath, "Why are all the great employees so high-maintenance?? Can't they just be great and leave it at that??" He was referring to, of course, the fact that most great employees/superstars require a lot of up-keep. They need constant reassurance, lots of attention, they often make multiple demands to improve their personal situations, they require first class accommodations where ever they go, they consistently ask for special circumstances when a less than desirable task arises, they often take charge as they see fit, and more often than not they live their lives asking for forgiveness instead of permission. To sympathize with management, imagine if you had multiple star players on your team, all of whom are high-maintenance, self-aggrandizing legends in their own minds, who want to be treated as special as they think they are!

In his book, Life in the Crystal Palace, Alan Harrington described the reasoning behind a superstar's desire this way: "Who deep down in his heart remains content to spend his working life as an obscure member of a team? Only it may be supposed, someone without talent. From childhood, we call out: LOOK AT ME! not LOOK AT US! The ego gives off sparks. The most natural desire in the world is to want to call attention to yourself, to shine in some respect above others, to shine YOUR light so that it will be noticed. To accomplish that, you make yourself worthy, study, drive, let everyone know you are there, and aim to get ahead quickly." In these situations, as a manager or leader, not only are you required to keep these HUGE ego's in check, you have to make sure these talented folks are growing and developing lest they get frustrated and look for work elsewhere. You have to also make sure the star player and all of the other members of the team not only work well together---you have to make sure they're winning championships---lest you lose your job.

Recently, I worked on a consulting assignment with a star player I've known for nearly 10 years. When I met him, he was an obscure "nobody" who desperately wanted to yell LOOK AT ME! He asked me for some help, I got him up and running, and now he heads-up a program that is larger than he could've ever imagined. His work has earned him multiple leadership and humanitarian awards, wealth and women. He grew his idea out of zero resources into a multi-million dollar operation. He's had a 20,000 square foot building constructed to keep all of his "stuff" and it was named after him, by the way. He's even been in the Oval Office twice! Needless to say, everyone has been looking at him and his work.

He is truly a star player in his field, but he is not self-employed.....he works for a very large organization. If you spent a few minutes meeting with him, you'd never know he actually worked for that organization, you'd think he was a lone wolf who answered to no one. But he does have a boss, and his boss HATES him. In fact, not only does his boss hate him, the VP hates him and the President hates him. Did I mention the CEO wants him fired as well? When I witness this dysfunction for myself, I can't believe that this superstar has so many enemies---check that, so many WRONG enemies. How can he survive on his job if everyone above him wants his head?

He has diplomatic immunity, and it comes in the form of financial support. My pal has multi-million dollar accounts that fund his work---corporate donations, philanthropic benefactors and government grants. All of this hard work attracts positive attention to his company and even generates some profit for them---so no matter how much the VP, President and CEO hate having to deal with his high-maintenance, arrogant self---they can't cut their Michael Jordan and suffer being a horrible team. It's like my ex-boss used to ask, "Why do all the great employees have to be so high maintenance?" All great things (and great people) come with a price. The question is, if you're a manager, what's the price you're willing to pay before your superstar's ego ruins your team? And if you happen to be a superstar who wants everyone to look at you, the question you have to ask yourself is how far will you go to gain recognition without destroying your opportunities for success?

With my pal, he is walking a tightrope over Niagara Falls. The wind his howling, the rope is slick and he dropped his balance pole. He truly is alone. Even though he is a legend, he is in a precarious situation. He needs to remember that the mighty DO fall, and because he is so high off the ground, he isn't gonna bounce.

Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:47:00 +0000

"When we break laws, we lose our hold on the central reality."

---Ralph Waldo Emerson

There's an old song (circa 1979-ish) by Judas Priest called Breakin' the Law, and it was one of the first mainstream songs to describe the psychopathology behind, well.....Breakin' the Law. In this high-speed rock song, we hear the lead singer, Rob Halford literally scream about how lying, cheating and stealing one's way into criminality comes from others treating us unfairly.

The first stanza of lyrics goes thusly:

"There I was completely wasting, out of work and down, all inside it's so frustrating as I drift from town to town, feel as though nobody cares if I live or die, so I might as well begin to put some action in my life...."

It's plain to see this guy's in the middle of a pity party, mainly because he can't find a job, so instead of trying harder to gain some decent employment, he'd rather go out and put some action in his life and throw his life away. Makes sense to me! NOT! But Emerson had it right, it seems like central reality is already out the window for the character in our Judas Priest ballad.

In the second and final stanza (Judas Priest wasn't known for extensive lyrics or many words for that matter) they shriek-out these words of wisdom and insight into their concept of reality lost:

"So much for the golden future, I can't even start, I've had every promise broken, there's anger in my heart, you don't know what it's like, you don't have a clue, if you did you'd find yourselves doing the same thing too..."

Now, we fully understand that there is hurt and anger over not having a job and not feeling connected to a town or with any people who care. Since there is obviously no future, and all promises have been broken, there is no trust that anything positive could ever happen. And since nobody can relate to this situation (no central reality) then there is only one thing left to do--get started breakin' the law! It seems so sad and pathetic when we read the words of a late 1970's early 1980's "metal band" try to explain how anger about being cheated leads some folks towards a life of crime because they want to get even, have excitement, and self-destruct because nobody cares about them anyway.

It all seems sad and corny but its all true---in the minds of the criminal, their actions are rationalized by exactly what those lyrics delineated. Revenge, self pity, self destruction and excitement. Even though this might not be the case for your common crystal-meth-whore who steals $10 off a John 3 times a night so she can buy some smokes at the corner liquor store; this might actually be true for your common white collar criminal, who might be sitting in the cubical next to you.

