UPPER and lower Case – Some Trivia

Something fun for a change:

Did you know that the terms UPPERCASE and lowercase literally have their roots in the shelves used by typesetters? Yep, they do! Read on …

Although the origins of many words are rather odd and esoteric in nature, the origins of the words “uppercase” and “lowercase” (used to refer to capitalized and un-capitalized letters) is rather straightforward.

Upper Case and Lower CaseBack when every bit of printed material had to be handset by a printer or their assistants, the actual and individual letter stamps used were arranged by frequency of use. The infrequently used capital letters went in the “uppercase,” a slanted shelf above the main work area. The frequently used un-capitalized letters went in the “lowercase,” a more accessible shelf closer to the workstation.

And that’s how we came by those terms!

Posted in General Musings | Comments Off on UPPER and lower Case – Some Trivia

Sir Ethan Hawke and His 20 Rules

220px-Ethan_Hawke_-_2009_Venice_Film_FestivalOne of my favorite actors is Ethan Hawke, principally for the acting he did in Dead Poet’s Society, but also for the work he’s done behind the camera in the little seen and even lesser recognized film, Before Sunrise. This is a man nominated four times for an Oscar – count’em, FOUR times – and he is only 45 years old. Remarkable, if you ask me.

Even more remarkable are his books, the latest of which is Rules for a Knight, based on a letter he says was discovered hidden in an attic somewhere and dating back to the 1400s.  Provenance aside, the letter is full of wisdom, which Mr. Hawke has brought forward into this gem of a book. Its protagonist is Sir Thomas Hawkes of Cornwall, and the book begins with these words:

“Tonight I will share with you some of the more valuable stories, events, and moments of my life so that somewhere deep in the recesses of your imagination these lessons might continue on and my experiences will live to serve a purpose for you.”

The stories, the events and moments of which he speaks may be summed up in the 20 rules for acting like a knight in shining armor. I suppose they can be equally applicable to women in shining armor, although the image is not that which we normally summon up.

Here they are:

  1. Solitude

Create time alone with yourself. When seeking the wisdom and clarity of your own mind, silence is a helpful tool. The voice of our spirit is gentle and cannot be heard when it has to compete with others. Just as it is impossible to see your reflection in troubled water, so too is it with the soul. In silence, the water is stilled and we can sense eternity sleeping inside us. Sadly, solitude – time without the endless orgasmic bashing of rap, of over-rated musical divas, from a bank of over-powered bass speakers – is not something our youth seem to be able to summon, although I believe they should try.  We can only live with ourselves if we can stop and listen, truly listen, to what we have to say. That is nigh impossible to do in a room full of shouting.

  1. Humility

Never announce that you are a knight, simply behave as one. You are better than no one, and no one is better than you.  Humility is a lost art, to be sure. The idea that we would never announce anything to the world, let alone the fact that we are striving be knight-like, is clearly lost in a world of Kanye Wests and Kim Kardashians.

  1. Gratitude

The only intelligent response to the ongoing gift of life is gratitude. For all that has been, a knight says, “Thank you.” For all that is to come, a knight says, “Yes!”  Gratitude is a wonderful virtue and one that I do not practice nearly enough. But in the becoming of a knight, one must be forever striving to be grateful.

  1. Pride

Never pretend you are not a knight or attempt to diminish yourself because you deem it will make others more comfortable. We show others the most respect by offering the best of ourselves. I am reminded here that false-humility – that is, pretending not to be a knight –  is not much better than pride. We are who we are.

  1. Cooperation

Each one of us is walking our own road. We are born at specific times, in specific places, and our challenges are unique. As knights, understanding and respecting our distinctiveness is vital to our ability to harness our collective strength. The use of force may be necessary to protect in an emergency, but only justice, fairness, and cooperation can truly succeed in leading men. We must live and work together as brothers or perish together as fools.

  1. Friendship

The quality of your life will, to a large extent, be decided by with whom you elect to spend your time. And the “who” can also be your thoughts. If we live with self-defeating thoughts, we will be self-defeating. No way around it.

  1. Forgiveness

Those who cannot easily forgive will not collect many friends. Look for the best in others.

  1. Honesty

A dishonest tongue and a dishonest mind waste time, and therefore waste our lives. We are here to grow and the truth is the water, the light, and the soil from which we rise. The armor of falsehood is subtly wrought out of the darkness and hides us not only from others but from our own soul.

  1. Courage

Anything that gives light must endure burning. Carpe diem!  Gather ye rosebuds while ye may.

  1. Grace

Grace is the ability to accept change. Be open and supple; the brittle break.

  1. Patience

There is no such thing as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. A hurried mind is an addled mind; it cannot see clearly or hear precisely; it sees what it wants to see, or hears what it is afraid to hear, and misses much. A knight makes time his ally. There is a moment for action, and with a clear mind that moment is obvious.

  1. Justice

There is only one thing for which a knight has no patience: injustice. Every true knight fights for human dignity at all times.

  1. Generosity

You were born owning nothing and with nothing you will pass out of this life. Be frugal and you can be generous.

  1. Discipline

In the field of battle, as in all things, you will perform as you practice. With practice, you build the road to accomplish your goals. Excellence lives in attention to detail. Give your all, all the time. Don’t save anything for the walk home. The better a knight prepares, the less willing he will be to surrender.

  1. Dedication

Ordinary effort = ordinary result. Take steps each day to better follow these rules. Luck is the residue of design. Be steadfast. The anvil outlasts the hammer.

  1. Speech

Do not speak ill of others. A knight does not spread news that he does not know to be certain, or condemn things that he does not understand.

  1. Faith

Sometimes to understand more, you need to know less. I just finished my PhD and I gotta tell you this: I think I know less rather than more. A lot less.

  1. Equality

Every knight holds human equality as an unwavering truth. A knight is never present when men or women are being degraded or compromised in any way, because if a knight were present, those committing the hurtful acts or words would be made to stop.

  1. Love

Love is the end goal. It is the music of our lives. There is no obstacle that enough love cannot move.

  1. Death

Life is a long series of farewells; only the circumstances should surprise us. A knight concerns himself with gratitude for the life he has been given. He does not fear death, for the work one knight begins, others may finish.

A must read!Rules-for-a-Knight

Posted in General Musings | Comments Off on Sir Ethan Hawke and His 20 Rules

And so we beat on

“And so we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.” – The Great Gatsby.

thSince high school (Denise?), I have struggled with the meaning of this final line from F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby. What does it mean, exactly?

It’s a great last line. Melancholic. Wrapping up the human condition with a tidy little boat metaphor, bumping, lapping, with a wave-like alliteration on “b.” Did I think so in high school? Nope. What past had I to be borne back into? My toddlerhood? Junior high school? Junior high ain’t no beckoning green light on the dock, let me tell you.

In my opinion, shared by many others, the last line of The Great Gatsby only begins to make sense if you’re over 40, or better yet, even older than that. Anything with a complex plot centering around obsession, alcohol, self-delusion, and accidents, seem to make more sense the older you get. In other words, old enough to have something of a past; old enough to have attempted things in life that have not panned out; old enough to know that, well, shit happens.