In his book, Life in the Crystal Palace, Alan Harrington wrote, "Our truths (central reality) are mobile and flexible. Like Einstein's Theory of Relativity, what you see from your perspective as truth, is completely different from what I'm seeing from my angle. From there we can go on the proposition that nothing is ABSOLUTELY true, and anything may be true. And if anything may be true, if you think hard enough it only takes a little emotional conviction to make it so. It permits even fraudulent people to manufacture sincere belief in what they are doing." Does anyone remember President Clinton saying, "Its not a lie if you really believe its true," in response to why he was confronted about his involvement with "that woman."?? Even though he was nearly impeached out of office because of that lie, Clinton had no central reality and lied about dozens of white collar crimes, like selling national defense secrets to the Chinese for campaign money.

Many years ago, I knew a few co-workers who felt like "The Man" had done them wrong. They felt like they had been passed over for promotions too many times. They felt like they had crappy job duties just because their supervisors didn't like them. They felt like their colleagues were out to get them and were trying to set them up for failure. They were hurt, angry and paranoid, of course, they had no central reality grounding them---so they thought that the best solution to this situation was NOT to work harder and become better employees. Instead they got even by breakin' the law.

They all got involved with stealing a little here and there from their company. They used to buy jeans and shoes with their company credit cards. They would get their company issued vans washed and then they'd bring their personal cars for a wash and wax on the company's card. They would go out to lunch with their friends and charge it to the company, saying it was a business meal. These actions were, in their minds, no big deal because the money they spent on the clothes, car washes and lunches were like reimbursements of the money they never received from the promotions they never got.

They also justified this illegal behavior by rationalizing that since nobody at that damn company cared about them anyway, they wouldn't mind getting caught and getting fired. So their lack of a central reality dug them deeper into an abyss. Their illegal activity became more significant and more brazen. They began stealing more by purchasing more with their company cards, and hiding the expenses with some creative accounting. They even started stealing office furniture and made profits by selling it all to local pawn shops! In their minds, they were simply getting what was theirs---if they weren't going to be given big promotions, they'd find the cash somewhere else.

Of course, they were eventually caught and this white collar James Gang was fired and prosecuted. During their trial, their angle and view of their "relative truth" was that they were the victims of an oppressive workplace that inhibited them from getting ahead. They even quoted Judas Priest, not verbatim, but they paraphrased their second stanza and ended their not guilty plea by saying, "you don't know what it's like, you don't have a clue, if you did you'd find yourselves doing the same thing too...."

I would argue with Mr. Emerson and say that we break laws BECAUSE we lose our hold on central reality. So stay real and stay out of jail.

Family Man First

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:29:00 +0000

"I've learned that you can't have everything and do everything at the same time."

---Oprah Winfrey

Career men and women know how difficult it is to make a relationship work. Climbing the ladder, reaching for that brass ring and trying to be a good husband/wife and mother/father is tough. Most spouses and parents, at some point decide the career isn't worth it and (rightfully so) place their families where that brass ring used to be. If your kid has a fever, you stay home and help your wife get the healthy kids to school and do the grocery shopping while she takes the feverish urchin to the doctor. You cancel your meetings, let the emails sit and never give any of that a second thought until your child's fever has broken.

If you're not married and don't have children yet, does that scenario sound like something you could pull off? Can you see yourself putting family first? If you said, "NO WAY!" then don't worry, you're not an insensitive freak. And if you said, "HELL YES!" then you shouldn't feel guilty about being a quitter who can't hack the grind of corporate life. The problem comes from straddling the fence, when the NO WAY and the HELL YES people try to have it all. Granted some people are able to miraculously earn $3.7M each year and still find time to stay at home and play with their kids, but most of us mere mortals have to work 20 hours/week just to stay ahead so we can earn our $80K or maybe $90K.

In his book, Life in the Crystal Palace, Alan Harrington dedicated a few pages to the issue of fathers working too much back in the 1950's and 60's. He was concerned about supervisors who wouldn't let fathers go home for supper, and he was even more concerned about fathers/husbands who volunteered to work extra hours so they could get ahead. He wrote, "Strange men, who can't bring themselves to go home when the sun sets!" I'd have to agree with him. Sure, its great for men and women to try to get ahead so they can become better providers, but what is the cost? Kids who never see mommy or daddy? A failed marriage? Yes and yes. That is, unless you either agree to settle and take a job that will be less demanding---giving up your dreams of a corner office and private jet for something in the mid $30's to low $40's. (For the best example of this, watch the movie, The Family Man starring Nicholas Cage.) Or, you might be one of the few people who has a boss who believes in family first, a company who cultivates a family first environment and a team of colleagues who encourage you to stay home with a sick child instead of helping them with your critical sales presentation.

Believe it or not, it is not only possible to balance work and family, its actually possible to have a fulfilling career while putting family first. You have to look far and wide, but as the saying goes, "Whatever you're looking for is right where you find it." Ryan was a middle manager who was working for a large corporation. He was in his early 30's and was trying to grab that brass ring. He was a newly wed, and was trying to establish his career so he could afford to purchase a home for himself and his wife. He worked long hours (17 hours/day), traveled the world on business and was out of the country 2 weeks per month; and when he was "home" he had to travel out of state quite frequently.