To be sure, it is a rather cold ending.  The current in life – it’s always there – sweeping us along.  We can beat against it with out little oars, which are wholly insufficient, for they are made of ego and pride and thoughts of what might have been. We refuse, it seems, to go with the current like everything else in the stream. It is also within the human condition to want to swim upstream, as if only the dead fish go with the current.

Fish that are alive and well will swim only so fast as to match the current, knowing that beating against it trying to make distance is a futile effort. The freshest oxygen, they know, is right where you are. There is less oxygen, less living, the further back you drift. On the other hand, the smart fish (the ones that live) will recognize opportunity and bolt forward on occasion. It is a matter of adroit timing.

But Gatsby had something else in mind, me thinks. What he feared was not swimming fast enough to match the current, and thereby being borne into the past. But he also feared having to relive the past. He had tried to remake himself only to discover that you cannot really do that. You are you. Dwelling on what might have been is like breathing the same air twice.

dangelobarksdaleThe best explanation I have ever heard comes from television’s The Wire, an HBO show which ran in the mid-2000s and which, to my mind, is the very best television show ever produced. One of its characters, Deangelo Barksdale, tried to explain Gatsby in a prison book club setting (yes, there are book clubs in prison, it turns out). Here is what he said:

“The past is always with us; where we come from, what we go through, how we go through it. All that shit matters. Like, at the end of the book, you’know, boats and tides and all. It’s like you can change up, right, you can say you’re somebody new, you can give yourself a whole new story. But, what came first is who you really are and what happened before is what really happened. It don’t matter that some fool say he different ’cause the things that make you different is what you really do, what you really go though.”

Fish turn their backs on the past because they can only swim in one direction: Forward. That doesn’t mean that they don’t have a past anymore than any of us can deny our pasts. The secret is to make some sort of peace with the past and to know that it has formed you into you.

Posted in General Musings | Comments Off on And so we beat on

What Kind of Character Are You?

There is nothing new under the sun. Take, for example, this listing of character types composed some 2500 years ago. The DSM and any number of psycho-babblers cannot even begin to conceive of the competition that lies within these wise words:

8/3/2015, by Donald Conte (reprinted without permission, but I don’t think he’ll mind) (see http://thisisnotyourpracticelife.com/). By the way, this is probably the best blog on the internet and I highly recommend that you read it every day. I do!

The generalized character types we recognize today are no different from those of ancient times as evidenced by a work partially passed through more than two millennia to us. The Characters was written by Theophrastus (371-­‐287 B.C.E.) who headed the Lyceum after Aristotle died. Originally called Tyrtamos, he acquired his nom de plume from Aristotle because it meant “divine speaker.”

So, what did this human-god pass on to us?

The Characters is composed of short descriptions of personality types, reportedly both “good” and “bad,” but unfortunately, only his list of the “bad” survived. In a politically correct 21st century, calling a type of character “bad” is, of course, judgmental, and, therefore, taboo. Nevertheless, a quick look at Theophrastus’ classification can serve as a point of departure for our own self-examination. These bad characters include:

The ironical person who says the opposite of what he or she really thinks to achieve goals

The flatterer (no explanation necessary here, dear erudite reader)

The chatterer who just goes on incessantly about anything (think Cliff Claven from the TV program Cheers)

The boor who lacks the refinements of a culture (burp!)

The ingratiating person who is always eager (or even, in some instances, anxious) to please others

The outcast who is a man or woman of no principles

The talker who appears to know everything about everything and who thinks those he (she) encounters are wrong if their ideas differ from his (hers)

The inventor of news who is not unlike today’s gossip columnists, pundits with an agenda, and tabloid writers

The shameless person who does not care if his or her character is one of ill repute as long as he or she has something to gain

The skinflint (no further explanation necessary, “Here, Miss. Give my friend the check”)

The abominable person who is obnoxious to others, doing something to offend just because he or she gets joy from offending

The unseasonable person who chooses the wrong time for anything, such as asking someone in a hurry for an opinion

The presumptuous person who promises what he or she cannot deliver

The feckless person who is defined by a lack of wit and action

The hostile person who is just plain evil for no apparent reason (Think Billy Budd’s nemesis, Claggart, in Melville’s tale or of Shakespeare’s Iago in Othello, of whom Thomas Carlisle spoke as a manifestation of motiveless malignity)

The superstitious person who believes objects, animals, and actions (such as breaking a mirror) can control his or her fortune

The chip-on-the-shoulder person who is always bothered by some grievance with others

The distrustful person (what more to say?)

The offensive person who cares little for manners and customs of appearance (I think this guy or gal pals around with the boor)

The tiresome person who interrupts the course of another’s daily activity

The (petty) ambitious person who puts on a show in everything he or she does to exalt himself
or herself

The mean person who values expense over honor

The boasting person
 (I leave this to your description)

The arrogant person who despises everyone but himself (misanthrope)

The cowardly person
 (Is it true that cowardly actions come back to haunt cowards in some way?)

The authoritarian (an oligarchic temperament motivated by power and profit)

The late-learning person who takes on tasks too difficult for his or her age

The slanderer (calumniator, detractor, defamer)

The criminal who is essentially a psychopath

The avaricious person who craves gain at the expense of others

Humanity fashioned these characters from the stuff of potential personalities. At various times in our lives we might be guilty of creating some of these characters or imitating some of their characteristics. Or, in the words of Verve in “Bitter Sweet Symphony”:

“But I’m here in my mold…
And I’m a million different people from one day to the next”

Of course, the characters you have fashioned or encountered in others could be like those of Theophrastus’ lost descriptions: the “good characters.” Maybe you are one or more of the following that I assume the ancient thinker might have expressed as adjectives:

Straightforward

Honestly deferential

Engaging

Sophisticated

Independent

Principled without foisting principles on others

Humble

Respectful

Reputable

Generous

Pleasing

Considerate 

Accommodating 

Competent

Kind

Rational

Forgiving

Trustful

Assiduously sophisticated 

Deferential

Unobtrusive 

Upright 

Modest 

Humanitarian 

Brave 

Tolerant 

Extolling 

Law-­abiding 

Benevolent

The how of each of these characters is so easily identifiable that the second last of them, law-­‐abiding, was even used as an ironic title for a motion picture (Law Abiding Citizen). Why any of us should be any of them, that is, any of either the “good” or the “bad” characters, is a bit of a mystery. We all have life experiences, role models we observed, and other reasons for taking on any of these character types, but none of those reasons make the “bad” character types any more pleasant to be around. Still, as Theophrastus’ predecessor Socrates noted, “the unexamined life isn’t worth living,” so it’s probably important to figure out which character or mix of characters you are.

 

Posted in General Musings | Comments Off on What Kind of Character Are You?

What Every CEO Loses Sleep Over

CEOTo be sure, a CEO is a special kind of animal. It takes a special combination of innate drive, incredible guts, business intelligence and savvy, and emotional intelligence. Of course, most CEOs will also come with specialized knowledge in either sales or human resources, the firm’s technology, or business strategic planning. They will post with skills in business acquisition, financial management, political acumen, and a variety of other skills some of which are unique to the business itself.

But they, like most of us, will also present with truly felt fears – and here are some of them. Every CEO fears …

No. 1: That They are Being Presented with Incomplete Information

Nobody likes to bring the boss bad news, especially if the CEO has an animated personality or is known as being extremely tough. To avoid being the bearers of bad information, subordinates and direct reports often spend hours upon hours couching, tweaking and watering down bad news to make it more palatable to the top dog.