Ryan and his wife never saw each other. Their marriage suffered because of their lack of time together, and the pressures from working so hard, and so much yet still not having enough money to start a family, lead them to divorce. Years later, Ryan re-married and was hopeful that this time he could make it work. His years of hard work, long hours, incessant travel and personal sacrifice lead him to a crossroads. He was able to quit his demanding job and take a job that paid him more money, required ZERO travel and asked him to be aware of the importance of balancing his work life and his personal life! Under this healthy environment, Ryan was able to purchase a home and have 3 beautiful children.

In addition, Ryan was home every night for dinner, he was home every weekend for zoo and and beach outings, and whenever an issue arose at home---be it health related or dance recital related-- he was given 'leave' no questions asked. If his boss noticed he was working too many hours, she would remind Ryan to go home and play with his kids. If she noticed he was spending too much time sending emails from home, she would remind him to put them off until he came into the office. His boss was the quintessential family woman and believed to her core that there was nothing in the office that couldn't wait, and there was nothing in the office that was more important than family.

The interesting thing about Ryan's boss was that she was ultra-successful, made tons of money, was very powerful and influential, was extremely respected AND believed children are the most important element of a person's life, not credentials or corner offices. Ryan's boss wasn't married and she didn't have any children---she gave up those opportunities so she could attain the status she had achieved in her career. For her, it was an either or proposition, and she chose the path of career status---and she had many regrets. Perhaps that is why she is so understanding and encouraging of her staff when they try to have it all. Either way, she is a blessing to all those who work for her.

Ryan's boss's story reminds me of an old fable I heard long ago. Its about choosing either this or that---a relationship or an opportunity to make some money. It goes like this:

"An up and coming business man meets a frog who offers him anything he could ever want for his career if he would simply kiss the frog. "No," says the business man. "Come on," says the frog, "Kiss me and I'll turn into a beautiful, sexy woman who will fulfill your every desire and will become your faithful wife!" "Nah," said the aspiring business man, "I don't have time for a girlfriend or a wife.....but a talking frog, now THAT'S very intriguing and promising!"

Fancy People & Ordinary Things

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:04:00 +0000

“Excellence is doing ordinary things extraordinarily well.”

---John Gardner

Did I miss the mass-memo that gave everyone permission to do their jobs in a half-assed manner? It's bad out there.....with the employee malaise, the laziness, the lethargy, the malcontented feelings, the bitterness, the lack of caring and the incessant blaming. A few years ago, I saw a cartoon by Randy Glasbergen that fits my rant nicely. In his cartoon, a father was giving advice to his son, and he said, "If at first you don't succeed, shift the blame, change the rules, redirect the focus on your critics, spin the media, redefine success, and there won't be any need to try, try again!" It's funny because its true---that Glasbergen guy is saying what we're all thinking! To John Gardner's opening point, I would argue that doing the ordinary things even moderately well, or at least paying attention to them, would be a step towards excellence.

There are only a few things that push my buttons, frost my arse, and boil my blood---people who don't read their messages is one of them. Well, there's more to it than that. Not only do they neglect to read their messages (be they email, fax, memo, Twitter, text, etc), if they do open them, they don't pay attention to what is written. Then, because they don't care enough to read the note/message, they invariably F^#K something up. And when that something is F^#KED up beyond recognition, what do they do? They shift the blame, change the rules, redirect the focus and so on, and so on.

As if this weren't bad enough, the worst perpetrators are also the usual suspects and repeat offenders! It's their M.O. in life and in business to non-chalantly and lackadaisically waft through life, focusing on what is important to them, and everything else be damned. Our little meetings or programs are of no significance to them, so they'll "forget the date" or "go to the wrong room" every time we invite them. However, they will never admit that the mess-up with the schedule or the room location was their fault---this is where the spin comes in!

An astonishing 13 room-change incidents in only a 12 month time frame has occurred in my presence whereby a person of lofty status within a company/organization (VP, CEO, Ph.D., M.B.A., etc) had neglected the room-change details, but proceeded to spin the situation. To make matters worse, all 13 tantrums were in front of a group of attendees who somehow found their way to the proper meeting locale, AND the 13 tantrums were divided up among only 4 lazy, self-centered, lackadaisical malcontents.

Here's one example of NOT having a handle on the ORDINARY THINGS.....
Lonnie was a VP with an M.B.A and a Ph.D. and was a big shot within her company. She was self-absorbed and all-important in her own mind, and whatever wasn't in her 'world' had no relevance or importance to her. She continuously disrespected her colleagues by arriving late to meetings or not showing up at all. The problem was, because she was so well connected in her industry and within the company, she was constantly asked to make a speaking appearance, and folks were at her mercy.

During one such occasion, Lonnie promised to attend a meeting and agreed to speak for 30 minutes. She was the opening speaker, so it was critical she arrived early. Jack, the meeting organizer, knowing that Lonnie's boss wouldn't be in the audience (which was her ONLY motivation for ever being on time) had a bad feeling in the pit of his stomach. Earlier that day, he even sent Lonnie's secretary an email asking if Lonnie was all set or needed any last minute details about her brief talk. The secretary confirmed and said all was fine. Regardless of this assurance, Jack felt uneasy.

At five minutes before the top of the hour and the start of the meeting, Lonnie was nowhere to be found. Even though this meeting room was just down the hall from her office, it appeared she would be late yet again. An additional thought that crossed Jack's mind was that the room had been changed, and that is always a death-knell for any meeting organizer. But as he looked around the room, nearly 95% of the attendees were already seated, so the message about the room change was obviously received and read. Then, the predictable happened......Lonnie's secretary entered the meeting room, approached Jack and said, "Lonnie called and said she'll be late. She went to the meeting room you always use (which is in Tower 2 on the 33rd floor, he was in Tower 1 on the 4th floor). She didn't know the meeting was being held here." And the secretary walked away.

Jack was dumb-founded and wondered how this could have happened AGAIN. The same person. The same issue. Not only that, this issue of reading room change notices has happened to Jack 4 times in the past 6 months, half of which were Lonnie's. He just couldn't understand why "Fancy People" even with their legions of secretaries, executive admin assistants, interns and helpers can't, don't, won't pay attention to details. Back to the ill-fated meeting.....Lonnie came trudging in 15 minutes late, and she actually had 3 other "Fancy People" in tow; and it was no coincidence that these 3 folks were also chronically "late" and "lost" people who didn't pay attention to details. So, now that they had their 4 self-centered and self-important attendees seated in their chairs, the meeting could finally get started. Or could it?

No, not really because Lonnie had to first throw a tantrum in front of the entire group. Interestingly, she followed the Glasbergen cartoon script in exact order! First, she shifted the blame for being late by saying, "Excuse me for being late, everyone......there was no announcement of the room change, and I was all the way up to the 33rd floor of Tower 2 before someone told me we moved." Some folks looked around at each other in bewilderment wondering how in the world the kick-off speaker wouldn't be informed of a room change---they looked at Jack like he was an idiot. Next, Lonnie changed the rules by saying, "You know, when meeting locations are changed, the information shouldn't only be in the agenda attachment (admitting she DID see it), but it should be in the email message as well."

Jack thought that was a great idea, which is why he typed in bold, red letters, 24 font size: ROOM CHANGE, TOWER 1, 4th FLOOR!! It was in the email itself and it was in the subject line. Folks, in the meeting looked around at each other, some exhibiting egregious recognition reflex because they began to recall that the announcement was in multiple emails and was listed in multiple locations within those emails. Yet, Lonnie continued to embarrass herself by redirecting the focus, "And another thing.....when changes like this occur, its not enough to send me the information. Jack should've sent a copy to my secretary, to my executive assistant and to my graduate intern---if they all received copies then it isn't Jack's fault, but I doubt that occurred." Truth be told, Jack only sent the announcement to Lonnie and her secretary. For some reason, he thought that informing 2 adults would be sufficient and would get the job done. He was wrong.

I'll spare you the agonizing details of how Lonnie spun the situation further and how she re-defined success (her formula for getting her to meetings on time). Suffice it to say, it consumed 10 additional minutes of everyone's valuable time, and Jack vowed to NEVER coordinate another meeting with Lonnie's involvement EVER again. As previously mentioned, it wasn't just Lonnie's issue---there were multiple offenders. But the common thread was they were all people who considered themselves "Fancy" and they were notorious for being high-maintenance when a day/time/location change occurred.

The other common thread was that these folks were all considered "experts" and folks who performed their jobs extraordinarily well. Maybe they felt like they had "arrived" and they didn't have to bother sweating the small stuff any longer. Maybe so, but all they did to themselves was begin to erode their credibility and diminish their professionalism in the eyes of their colleagues. Trust went down the drain, and in my opinion, they took steps backward away from excellence. Regardless, Jack, as he did in all of the other Room Change Fiascoes, apologized to the group for any inconvenience the room change has caused---and then they got on with their meeting----30 minutes later.

Use Your Illusions

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 12:26:00 +0000

"It seems absurd, yet is precisely true, that since all reality is naught, illusions are, in this world, the only true and substantial things."

---Count Giacomo Leopardi

Aside from being intriguing, I like this quote because it is the only sentence I know of that has gotten away with more commas than vowels, AND it is oxymoronic---claiming illusions are "substantial things." The more I think about it, the more I think that maybe they really are. Maybe being pretentious and fake and phony IS the way to be. Maybe all the posers and wannabes and grandiose and legends- in- their- own -minds folks are on to something.

You might not be convinced yet, but allow The Count from Itallia to explain further: "Pretense is the soul, so to speak, of the social life and is an art without which no other art or faculty, considered according to its effects on the human mind, can be perfect. Consider the fortunes of two persons, one of true value in every way, the other of false value. You will find that the latter is more fortunate than the former; indeed the false one is usually fortunate, the true one unfortunate. Pretense makes an effect even if truth be lacking, but truth without pretense can do nothing. Nor does this arise, I think, from our evil inclinations, but because bare truth is always an impoverished thing, and hence if we would delight or move men we must use illusion and heightening, and promise more and better than we give. Nature herself is an impostor with man, and renders his life likable and bearable chiefly by means of imagination and illusion." The count wrote this in 1821, not 2009 (imagine what he'd say if he were alive to see the Hollywood phonies, the Cape Cod posers and the wannabe's of the Desperate Housewives ilk).

Regardless, let's dissect The Count's rant about being pretentious. Here are his keys to success:

1) Pretense is the Soul of the Social Life. In other words, if you want friends, and want to be popular, be a fake and a phony! Not in the sense that you LIE about yourself, your accomplishments or your life, but ACT as if you are interesting. Act as if you are cool. Act as if you are fun to be around. Act like you've done it all and act like you've seen it all---and as Shakespeare reminds us, by assuming a virtue you don't have, it will invariably become reality.

2) False People are More Fortunate. See #1. Once again, don't confuse "False" with lying. Lying not good. Don't Lie! Acting like you're important, fun, critical, necessary and interesting (done appropriately and not arrogantly) will attract people to you. If you don't think you're worthy of others' company why would anyone else? It's like asking for a raise......did you ever notice the "False" people ALWAYS get them? Raises and promotions are rarely given to hard working, truthful people who let the facts and the bottom line speak for themselves. The promotions are given to the shameless self promoters who are highly visible, all fluff, all glitz and glimmer, high profile, fast paced razzle dazzle. Case closed.