Middle managers and VPs spend hours in meetings and on conference calls laboring over the order, content and messaging contained in PowerPoint decks to minimize the CEO’s angst derived from under-whelming factoids and sub-par data points.

In such fashion, data can become virtually meaningless or, worse, incomplete.

Don’t kid yourself, this type of message manipulation happens a lot in corporations and businesses of all sizes. Selective information sharing and group think are crippling practices that ultimately hurt every organization and its senior leaders.

Smart CEOs recognize this risk and the vulnerability they face with overly-sanitized information. The best solution to this problem is for the CEO and senior leadership to create a culture of transparency that spurs individuals to elevate bad news to the boss as quickly and completely as possible. Smart CEOs telegraph the message that bad news is inevitable and must come to them quickly and unvarnished.

No. 2: That as a consequence of incomplete information, or even complete information, they will make a bad decision

Usually, when a decision gets to the C-level of an organization, it’s a difficult decision that no one else in the organization can or is willing to make.

Ultimately, the decisions that reach the chief executive office are thorny. They’re the lesser of two evils where they’re striving to balance the most upside with the least downside.  Cutting a baby in half is what CEOs do for a living.

Successfully neutralizing this CEO fear requires a combination of the best information available and the best advisers. The best top executives surround themselves with trusted counselors and experts both within and outside the organization, because the best decisions are generated by a diversity of perspectives.

Business executives rarely have the luxury of 100 percent of the necessary information to make every decision and need to rely on the expertise of their staff.

Within the U.S. military – a frequent business analog – successful leaders such as Norman Schwarzkopf and Colin Powell have said that they’ll wait for 70 percent of the facts to become available, then factor in the recommendations of their advisers to help fill the information gap when making mission-critical decisions.

No. 3 – That they Will Look Foolish 

Surprised? I know I was. But it is a fear of CEOs for the same reason that you fear it: No one wants to look foolish or incompetent. We tend to assume that once someone becomes a CEO they are thick-skinned, tough-minded individuals who are immune to such human foibles as worrying about the perception of others. We assume they have developed expert coping skills, but that’s rarely the case.

No matter how much of a maverick or iconoclast they might be, the perceptions and opinions of others matter to CEOs. It matters to all of us.

The reality is, that once a man or woman reaches the top spot in an organization they have nowhere to hide if things go wrong. Additionally, once in that top position, the stakes and risks are much higher. Many CEOs fear there’s little professional redemption if they fall from grace or look foolish. They believe that their credibility among key stakeholders such as shareholders, board members, customers, union leaders, employees, regulators, etc., might never be restored if they screw-up or look foolish.

Of course, most CEOs are able to bounce back from adverse perceptions and missteps. But it comes at a cost. And arrogance only goes so far. Even the CEO must face the CEO in the mirror. So, the best way to defuse this fear is for CEOs to always assume that everything they say or do – on the job or in private – will be on the front page of their hometown newspaper. A CEO job is a 24/7 job. There is no time off. The best leaders accept that responsibility and carry and convey themselves appropriately.

The mistakes of top execs tend to be more public and pronounced than those of the typical individual, so the fallout of looking foolish is much more real and magnified. The best way for CEOs to handle public perception mistakes is to accept responsibility quickly, apologize to the appropriate group(s) as needed and share the steps that will be taken to prevent similar miscues in the future.

Additionally, helping top executives see their blind spots and avoid resultant mistakes are invaluable ways that support staff and direct reports can help alleviate this particular CEO fear. The perfect subordinate is one who is not afraid to call a spade a spade. Trusted individuals who are able to assuage those executive fears will always be valued within organizations and by the CEO.

 

 

Posted in General Musings | Comments Off on What Every CEO Loses Sleep Over

TenThings TooDue When Feeling Down and Insecure

00060073A recent trip into and out of Los Angeles left me about as down and blue as I have ever been (and believe me, I can get pretty down and blue). The trip was almost doomed from the beginning: The Honda’s air conditioning quit in the middle of the Utah dessert (the hottest part don’t you know). With 105-degree heat, Macy, our poor little doggie, suffered a minor heat stroke. Neither I nor my wife do heat very well, having become accustomed to the gorgeous summer temps of Laramie (which have never – repeat, NEVER) topped 99 degrees. With the heat and discomfort came, for me, a slip-slide into depression; that constant review of what-might-have-been in my life. We arrived in Los Angeles in the middle of a heat wave, which in a crowded city like LA is never more debilitating. We got the air conditioning fixed, but I remained rather blue the entire time we were there. Little things kept nagging at me, and frankly I lost my confidence in life.

Now, without question, our confidence levels can vary even in the best of times. And, at times, they can soar, like when I marched in my doctoral graduation ceremony. But at other times, they can crash, like when I engage in unceasing life review of what might-have-been. Even counselors are subject to such fluctuations. It got me to thinking: What should I have been doing when the spirit within me was losing altitude at an alarming rate? The answer is always simple in hindsight, of course, and never in the moment. But I am resolved to try and revisit some answers that have worked in the past: Reminding myself of what I have done right, paying increased attention to what I have rather than what I don’t have, etc.

gwh-02919-detailNo. 1 – Decide What Is and (more importantly) What Is NOT Your Fault.

And then stick to that decision. The air conditioning going out was NOT my fault. It is a design fault on the part of Honda Motor Cars, pure and simple. The compressor comes on and off at all times unless you remember to turn off the air conditioner, the setting of which is not very intuitive. But no matter: I had decided that its failure was my fault and that the discomfort of my wife and little dog was ultimately at my hands. From there, the cascade of discouragement took off.

Instead, had I decided that the failure was NOT my fault and then stuck with that decision, I could have avoided all that followed. It would have required a sense of confidence in my ability to overcome the problem, eventually, and in the meantime, to do whatever I could to make the trip as comfortable as possible. If that was unacceptable to others, then they have the responsibility to take appropriate action. But wallowing in the incorrect view that the failure was somehow my fault made no one better off.

This is true of so many things in life. It is not my fault, for example, that my bitch of a sister-in-law ultimately saw to the destruction of my relationship with my brother. For decades I tried to walk on egg-shells and in between the raindrops of her dysfunction to maintain a workable relationship with her, but ultimately I had to stick with the decision that it was not my fault, nor my problem.

Be careful here, however: Many things are shared in terms of “fault.” Take your share, and only your share.

No. 2 – Make a List of PositivesEffects

JVR TenThings™ was born of the idea that life is never so bad that we cannot sit down, right now, and make a list of ten things that are going well. These are the things to hold onto when life serves up the bumps in the road. Make the list when you are doing well, by the way, NOT when things are going not so well. Keep the list handy. I carry mine in my Commonplace Book, which makes it hard to consult when driving without air conditioning in the Utah heat, but it’s there nonetheless. I just need to pause, pull over, and consult it.

The list should be fairly static, by the way. It is not a list of things that are going well right now, but rather, a list of things that are consistent and rather predictable positives in one’s life. My marriage, for example, is such a talisman and easily makes the list. Or, my friendships. Or my overall health. You get the picture.

No. 3 – Try and Get Out of Your Head

Getting out of our heads and into our lives is often far easier said than done. But it is worth the effort. And it comes down to this: Reliving an experience, even in the moment, will only work to prolong feelings of worthlessness.  The running dialogue of negative self-talk is its own reward, sadly, and needs to be stopped somehow.  Driving long distances with a broken air conditioner is the perfect breeding ground for loathsome self-talk, frankly, and I should have known better and pulled over and called it a day.

This is where thought distraction and thought diffusion techniques come into play. Distraction involves doing something else, anything else. Reading a book, for example, or (for me) washing the car or vacuuming the house, are good thought distraction activities. For others, it might mean taking a run or going for a hard walk or bicycle ride.

Diffusion is all about silencing the self-talk by thinking of something else (or nothing at all, if that’s possible) but, for me, is much harder to do. I need to be doing something else, not just trying to diffuse the self-talk. But for others, meditation and managed breathing exercises can work wonders.

I am told to remember this: It’s important to remember that our thoughts are often a running dialogue of negativity, very little of which is true. It’s one thing to notice and identify a thought, and another to believe it. The more we internalize these external events, the more they can bring us down. If there is a lesson to be learned from an experience, absorb it. Then do your best to move forward.

No. 4 – Do Something for Someone Else

This is somewhat related to thought distraction in the sense that as you are doing for others, you are thinking less of yourself.  It is also related to the idea that no matter how bad you think your life may be, there is always someone else is far worse condition and who could use some help. Counseling as a profession has been this for me. By listening to the tales of woe from countless clients, I am bound to feel a little better about my life.

Helping-Others-ShoesThis need not mean joining the local soup kitchen or going to work for a militant cause of some sort, although it can mean those things, but rather, the little things that can help someone else in the moment. Here I am thinking of the old adage that “doing a good deed every day” can strengthen the heart. Little things like holding the door for someone, or helping your neighbor bring in the groceries, can go a long way toward ameliorating your own feelings of worthlessness.

No. 5 – Form a Fan Club

I have learned, through my counseling work, that life can be a lot worse. A LOT WORSE. People who on the surface appear to have it all together are in fact miserable and one short step away from self-annihilation.  This helps to remind me that I am not in this along. “This” of course, refers to life in general.

Who we turn to in times of self-doubt is an important inventory to take now and then. For me it is my wife and my best friend. My wife reminds me that it can also be God that I turn to, although I have forever found that hard to pull off with much success. My logic is rather simple: Who am I to turn to God when I am down, when I am doing such a lousy job at living the life He gave me? But I respect the idea.

Anyway, who we turn to during times of low self-confidence can greatly affect how quickly we rebound. Or, for that matter, how low we will allow ourselves to go! Support groups are supposed to pick you up when you’re feeling down and remind you of the amazing gifts and talents you possess. If you surround yourself with people who will be true advocates for you, and you for them, it creates a positive feedback loop of genuine confidence and a beaming attitude. Plus, it can add to resilience for future times of trouble.

No. 6 – Keep a List of What You Do NOT Want to Be (or Become)

Clients of my counseling practice (when I am practicing, that is) find it odd when I suggest that they list the things they do not want to be. Here I am thinking of the things we want to avoid becoming. For example, I do not want people to see me as a thief, or a louse, or slovenly, etc. Sometimes it is harder to conceive of the things we want to have or be, than it is to list the things we want to avoid.

Being bitter is one of those things and I have to work hard to avoid becoming bitter about life. About not living up to the potential that I thought I had when I stood on that stage in 1974 and gave the Valedictory Address to my high school class. About how I blew that potential, by and large. But that will only metastasize in me, and I know it. So, I need to work hard to avoid being a bitter person.

By listing those attributes I can focus on avoiding them.

No. 7 – Take Other People Out of the Equation

This is one that I have borrowed from www.LifeHacks.com and it is quite useful, even though it may appear on the surface as somewhat contradictory. Nevertheless, judging yourself against someone else will invariably lead to negative self-talk, unless you judge yourself (rather arrogantly I think) against someone who is clearly behind or beneath you in terms of lifetime achievements, etc. Try and avoid both ends of the spectrum and only compare you to you. The process is hard work, but in the end, if you set expectations for yourself fairly and in accurate terms of what you know about yourself, the process will work to remove other people from the equation.

Letting your self-worth be the result of how you stack up to other people’s achievements, appearances, and lives is one of the easiest ways to sabotage yourself, and it’s clearly a one-sided viewpoint that doesn’t take into consideration the whole picture.

No. 8 – Remember, It Could Always Be Worse

holocaustI think here of the experiences of the Jews in the concentration camps, and in particular the experience of Victor Frankel, who wrote extensively about how he always had a choice: To give up and die, or to continue to hope for a better outcome. Even at its seeming worse, life in the concentration camps (the extermination camps) always came with that choice. Always.

This is related to the idea of keeping lists of what is going well in your life. Had you not had positive experiences in your life, then it would be very easy to sink into a recursive cycle of depression about the future. Listing those positives is one way of reminding yourself that it could be worse; that you could be someone with no positives to list!

In the midst of a depressive episode, of which I have many, it can be hard to stop and think this way. But the mantra could be to say over and over again, “it could be worse, it could be worse, it-could-be-worse.”  This is very hard for me.

No. 9 – Keeping PerspectiveIMG_6064-750x750

Related to the notion that things could always be worse, is the notion that even in the best of times, perspective is critical, let we get too high on the ladder only to make the inevitable depressive cycle that much worse. Does that make sense? Staying appreciative for all you do possess is a big part of self-confidence, but so too is being mindful of what you don’t have what you really want is just a proxy for something to hope for. To dream for. To strive for.

No. 10 – Walk, Water, and Write™

Lastly, I need to remind myself that at those times when life doesn’t seem to offer any tomorrows, when all I am left with is an empty feeling of worthlessness, often it is simply because I am tired, hungry, or thirsty. The answer for me has been to pause and focus on walking, writing and remembering to drink lots of water. Odd though it may seem, that simple equation can and will alleviate the symptoms faster than anything I know.

Posted in Counseling Concepts, General Musings | 2 Comments

Erikson’s Eight Stages of Psychosocial Development – a RussoReview

Erikson Shortly Before His Death

Erikson Shortly Before His Death

This very long post will concern itself with a review of the work of Erik Erikson and his Stages of Psychosocial Development. I want to have this up on the Blog for future reference.

I will begin by reviewing the world of psychoanalysis, which began with the work of Sigmund Freud:

Without question, his contribution to the fields of psychoanalysis, psychotherapy, and counseling psychology was without peer. Indeed, his work by itself spawned a generation of “shrinks” throughout the 1930s, 1940s, and well into the 1950s.

Indeed, we cannot speak of “therapy” without giving a tip of the hat to Sigmund.


Many people rejected his work, while others sought to add-on to his theories in very meaningful ways. We would not have, for example, the notion of a “mid-life crisis” had its author, Carl Jung, not studied under Dr. Freud.  His daughter, Anna Freud, contributed mightily to his father’s work.  The Freudian structure of personality was the “reference standard” against which all comers were compared.