3) Truth Without Pretense Can do Nothing. See #2. Also, this is a very important point because we can't lose sight of TRUTH. Truth will keep you grounded in reality, it will give you credibility and it will help you refrain from becoming a complete fraud. If you are 100% pretense and no truth, you'll be found out and that will be the end of it. But, if you have a 50% balance between the two, you'll do alright. Everyone needs a little glitz and glimmer, a shameless self-promoter and some razzle dazzle from time to time. You need to be your own agent who uses pretense effectively so you do get noticed, so your truth is exposed and you gain good fortune. Truth alone won't get you noticed. Tactful pretense will.

4) Pretense is an Art. This is the understatement of the century. I mentioned pretense has to be tactful. Herein lies the art. Any snob can be pretentious and act important, but it is the tactful person who is able to wield pretentiousness like a laser-sharp scalpel---dissecting his/her image with precision---including some half-truths, a little smoke, a few mirrors, some strobe lights, glimmering disco balls, and a strong track record built upon results.

5) Being Fake is not Evil. As long as there aren't any lies, it isn't evil. But merely pumping up the volume on your promotion of your "self" at work isn't evil.....it's necessary. Sometimes being fake, or promoting yourself or putting yourself first might require you to strategic, politically savvy or even downright ruthless. If you find yourself in a position where it is either "you or him" and you're career depends upon your ability to be duplicitous, a butt-kisser, or even a back stabber---you have to be able to act without thinking twice. So ask yourself this question now, because in the heat of the battle, you won't have time to sit and soul search: "Do I have the ability to fight dirty by using reverse psychology or by being fake if I am backed into a corner and my career depends upon it?"

6) Nature Lies to Us, So We Must Lie. This one can be contorted out of context, so let me explain a bit.....some insects, in order to protect themselves from predators, look like twigs and leaves. Some fish have fake eyes on their tails so predators bite them there instead of where their heads are, allowing them to get away unharmed. Some birds, when threatened are able to puff up their feathers, giving them the appearance that they are 3 times larger than they really are. The Great Salt Lake in Utah looks cool, refreshing and alluring, but you can't boat on it, can't live near it, can't really swim in it and you can't drink it. Are all of these examples LIES? Or are they ways nature uses pretenses to protect itself and survive? In my opinion, its the latter. In the cases of nature's pretenses, they're an art---so what is so horrible if we use this art to survive in the corporate jungle??

7) Bare Truth is Impoverished. See #3.

To play The Devils Advocate, I'd like to present the other side of the story. The side of truth without pretense. Consider this quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson (perhaps history's LEAST pretentious person): “The mark of the man of the world is absence of pretension. He does not make a speech; he takes a low business-tone, avoids all brag, is nobody, dresses plainly, promises not at all, performs much, speaks in monosyllables, hugs his fact. He calls his employment by its lowest name, and so takes from evil tongues their sharpest weapon. His conversation clings to the weather and the news, yet he allows himself to be surprised into thought, and the unlocking of his learning and philosophy.” One word: BORING! Sorry Ralph, The Count was right, "Bare Truth is Impoverished" and you're not gonna make any friends at a party with that approach! You'll be left standing alone in the corner holding your cocktail weenies all night.

It's like The Count prescribes, "if we must delight or move men, we must use illusion and heightening," that means NOT taking a low profile, NOT avoiding an opportunity to brag, NOT speaking in monosyllables, and NOT talking about the weather. Face it, life IS a popularity contest. We are hired for jobs based on how "likable" we are (look at the results of the 2008 election). We get dates, become prom kings, get promotions, get lower prices, have more friends, are asked opinions, are invited to parties, get more birthday cards in the mail, and really do get more job offers based on how popular we are.

Not long ago, I conducted a few sociological experiments with a friend of mine. I, being a Ralph Waldo Emerson type (rooted in truth and not ostentatious), and my friend, being all flash and little substance (as The Count subscribes) attended a work-related party where we knew about half of the guests and didn't know the other half. He and I both grabbed a plate of cocktail weenies and stood in opposite corners of the room.....both all alone, waiting for folks to approach us. What happened was interesting. The folks who knew us automatically gravitated towards my friend who was "fun" and lacked substance. I, rooted in fact and truth, stood alone with my fact and truth. Once the people who didn't know my friend saw the crowd of his friends gathering around him, they too joined in. And, conversely, because I was alone with my facts, my truth and my cocktail weenies, the folks who didn't know me didn't take a chance and didn't approach me. My friend and I conducted experiments like this quite often and they ALWAYS yielded the same results.

On the other hand, when we attended parties and work-related gatherings where we knew nobody, we reversed roles. I assumed the virtue of being flashy with no substance, and he became the Ralph Waldo Emerson protege. Guess what happened? I became the popular one and he was alone with his monosyllabic talk about the weather! The moral: be who you NEED to be when the moment arises. Use your illusions to your benefit, as the situation warrants them. When needed, be outgoing, be humble, be ruthless, be cut-throat---whatever it is, whenever it is---just be who and what you need at the time. That's not pretentiousness, that's not being phony--- that's the ART of survival.

Ambition Ammunition

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:07:00 +0000

“Ambition is the last refuge of failure.”

---Oscar Wilde

Lately, it seems more difficult to discover what truly motivates ambition at work. Recent surveys of the workforce produce alarming numbers. Job satisfaction in the U.S. has hit a record low, according to a recent Executive Action Report from The Conference Board, a New York City-based non-profit which creates and disseminates knowledge about management and the marketplace.

While discontent was spread across all age brackets, incomes and regions, The Conference Board noted the biggest decline in overall job satisfaction in respondents aged 35 to 44 (from 60.9 percent in 1995 to 47.2 percent in June 2003). The lowest job satisfaction was reported among workers aged 45 to 54 with only 46 percent indicating that they were happy with their jobs.

But it's not just us lazy American slobs who feel entitled to job satisfaction, the Chinese have caught the fever as well. In a 2009 survey conducted by zhaopin.com, a Beijing-based recruitment website, the Business Reference reported that the survey shows that among the 87.8 percent unhappy people, 70.8 percent say they are unhappy because they cannot figure out their career path; 59.4 percent say it is because of a low salary that they do not expect to rise soon; and 45.9 percent think the work they currently perform does not match their skill levels.

My response: BOO HOO and give the babies their bottles. Folks who carry around feelings of anger, anxiety, entitlement, grief and hurt because the believe their careers are not going according to their plans are malcontents who need to stop whining. they need to take control and MAKE their own breaks. They lack ambition to take control of their destinies and prefer to wait for someone to "discover" them, give them promotions and lavish them with corner offices and clothing allowances.

The sad thing is, most of the folks who are dissatisfied with their careers HAD ambition at one time, and have gotten pretty far---but having hit a plateau, they feel discouraged or even frightened that they have maxed out and climbed as high as they can. In desperation, they give up and get complacent instead of letting their frustrations fuel their ambition for further growth. In other words, contentment with the status quo is a CAREER KILLER. It will block your ability to climb higher, run faster and fight harder for the opportunities that require competition and personal mettle. Complacency will lull you into thinking that what you have is good enough, that you don't need or deserve anything better in life; and opportunities to truly improve your career and life will pass you by because you either won't recognize them or you'll be too preoccupied with settling for "whatever it is" because "it is what it is."

A perfect example of this mentality is exemplified in a story that Richard C. Notebaert, former CEO of Ameritech and Qwest International, illustrated how lack of ambition has been an issue for thousands of years: "In a museum at Princeton University, there is a toy from a pre-Columbian civilization. It's a pull-toy complete with wheels. Now the question is, if the craftsmen of the day were able to conceive of and construct wheels for an amusement—a toy—why didn't they take that technology a step further and design carts and wagons? Why didn't they develop tools that would ease their burdens? Many scholars conclude they just never thought of it." To me, that is one of the saddest stories---can you imagine being on the brink of altering your civilization, but lacking ambition rendered it "not to be?"

Salvador Dali once said, "Intelligence without ambition is a bird without wings.” So take stock in your ambition levels and test yourself on your true motivations. Do you REALLY want to improve your career, or are you content complaining about it or negatively filling-out dissatisfaction surveys? Consider all you might miss if you relegate yourself to a perpetual pity party---for like the civilization that had the wheel at their disposal, if you lack ambition you will miss your opportunities for advancement because "you just never thought of it."

Stop Passing the Buck

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 12:27:00 +0000

"Enterprising people take the cold water thrown on their idea, heat it with enthusiasm, make steam and push ahead."

---Harvey Mackay

I adore people who can't take NO for an answer---people who defy the odds and press onward---people who don't let anything stand in the way of their goals. That determination, fortitude and moxie is what this country was founded on and is what keeps us hanging on in spite of a lack of role models in DC. But that's OK because lucky for us, enterprising people don't need role models or anyone else to tell them what to do, when to do it, how to do it, or why to do it---they just do it because they know its the right thing to do. And by "right" I mean it is moral, practical, imaginative, and beautiful in its own ways. It is a seedling of genius, an innovation for the ages or simply a good idea that fills a need.

"The imaginative organization understands that innovation starts with an idea," said Peter Drucker, the late management consultant and author. "Ideas are somewhat like babies. They are born small, immature and shapeless. They are promise rather than fulfillment." Yes, innovation does start with an idea, but initiative comes before innovation and it gets you past go. Initiative is what KEEPS you going when the times get tough---when people poo-poo your innovation or when your innovation falls flat on its face, initiative will see you through. Initiative comes from an IDEA, not literally, but from the acronym:

I= Imagination

D= Determination

E= Execution

A= Accountability

Imagination means you consider what currently ‘isn’t’. You constantly look around and ask yourself, “How can I improve this?”

Determination means that you don’t give up. If someone else stops talking to you about a task’s completion, that doesn’t mean you stop working on it. No matter the obstacle, you exceed expectations.

Execution means you do the right things and you do things right. Near perfection is your standard. If you checked-in with your boss in the Imagination stage and you got approval, you can be sure you are doing the right things. If you’re not sure if you’re doing it right, just ask your boss!

Accountability means that you take responsibility for your own success (or lack thereof). Blaming or creating excuses or claiming you didn’t know what to do next can’t and won’t get you far.

A few years ago, a colleague of mine worked with a lady (Dawnita) who was the antithesis of initiative. She had none, actually. She and my colleague, Danny, joined a lot of company committees and they sat on 3 of them together. Time and again, after a committee meeting, Dawnita would tell Danny: "You know, you should follow-up on that request the chair of our committee made. You could contact everyone in our department, get their info and write a report for the chair and have it to her by tomorrow morning, right?!" This wouldn't be so bad if Dawnita defaulted to this passing the buck behavior once in a while---but she did it every time an assignment was handed out. If it wasn't related to her regular job duties, she wouldn't touch it.