The Iceberg of FreudHe founded the school of psychoanalytic theory. The importance of unconscious processes in human motivation and his concepts of personality (the ID, EGO and SUPEREGO) cannot be overstated.  Indeed, the proper development of personality at various stages in the development of the infant to toddler to child to adolescent to young adult will determine the ultimate success of the adult until death.  Erikson, as we will soon see, elaborated on the development of personality in his eight stages – arguing, as did Freud, that successful negotiation of each stage would set-up future success in later stages.  Freud set forth the so-called psychosexual stages that we have all heard of: ORAL, ANAL, PHALLIC, LATENCY, and GENITAL. These inborn drives determine later personality development.

But it was Erikson who argued that successful adaptation to one’s environment was also critical.  Others argued that object relations were also critical. OBJECT refers to persons in a child’s life who can fulfill needs or to whom the child can become attached.  These are important notions to keep in mind as you read this rather long post.


Erik Erikson studied under Anna Freud and made considerable contributions to Freud’s ego psychology (recall Freud’s conception of the psyche as comprised of EGO, ID, and SUPEREGO). Erikson’s most important contribution was that of setting forth so-called psycho-social life stages, which included adult as well as child development. Beginning with Freud’s psychosexual stages, Erikson demonstrated their implications for growth and development as the individual relates to the external world.

Erikson’s eight stages focus on critical tasks that arise from what he saw as “crises,” which in turn arise at significant points in life. If these crises are not successful overcome, if the critical tasks are not successfully negotiated, then future crises and their related critical tasks will prove far more difficult (if not impossible) to overcome.

Of note is this very important difference between Freud and Erikson: While Sigmund saw the psycho-sexual stages as having definitive endpoints, Erikson saw the stages as remaining evident throughout life. For example, the very first stage, that of trust-versus-mistrust, begins in infancy. But if not mastered successfully, it will affect relationships at any time during the person’s life.


Here then are the eight stages (with reference to Freud’s psychosexual stages in parentheses):

Stage One: Infancy, TRUST VERSUS MISTRUST. An infant must develop trust in her mother to provide food and comfort so that when her mother is not available, she does not experience anxiety or rage. If these basic needs are not met, then non-trusting interpersonal relationships may result later in life. (The ORAL stage would be the Freudian analogue and, like Erikson, is focused on the trust the infant must have that the mother will see to its basic needs. Freud consider the unmet need here to translate later in life to insecurity in interpersonal relationships, or an overly developed dependency).

Stage Two: Early Childhood, AUTONOMY VERSUS SHAME and DOUBT. Erikson was of the belief that during this stage the child must develop bladder and bowel control with confidence and without criticism from his parents. If parents promote dependency at this stage, or are critical of the child, the development of INDEPENDENCE will be thwarted. (Freud famously labeled this the ANAL stage. If parents respond with disgust at the child’s natural tendency to want to experiment with his own “output,” then the child will develop a lowered sense of self-esteem. Alternatively, being overly complimentary of what the child does can (and most often does) result in an overly developed sense of control, cleanliness, and orderliness (the so-called anal-retentive personality). Freud also saw children as wanting to develop control over other children during this phase, something which must also be considered in the parenting of the child.)

Stage Three: Preschool, INITIATIVE VERSUS GUILT. Without laboring over Freud’s notion of “envy” of other children’s private parts, Erikson saw this stage as involving the displacement of natural anger and resentment toward the same-sex parent, or rivalry with the other-sex parent. That displacement of energy is the stage’s crisis point: To be successful it must be displaced toward competence and initiative. The child will need to learn how to engage in social and creative play activities (herein lies the notion of play therapy, by the way). A child deprived of such displacement opportunities will develop guilt about taking initiative for their own lives later in life. (The PHALLIC stage was Freud’s notion and involved the LIBIDO for which he is famous. Libido as a source of development energy was conceived of similarly to Erikson and was something to be channeled. Sexual identification later in life could be problematic, Freud thought, if the stage was not negotiated carefully by both parents.)

Stage Four: School Age, INDUSTRY VERSUS INFERIORITY. At this point, Erikson felt that the child must learn basic skills required for success in school. The development of a sex-role identity begins to gel at this point as well. If the child fails to develop basic cognitive skills in this stage (mostly through adequate schooling), then a sense of inadequacy or inferiority may develop.  (LATENCY was Freud’s name for the stage, and as the name implies, the libido discussed in stage three is now latent (sublimated) in favor of the channeled energy toward school, developing friends, sports and hobbies.)

0bama-Lisa-Monaco-Rebellious-teenagers-UA-editStage Five: Adolescence, IDENTITY VERSUS ROLE CONFUSION.  This is a key
phase in most people’s lives, particularly in the affluent west of the past 50 years. During this phase, teenagers should be developing confidence that others see them as they see themselves (aka, solid identity).  At this point, adolescents are able to develop educational and career goals and deal with issues regarding the meaning of life.  If this is not done – that is, if this phase is not negotiated successfully – a sense of role confusion will result. Role confusion is another way of saying that the average teenager, absent some degree of confidence, will be totally confounded by the world around them and may even shrink from it (or, sadly, attack it without remorse). Evidence of an unsuccessful negotiation of this phase is an inability to set educational or career goals. (GENITAL was Freud’s overarching name for this stage, and for the remainder of Erikson’s stages. Freud saw it as a time when the adolescent will begin to focus his or her sexual energy towards members of the opposite sex. This might be seen as “other love” rather than the “Self-Love” which characterizes the earlier Freudian stages).

Stage five of Erikson’s stages is perhaps the most difficult stage, candidly, and may well determine the course of the person’s life.  Role Confusion is often evident in the people with whom we interact every day.

Stage Six: Young Adulthood, INTIMACY VERSUS ISOLATION. As the person emerges from adolescence into young adulthood, it is often concurrent with the beginnings of a career (or of serious work or school endeavors). Cooperative relationships are developed – cooperative in the sense of mutual self-interest – along with intimate relationships with another person.  Success will beget success in this stage and the young adult will flourish. Conversely, failure in this stage will often lead to a sense of alienation or isolation.

Stage Seven: Middle Age, GENERATIVITY VERSUS STAGNATION.  Let us assume that the individual has successfully negotiated stage six and has developed solid relationships that, by now, will be producing reward at an exponential rate.  Offspring is one element and might contribute to the word “generativity” that Erikson uses.  But it is more than mere procreation. A sense of duty to others, regardless of friendship or not, regardless of the promise of return on investment, if you will, will emerge here. The idea will emerge of taking responsibility for helping others whom we do not know intimately. Think again of what Erikson might have meant by the word “generativity” and we can see that the individual who successful negotiates this stage will want to generate energy that helps others at any stage in their lives.  A sense of productivity and accomplishment will begin to emerge; absent this, a certain apathy about the world will mark their failure.

middle_agesOf note here was Erikson’s conception of middle age. In the decades of his life, ending in 1994, middle age was considered the late 40s and most of the 50s, with old age setting in around the time we turned 60. Of course, this has changed, and middle age begins later and ends much later, probably not until the late 60s. Bear this in mind when considering the onset of stagnation. It may be that the client who is evidencing all manner of stagnation is in reality, experiencing the isolation and alienation of Stage Six.