What was even worse is that Danny was a vice president and Dawnita was a director---he outranked her by 3 levels and she still had the stones (and the ignorance) to pass the buck on to him!! Needless to say, Dawnita was slowly hanging herself by demonstrating she didn't have an IDEA to save her life, she was disrespectful to her superiors and she was ignorant to corporate politics. She was one of those lackeys who could only function when she was told what to do, when to do it, how to do it and why she had to do it. She had zero enterprising qualities, no initiative and could not extend herself to help on a project.

Needless to say, when the years passed and Dawnita was stuck in her director's role, she retaliated by quitting. She left the company feeling unappreciated and exploited, when in reality all she needed to do was generate some heat with enthusiasm and steam ahead with a little initiative.

You Gotta Be a Football Hero

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:44:00 +0000

"How people play the game shows something of their character. How they lose shows all of it."

--Anonymous

This quote reminds me of one of my most resonant theories about reaching our potential: American football is THE perfect metaphor for life. Football? Not chess or something more sophisticated like Polo? Nope.....football; a game where fat, sweaty men and steroid-injected neanderthals beat the crap out of each other for 60 minutes, then shower together afterwards. That's the perfect metaphor for life? Yes......well, on a deeper level it is. Allow me to elaborate:

1) Football, like life, is about conquering opposing forces. In football, as in life, you have an opportunity to "take the ball and run with it" ---but there isn't always an open field in front of you. There is always an opponents defense that is trying to slam you to the ground and flatten you like a pancake. Success in life and career is about how well you can outrun and outsmart the defense. How well can you maneuver around your opposition? How well can you avoid their grasps and attempts to bring you down? In life, this "defense" that is against you might come in the form of a jealous co-worker, or an angry boss. As in football, you have to study the opposing defense, know who they are, know their strengths and weaknesses---avoiding the former and attacking the latter. That's how you beat opposition to your attempts to move forward. As if running from people who want to flatten you wasn't enough, the other major opposing factor in football and in life is time. In both, the clock keeps ticking-- and if you don't manage the time you have efficiently and effectively, you will lose in both situations. In football, you're given time to think about what you need to do before each play, you're given time to rest at the half-way point and you're given only 60 minutes to attain your ultimate objective---to win. In life, we only have so much time to earn a degree, find a satisfying career, climb the ladder and ----win. COACH'S QUESTION #1: "Have you studied your opposition? Can you beat them and the clock?"

2) Football, like life, is won by those who have a plan. In order to outwit and outsmart the opposition that is trying to keep you from reaching your goals, you MUST have a game plan. In football, your game plan is a 1,000 page binder full of "if/then" scenarios, covering every conceivable situation. If you are faced with situation X, then you will respond with plan Y. If you are faced with situation B1, then you will respond with plan C8. It is all mapped out. Why? First, you can't win a football game by just "winging it"--as mentioned, you need to study your opposing forces strengths, and avoid them; study their weaknesses, and attack them. In other words, if you fail to plan, you might as well plan to fail. Also, planning gives you confidence and a sense of security---you need both to win. COACH'S QUESTION #2: "Is your game plan for your career all mapped out??"

3) Football, like life, is endured by those who are sound of mind and body. In a 60 minute football game, the strong survive and the meek cannot thrive. Strength means having endurance---being able to run away from threats, being able to smash into enemies head on, being able to stand up to opposers and push them away from you, being able to flatten them like a pancake when needed, and having the strength to get up and try again when they flatten you like a pancake. In order to take all of this abuse, and in order to dish it out yourself, you not only need to be in top physical condition, you need to be mentally tough. Football, and life, are not for cry babies. Football, and life, are not for lazy couch potatoes. You won't last in either game if you are one or both. Condition yourself by running and lifting weights after work---the endorphins will improve your mood, your healthy physique will give you an elevated self-concept and you'll have the endurance to wake up early and work late---giving you an edge on your lazy and flabby competition that lives off of potato chips and Snickers bars. Toughen-up your mental attitude, learn how to take insults, grow a thicker skin so every little piece of gossip doesn't bother you. And learn how to play "mind games" with your opposition. Most battles in football and in life are won before the fight on the field even begins, and psychological toughness is where it all starts. COACH'S QUESTION #3: "Are you tough enough to win?"

4) Football, like life, is most successful with the guidance of a knowledgeable coach. We all need a high-powered, knowledgeable coach to lead us to victory. There are hundreds of examples of great football teams that were lead by a poor coach, and the end result was that great assemblage of players wound up being a bunch of losers. Why? Because a great coach can mentally prepare a team for victory by giving them confidence, by making sure they are picked up when they are down and knocked down to reality when their heads get too big. A great coach knows how to develop a winning game plan, and is prepared for every negative scenario with a winning counter strategy. In football, the most astute players want to be lead by a great coach---they change teams just so they can live and learn under the guidance of "The Master." COACH'S QUESTION #4: "Are you studying and working under the guidance of a Masterful Coach?"

5) Football, like life, is mastered with the help of others. There's no "I" in TEAM, but there is "ME" in TEAM. Teamwork begins and ends with ME--so are you willing to be a team member? Are you willing to cooperate and to contribute? If ME doesn't want to contribute and cooperate, then ME won't be a part of this TEAM, and ME won't win. A great football team has 11 players on offense, 11 on defense and 11 on special teams (kick-offs and punts and field goals/extra points). Each person is a specialist and contributes to the TEAM and to the sub-team's objectives. The the business world, a defensive sub-team holds the opponents at bay and keeps them from stealing customers or advertising ideas. The offensive sub-team plans the new advertising campaign and works on taking over 50% of the market share with their great ideas. And each person on those sub-teams is working for the benefit of the company at large---they aren't in it for personal glory, and they aren't in it for individual praise. They don't try to work their job and take over the jobs of the other specialists--- just like the quarterback would never try to be the defense's star linebacker. COACH'S QUESTION #5: "What's your contribution to the team?"