Stage Eight: Later Life, INTEGRITY VERSUS DESPAIR.  People are prone to look back on their lives and wonder “if only,” and it is this process of life-review that Erikson sought to capture in the last stage. We may feel as if we have not handled our lives well or develop a sense of having not accomplished all that we set out to do. Remorse may be present, and at time, downright depression. This he called “despair,” and we are only now beginning to understand it as the root of so many “grey suicides” that are happening in our country today.

Conversely, the idea of “integrity” would evidence a successful conclusion to one’s life. Integrity in Erikson’s nomenclature is the sense of having won more games that we lost, that we did so with aplomb and moral integrity, and that we can and often do integrate our knowledge in a way so as to pass it along to others. Here we see the so-called memoirs of the rich and famous. Or the so-called “life reviews” captured on film and held in our local libraries.

The existential question in this Stage 8 is, “Is it okay to have been me? Did my life count?”  (the answer to which can either imply a smooth transition to death, or a failure to negotiate this stage and, sadly, contribute to early death).

274-620x443As we grow older and become senior citizens we tend to slow down our productivity and explore life as a retired person. It is during this time that we contemplate our accomplishments and are able to develop integrity if we see ourselves as leading (or as having led) a successful life. If we see our life as unproductive, or feel that we did not accomplish our life goals, we become dissatisfied with life and develop despair, often leading to depression, hopelessness, or suicide.

Remember this: The final developmental task is retrospection, or a process by which people look back on their lives and accomplishments. They develop feelings of contentment and integrity if they believe that they have led a happy, productive life. They may instead develop a sense of despair if they look back on a life of disappointments and un-achieved goals. This is an area where I wonder if man, absent any sense of contribution, or of having built something, won’t slip into permanent despair at a much earlier age.

So, anyway, that is my long post on Erikson’s stages of development. I think it vastly interesting stuff.


References

Sharf, R. S. (2008). Theories of Psychotherapy and Counseling: Concepts and Cases.  Thomson: New York.
Posted in Counseling Concepts, Dissertation and Research, General Musings | Comments Off on Erikson’s Eight Stages of Psychosocial Development – a RussoReview

Trans-National-Professional-Stan: Extreme Liberalism as a Mental Disorder

BREXITThe elites of my world – the transnationalprofessionals – are apoplectic at Brexit and the slight victory the other day of British nationals over the internationalists.  Ms. McArdle in her article from Bloomberg, reproduced below, could not have said it better: The elites are stuck and have nowhere to go.

I thought I would put this up on my blog while giving her complete and total credit for what follows. I own none of it, except that it captures my sentiment two days after Brexit won over the Remain constituency, the latter of which is today rioting for a new referendum.  Why is it that the leftists riot but the conservatives take their lumps quietly?


I was on a hike yesterday and overhead one of the academics who was out with us, say, “Brexit was a triumph of what Trump stands for: Closed borders and Racism.” My God – is that what the academics really think? Do they not have any sense whatsoever of “country”? Of course they do not. What the left cannot win at the ballot box, they will seek by undoing the ballot box altogether. Pure academics – pure unadulterated leftists – are the most dangerous kind, and suffer from what Michael Savage has long called the newest mental disorder – extreme liberalism.

refineryTake for example, their fight against oil refineries. Long held as a triumph of a marriage of environmental sensitivity and beautiful engineering, of chemical process and cleanliness, refineries were nevertheless abhorred by Leftists as a symbol of American exceptionalism wrapped in some sort of environmental effrontery. So, what did the Left do? They essentially criminalized the construction of new refineries, to everyone’s detriment. The problem was (and is): we still need refineries.

So what did the oil companies do? They moved them to countries more concerned with getting things done, the environment be damned. I think of the refineries and other production facilities I saw in third world countries – massive, beautiful installations that SHOULD have been built in my own country – and the profligate waste and messiness they exhibited. Oil leaking everywhere and seeping into the ground.  Un-scrubbed emissions spewing into the air.  All the Left succeeded in doing was exporting the worst of the process, to the detriment of Mother Earth. We should have kept them here where they are infinitely cleaner.

The same could be said about anything else they hate: those things merely get exported, and thereby are out of our reach of oversight and regulation. Extreme Liberalism is indeed a mental disorder.

My comments on Ms. McArdle’s article appear as inset comments below:


JUNE 24, 2016 1:20 PM EDT

‘Citizens of the World’? Nice Thought, But …

By Megan McArdle, Bloomberg.

I didn’t think it would actually happen.

Sitting in an airport with middle-class Britons last week, I heard far more support for leaving the European Union than for staying in. But heading into Thursday’s voting, I couldn’t quite believe it.

I didn’t think it would happen simply because things like this usually don’t. The status quo is a powerful totem. People don’t like jumping off into the unknown. As polls moved toward Remain in the waning days of the campaign, I assumed that we were seeing the usual pattern: People flirt with the new, dangerous outsider, then come home and marry the familiar boy next door.

Funny: my thought here was of the Iranian imports we accepted into America in the wake of the Shah’s downfall in the 1980s. How many American boys were shunted aside by American girls who were enamored of the new and sexy Iranian hunks? I had personal experience with this. A girlfriend from long ago dumped me and went for an Iranian man, and then paid the price not a year later when he exhibited all that he’d been trained to do: He was essentially a misogynist who wanted “his woman” behind him and two steps to the right at all times. American boys had been recently trained in the ways of equality but had always been trained in the notion of respect and love. The familiar boy next door turned out to be OK and she came flooding back but only after she’d had a child with the fucker and would forever then pay that price.

It turned out my anecdata from the airport did better than the polls. And way, way better than the betting markets, which as late as 7 p.m. in the Eastern U.S. gave “Remain” a 96 percent chance of winning. Betting markets failed worse than polls, worse than a casual survey in an airport. They failed, because as the blogger Epicurean Dealmaker pointed out on Twitter, “Markets distill the biases, opinions, & convictions of elites,” which makes them “Structurally less able to predict populist movements.”

Anecdata – now, there’s an interesting word and one I had never seen before. It is simply the plural of the word anecdote! I love it.

The inability of those elites to grapple with the rich world’s populist moment was in full display on social media last night (following the win of the Brexit supporters in England). Journalists and academics seemed to feel that they had not made it sufficiently clear that people who oppose open borders are a bunch of racist rubes who couldn’t count to 20 with their shoes on, and hence will believe any daft thing they’re told. Given how badly this strategy had just failed, this seemed a strange time to be doubling down. But perhaps, like the fellow I once saw lose a packet by betting on 17 for 20 straight turns of the roulette wheel, they reasoned that the recent loss actually makes a subsequent victory more likely, since the number has to come up sometime.

The elites in America are no less snobby. Us normal folk are not to be trusted with self-government, what with our guns and bibles and such.

gun-bible-600x331Or perhaps they were just unable to grasp what I noted in a column last week: that nationalism and place still matter, and that elites forget this at their peril. A lot people do not view their country the way some elites do: as though the nation were something like a rental apartment — a nice place to live, but if there are problems, or you just fancy a change, you’ll happily swap it for a new one.

And oh how the leftists swoon over Billary but announce that, should Trump win, they will relocate. Honest to God, where did they learn such thoughts?

In many ways, members of the global professional class have started to identify more with each other than they have with the fellow residents of their own countries. Witness the emotional meltdown many American journalists have been having over Brexit.

Megan, I could not agree more. Thin skin is only the beginning of their reaction.

Well, here’s one journalist (me, Megan) who is not having a meltdown. I think Brexit will be somewhat costly — if you want to understand just how complicated the separation will be, take a gander at the primer that the law firm Dechert put up for its clients — but it’s not going to destroy the country or start a war, so if Britain wants out, then … bon voyage. I can certainly understand why my British friends who supported Remain are upset, and why people in other countries who are actually going to experience long-term effects from this decision are unhappy—if I were a Pole, I’d be worried as heck. But I don’t take it personally.

A lot of my professional colleagues seemed to, and the dominant tone framed this as a blow against the enlightened “us” and the beautiful world we are building, struck by a plague of morlocks who had crawled out of their hellish subterranean world to attack our impending utopia. You could also, I’d argue, see this sentiment in the reaction of global markets, which was grossly out of proportion to the actual economic damage that is likely to be done by Brexit. I mean, yes, the British pound took a pounding, and no surprise. But why did this so roil markets for the Mexican peso? Did traders fear that the impact on the global marmite supply was going to unsettle economies everywhere?

Well, no. This was a reflection of sudden uncertainty, not a prediction about the global economic future.

But the sheer extent of the carnage made me wonder if one of the uncertainties traders were newly contemplating was when the morlocks are going to be coming for us outward-looking professional types with pitchforks.

The answer to these uncertainties, I submit, is not to simply keep doing what we’re doing. There’s a lot of appeal to the internationalist idea that building superstates will tamp down on war. But there’s a reason that the 19th century architects of superstates (now known simply as “states”) spent so much time and effort nurturing national identity in the breasts of their populace. Surrendering traditional powers and liberties to a distant state is a lot easier if you think of that state as run by “people like me,” not “strangers from another place,” and particularly if that surrender is done in the name of empowering “people who are like me” in our collective dealings with other, farther “strangers who aren’t.”

Megan, the problem of course is that “people like me” no longer exist, at least not in numbers to counter the extremes of Extreme Liberalism. Sheeple are the direct result of 50 years of social engineering by the super-statists, with most of the people like me coming to believe that there must be something better than the racist, jingoist America we thought we lived in. Turns out, however, that there isn’t. America was and is the last best hope.

The EU never did this work. When asked “Where are you from?” almost no one would answer “Europe,” because after 50 years of assiduous labor by the eurocrats, Europe remains a continent, not an identity. As Matthew Yglesias points out, an EU-wide soccer team would be invincible — but who would root for it? These sorts of tribal affiliations cause problems, obviously, which is why elites were so eager to elitisttamp them down. Unfortunately, they are also what glues polities together, and makes people willing to sacrifice for them. Trying to build the state without the nation has led to the mess that is the current EU. And to Thursday’s election results.

Here I am reminded of a wonderful quote: “Love of country is what I do NOT feel when I am wronged, but what I felt when secure in my rights as a citizen. Indeed, I do not consider that I am now attacking a country that is still mine; I am rather trying to recover one that is mine no longer; and the true lover of his country is NOT he who consents to lose it unjustly rather than attack it, but he who longs for it so much that he will go to all lengths to recover it.” – Thucydides, On the History of the Peloponnesian War, Page 279.

Elites missed this because they’re the exception — the one group that has a transnational identity. And in fact the arguments for the EU look a lot like the old arguments for national states: a project that will empower people like us against the scary people who aren’t (like us).

Unhappily for the elites, there is no “Transnationalprofessionalistan” to which they can move. (And who would trim the hedges, make the widgets, and staff the nursing homes if there were?) They have to live in physical places, filled with other people whose loyalties are to a particular place and way of life, not an abstract ideal, or the joys of rootless cosmopolitanism.

In other words, they have to tolerate us normal folk who believe in place and country.

Even simple self-interest suggests that it may be time for the elites in Britain and beyond to sue for peace, rather than letting their newborn transnational identity drive them into a war they can’t win — as happened with so many new states in the 19th and 20th centuries. Try to reforge common identities with the neighbors they have to live with, and look for treaty rules that will let them live in peace.

Unfortunately, it’s not clear that transnationalism is any more capable of tempering its own excesses than the nationalism that preceded it.

 

Posted in General Musings | Comments Off on Trans-National-Professional-Stan: Extreme Liberalism as a Mental Disorder

The Middle Finger of Love: Managing YOUR Passive Aggression

obama-finger-Recently, I had to wait behind a woman who insisted on holding me up at a light while she texted someone something that was obviously far more important than my right turn.  I could tell that she knew I was behind her, what with my blinkers blinking and all.  Plus, I could see her looking in the rear-view mirror at me.  Anyway, I waited for that fraction of a second we all seem to wait before blasting my horn (well, it wasn’t a blast – more like a friendly reminder).

She gave me the universally understood middle finger of acknowledgment.  And, two minutes or so later, after the light had changed from green to red, she decided to hang up and make the turn herself.

Now, two minutes is not a lot of time, but it got me to wondering: Why the middle finger? Why say “fuck you” when all someone did was gently remind you of an inconsiderate action? Is that a fuck-you-worthy event?

Niles-Crane-787635For maybe an hour after that, I fumed. I found myself thinking of Niles Crain and his complaints about what he saw as the world’s tendency toward ever-increasing boorish behavior.  I found myself fixated on what felt like rude and inappropriate lane-hogging. I didn’t say anything in the moment and I certainly didn’t rush up to return the middle-finger-of-love. But that doesn’t mean I wasn’t reacting.

On the contrary, I was silently fuming. How could anyone be so inconsiderate? And why wasn’t I standing up for myself? Why did I let the little event go?

Alright, so you might be wondering why I didn’t, in the moment after the middle-finger came up, simply go around her and make my turn? The problem is that while it seems straightforward, in that moment it didn’t feel straightforward. Maybe it was my fear of conflict, or the way that little girl (err, woman) acted like she owned the lane, but, somehow, I didn’t muster the courage to assert myself.

Think about how often you see this happen: Someone does something that upsets others — they yell, bully or leave people out, ignore emails, do shoddy work, show up late, text message during meetings, play favorites — and the people around them don’t say anything. To be sure, those people are reacting – they’re just not doing it openly.

I used to think that passive aggressiveness was simply some people’s way of being obnoxious. But while sitting there behind her, I experienced the cause of a lot of passive aggressiveness:

“Passive Aggression is the feeling of powerlessness that grows in the fertile ground between anger and silence.”

Passive aggression is an attempt to regain power and relieve the tension created by that gap between anger and silence. People complain to each other. They withdraw, use sarcasm, and resist the person in quiet, insidiously defensible ways.