6) Football, like life, is managed by those who live by the rules. Football has a lot of rules, regulations and guidelines. How you reach your goals, how you manage your temper, where you are allowed to run and roam, when and how you move around, and even the way you dress is all regulated. Break a rule, and you're penalized....just like in life. Conduct yourself professionally, with integrity and dignity and you won't be penalized....just like in life. Penalties set you farther away from your goals, but not breaking the rules allows you to stay in the game. Get out of hand and become a disruption to the game or the team, and you might find yourself looking for a new job.....just like in life. COACH'S QUESTION #6: "Do you live by the rules?"

7) Football, like life, is about running up the score on your competition. Competition, contrary to conventional wisdom, is about sportsmanship. Its about respect. Football, like life, is about driving your competition into the ground, to the point where they cannot get back up and fight you any longer. Its about physical and psychological humiliation, to the point where the enemy cowers in your presence. But once the competition is over, the victors must be respectful of the vanquished. The victors must give a helpful hand and assist the vanquished to their collective feet. The victors must conduct themselves as winners should, with dignity---giving nothing but reverence and respect to those who have been beaten. And, in football, as in life, winning is never a guarantee---in fact, losing will most likely happen more often and that is why knowing how to lose with dignity is MORE IMPORTANT than winning with class. COACH'S QUESTION #7: "Are you driven enough to step on your competitions throat and render them "eliminated" AND are you dignified enough to help them back up when the confrontation is done?"

There you have it, my "Football = Life" rant! I could go on for days with additional subtle nuances that prove my point, but I'm sure you get the picture by now. The bottom line, in case you missed it, is this: All 7 of my points add up to character, and tie in with the opening quote. If you can understand and master those 7 points (which by no coincidence is what you earn in football after each goal and extra point), then you'll certainly know how to win, but more importantly you'll know how to handle losing. Because in football, as in life, character is king.

Hear me now, and listen to me later!

noreply@blogger.com (Dr. T. Behrens) — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:09:00 +0000

"About the time you are saying something that you have said so often that you want to throw-up, that is the time the American people will hear it."

---Richard Nixon

I'm as guilty of not listening to someone blabber on as much as the next person. But it only happens occasionally--like when I'm fatigued after being up all night with a screaming baby. Out of respect for the speaker and as a show common decency, I make it a point to stay on point---to always listen, hear and take notes.

I suppose its because I'm so sensitive to being respectful to other speakers that I get ultra frustrated when people to whom I speak quite often say:

1) "I don't remember you saying that."
2) "That doesn't sound like something you said."
3) "HUH?"
4) "Wait.....what were you saying again?"
5) "Who's doing what now?"

And there's the classic from Homer Simpson: "Can you repeat the things you said about the stuff?" I don't have to tell you how frustrating, irritating, disrespectful and degrading it is when you've thoughtfully prepared something to say, and all you're met with is "Wait......did you say something?" If you have a habit of not listening, you need to know that not only do you seem like an ignorant and crude "Homer," you are more than likely shooting yourself in the foot because the speaker you are ignoring is most likely one of the people who is in a position to promote you at some point in your career.

What can we do as speakers to get through to the brain-dead rabble who don't give a damn about what we are saying? Unfortunately, being serious, articulate, organized and polished aren't it. Diogenes reminded us that we have to "whistle and dance the shimmy" if we want to attract an audience because discoursing on virtue won't do it. And we all know the adage about how people will never remember what we said, but they'll always remember how we made them feel. So....dance the shimmy and make them feel good....got it! But where does SUBSTANCE come in? Where does the IMPORTANT MESSAGE get communicated? While I'm dancing, telling jokes and making them feel good? Good Lord! That seems like a variety show, not a quarterly update.

One of my supervisors from days past was pretty good at getting us to listen to what I called his "endless droning" about the bottom line and other benchmarks in our goals matrix. He got a kick out the "endless droning" bit and he used it to improve his approach and style. He was famous for telling us that he wanted us to "Hear me now and listen to me later"---which meant if we could at least stay awake to the point where we could recognize his voice and actually acknowledge that we could hear a sound coming from his mouth---then he would be happy with that. The "listen to me later" piece referred to the fact that he wanted us to take copious notes, refer to them later and "listen" to what he said when we were ready to pay full attention.

It was a tricky move, because in order to take those notes, we HAD to be focused and listening, not just hearing---as Dante said, "He who listens well takes notes." Its shocking to witness how few people care enough to really listen and take notes. Not long ago, while I was teaching a career development class, I was outlining my Top Ten qualities for career planning success. Point #10 was Taking Notes. After I finished espousing the virtues of taking notes, I asked the class if anyone could give me the Top Ten qualities in order, with at least one example that I had mentioned for each. The only sound I heard was a nervous cough from the back of the class.

Since I didn't see anyone taking notes (it was a college level class, why should they), I wasn't surprised by the response. My next step was to teach them a lesson they wouldn't forget---by getting their full attention, not by dancing the shimmy, but by making them FEEL like crap. I told them that anyone who could complete my instructions would get an automatic A in the class, no questions asked. For anyone who couldn't complete my instructions in full would, from this point forward, earn an F and would have the rest of the semester to dig their way out of the hole.

Everyone had an F to start the semester. They never forgot how I made them feel!