Dealing with a passive aggressive person is one thing. But what if it’s you who is being passively aggressive? In the immediate case, how else might I have responded to the finger? According to several writers, there are four potentials:

  1. Do nothing. Just live with it . Of course, that is what I ended up doing but that doesn’t mean I wasn’t bothered by the driver’s behavior. If something doesn’t matter to us that much and our anger dissipates, then silence can be productive. In other words, if there’s no anger, there’s no gap.
  2. Gossip and channel the anger: Eventually I talked to several people about drivers in my small town. I gossiped, albeit without a specific person to gossip about.  Everyone I spoke with was certainly supportive, and that made me feel better. On the flip side, of course, I’m sure those conversations created some amount of worry about what kind of guy would be so upset about be held-up at a stop-light for an extra two minutes.
  3. Claim the lane. Yes, I considered simply going around her. There were no pedestrians, and for that matter, no oncoming traffic, and the risks were quite low. But I am glad to announce that that obnoxious, if not potentially unsafe, response was not one that I made.
  4. Be super direct. This is, of course, the most mature way to respond and it’s our way out of the passive aggressive pattern. But it’s harder to do than the other three options because it requires that we talk about what’s bothering us and ask the other person to change their behavior. In the immediate case, it would have required that I get out of my car and approach the other driver, which of course was sure to result in her driving away like nothing ever happened.

7C36859D-D999-4788-9D7A-2EE169F09C54_w640_r1_s_cx0_cy13_cw0Create an Arsenal of Response

It helps to have an established method for being direct about someone else’s poor behavior. And I am not talking now about traffic lights and middle fingers. I am talking about what to do in the moment, in person. What if you encounter the analog of such an event in the office?  We can be direct and tell the other person that what they are doing is simply not cool, but somehow that feels like criticism and might very well result in a defensive reaction which would escalate the conflict.

In considering going around her, I was in effect wielding my power as a driver. But I didn’t want her to wake up from the texting and move her car to block me. That would result in something of a potentially unsafe stalemate and, worse, would have resulted in a diminution of my power – something many of us do to our detriment because we’re polite.

What I realized is that no matter what I do in a situation like that, I will end up feeling at least a little uncomfortable. That’s because, when we’re dealing with someone who is being selfish or inconsiderate, we need to be willing to assert our interests at least as strongly as they are willing to assert theirs. We need to be polite but also stand our ground. And that feels uncomfortable.

Here are three steps that might help, assuming an example in, say, the office:

  1. Ask a clarifying question. Is there a particular reason you are asserting yourself in this manner? The key is to be really curious (otherwise the question itself may be a passive aggressive move). There may be a perfectly good reason that someone is being inconsiderate (remember, they will not see it that way). Your curiosity might be the only move you need to make. If you hear a legitimate reason behind a person’s offensive behavior, your anger may simply dissipate. And, if they have no reason, they may simply shift their own behavior. If neither of those happen, then:
  2. Share your perspective while acknowledging theirs. I understand why you want to [insert whatever the inconsiderate behavior may be], but it’s frustrating to others around you. Have you considered what others might be enduring right now?
  3. Make a firm request. Since X is true, then please do Y. Saying it this way (“Since … please …”) suffuses you with a certain amount of authority. It lies somewhere between a request and a demand. You are setting a standard for how people should act and increasing the likelihood that the person will comply. I think this latter step is critical for leaders to master.

Mind the Gap

Mind_the_gap_2Avoiding the slide into passive aggressiveness requires closing the gap between our anger and our silence — either by dissipating our anger or breaking our silence.  Breaking the silence isn’t easy, doesn’t feel comfortable, and risks open conflict. But standing up for yourself is important and, in the end, open conflict is preferable to underground discord.  Boundaries, folks, are what we are talking about. Boundaries.

I know that having to tolerate a rude driver is not the best example for discussing passive aggression, but it was the readiest example I could come up with … not to mention that it is what got me to thinking about the whole subject.

 

Posted in General Musings | Comments Off on The Middle Finger of Love: Managing YOUR Passive Aggression

Drexel-Sibbet: A model for team performance

The tenets of this model were presented in a TEC meeting in mid-2014 and I found them fascinating and worthy of a post here at www.jvrusso.com.

Drexel Sibbet Model of Team PerformanceThe first thing to remember as you look at the DS illustration is that teams will often appear to be a bouncing ball, knocking about between the pillars of complete freedom and total constraint. It is a metaphor on life, if you think about it. But anyway, here are some notes on the model:

  • This model comprises seven stages to help optimize the workflow of a team effort: orientation, trust building, goal clarification, commitment, implementation, high performance, and renewal.
  • Each stage is identified by the primary question of concern for team members when they are in that phase.
  • The structure of the model resembles the path of a bouncing ball. This is because the model demonstrates the team’s arch of energy. When in the stages toward the top of the diagram (the beginning and end), teams will often feel a greater sense of freedom – the orientation and renewal stages provide opportunities for limitless potential and possibility.
  • As a team moves into stages toward the bottom of the diagram (the middle stages), there are more constraints. Goals are set, and some things end up being included, while others do not.
  • Teams don’t always move through the model in a linear fashion.
  • The model is designed to enhance workflow and team performance rather than restrict the team to a fixed set of rules.

Orientation 
The primary question asked during this first stage of the model is, “Why are we here?” The team must work together to identify a task that each individual finds personally beneficial, useful, or important to the organization. When team members are unable to envision a role for themselves, they often feel anxious and distance themselves from the group. Alternatively, when members feel more connected, they are more likely to participate in achieving the group’s goals.

Trust Building 
According to the model creators, this is the stage during which “people want to know who they will work with – their expectations, agendas, and competencies.” Trust can only be established once team members become clear on their individual roles and responsibilities and establish a better understanding of each other’s work styles and experience.

Goal Clarification 
Here is where the team works to identify a shared vision by discussing possibilities, variations, and the reasons these goals may or may not be the best options. Some disagreement can happen during this stage, so it is important to make sure that everyone is on the same page before proceeding. This is also a good time to address any conflict between individual and organizational goals.

Commitment 
This stage comprises the most constraining work the team will face during the entire process. If your work here remains unresolved, some team members may disown individual responsibility for the success of the team by going along with the preferences of others, while others may attack proposed courses of action without offering any feasible alternatives. Such behaviour could indicate a lack of priorities, roles, or a clear definition of how work should proceed.

Implementation
The implementation stage is dominated by timing and scheduling. You may cycle back through earlier stages of the process as your team encounters unforeseen obstacles and works to find its groove. The key here is to impose some shared processes for completing the team’s work. This can be achieved with online project management tools, flowcharts, or work plans.

High Performance 
While the design of this model might suggest that “high performance” is a destination that all teams reach, research indicates that many never do. But you don’t have to reach this point for good work to get done. The process outlined in the Drexler/Sibbet model is designed to increase the likelihood of becoming a high-performance team and spending more time in this stage.

Renewal 
The primary question at this stage of the process is, “Why continue?” You can think of renewal as both an ending and a new beginning. Each team member may want to reflect on what worked and didn’t work, what was achieved and can now be left behind, and what issues remain to be tackled.

Planning

Another tool that may prove helpful in planning projects is GRPI – an acronym for goals, roles, process, and interpersonal relationships.

The GRPI model suggests that teams and their leaders will function most effectively if they address the four stages of planning in the order they are listed in the acronym, as follows:

Goals – What is the team going to accomplish? What is its core mission?

Roles – Who will do what on the team? Are the roles and responsibilities clear?

Process – How will the team work together to solve problems/make decisions?

Interpersonal relationships – How do the team members get along?

Posted in Business, Dissertation and Research | Comments Off on Drexel-Sibbet: A model for team performance