It's weird how you sometimes recognized a cluster of similar situations in a narrow time frame, each in different areas of your life. I'm not sure if this is truly a coincidence or more a phenonomen where the first experience makes your sensitive to others.
In any event, I've noticed that more and more people are uncomfortable calling a problem a problem. The oh-so-cloying phrase "oh, it's not a problem, it's an opportunity" has reached epidemic proportions -- and is more virulent, I suspect, than H1N1.
In the dark and distance past, someone wisely said that you'll get further solving a problem when you see it as an opportunity for growth. And I totally agree with that. Problems are the reasons we break paradigms, stretch out of our comfort zones, and leap to new levels of execution. YAY for problems.
But, over time, the wisdom of that simple reframing advice has given way to a politically correct vocabulary where people avoid even uttering the word "problem."
The original idea was not about giving lip-service to a word that lowers our blood pressure and helps us to hide from the powers-that-be. No, the original ideas was really was meant to change our way of thinking and acting, not just our groupspeak. In other words: It's not JUST a problem; it's ALSO an opportunity.
The reason this matters is that those who prefer the "vocabulary substitution" approach cannot even answer the question at the heart of any business relationship: What is the client's problem?
If that question quickens your breath, gives you hives and you find you cannot even label a flipchart with the heading "problem"...then it might be time to re-think your approach.
Your clients have problems. Period. If they didn't, they would not need you.
They don't wake up in the middle of the night and celebrate their opportunities.
They don't lose concentration in the middle of a tennis match because they received a text with an exciting opportunity.
They don't step out of weddings, funerals, and 7th grade band concerts because an opportunity just can't wait.
Nope. They have problems.
And if you can understand and help them define the problems, then and only then, Virginia, you've arrived at an opportunity.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
You've Got Spinach in Your Teeth
It's always interesting to notice how many people DON'T take the time to tell you they've found a problem in your work. It could be a typo or other small error, or it could be something more substantial. There are many times when no one tells you, then suddenly you find the problem and you realize everyone already noticed.
Why doesn't someone nudge you with the professional equivalent of "um, you've got some spinach in your teeth..."? Here are some possibilities:
Volleyball Syndrome
They are secure in the belief that if they keep their heads down and avoid eye contact, someone else will get the job done. These are the people who never raised their hands above their heads playing volleyball in gym class. ("Here it comes! You get it!" being their rally cry)
Second-to-the-Summit Syndrome
These folks notice, but assume someone had to have mentioned it, so they don't want to pile on. They reach the summit, but instead of planting a flag they start looking for the Starbucks the first guy franchised.
Karma Syndrome
These people assume it must the universe giving you a little comeuppance, and, really, who are they to interfere?
Battered Ego Syndrome
These souls see the mistake, but then have a silent argument with themselves that they must be wrong. When the mistake is revealed, they sigh "Oh, I knew that, but..."
Next time you notice a mistake, tell the person. It's nice to be nice, but, nicely or not, I'd rather know when my slip is showing (Hmm, does anyone wear slips any more?), my teeth are besmeared with foreign objects, or my infinitive is split wide open. And you?
Why doesn't someone nudge you with the professional equivalent of "um, you've got some spinach in your teeth..."? Here are some possibilities:
Volleyball Syndrome
They are secure in the belief that if they keep their heads down and avoid eye contact, someone else will get the job done. These are the people who never raised their hands above their heads playing volleyball in gym class. ("Here it comes! You get it!" being their rally cry)
Second-to-the-Summit Syndrome
These folks notice, but assume someone had to have mentioned it, so they don't want to pile on. They reach the summit, but instead of planting a flag they start looking for the Starbucks the first guy franchised.
Karma Syndrome
These people assume it must the universe giving you a little comeuppance, and, really, who are they to interfere?
Battered Ego Syndrome
These souls see the mistake, but then have a silent argument with themselves that they must be wrong. When the mistake is revealed, they sigh "Oh, I knew that, but..."
Next time you notice a mistake, tell the person. It's nice to be nice, but, nicely or not, I'd rather know when my slip is showing (Hmm, does anyone wear slips any more?), my teeth are besmeared with foreign objects, or my infinitive is split wide open. And you?
Thursday, June 25, 2009
The Definition Vortex
Defining a problem is important; I don't deny it. If you haven't framed the problem you have no chance to solve it.
And yet, I've seen so many people hide behind the camouflage of defining a problem. "Let's have a meeting and define the problem" turns into weeks of discussion and debate. In the meantime, the problem is getting worse, having children, planting roots -- pick your metaphor -- and we're still talking about how to talk about it.
Long ago a boss told me that if a meeting was rescheduled more than 3 times, it probably was a meeting that didn't need to happen. I propose a corollary:
It the topic of "defining a problem" requires more than 2 meetings, it's very likely you have bitten off too much to chew.
Break it down, pick a part of you CAN define and begin to work to solution. If you are creating flowcharts and Gantt charts that start with the big bang, it might be time to re-frame and simplify.
A wise woman recently told me: "If two things are a mystery, choose one." This is great advice, and this direction could kick many project teams out of the "definition vortex"!
And yet, I've seen so many people hide behind the camouflage of defining a problem. "Let's have a meeting and define the problem" turns into weeks of discussion and debate. In the meantime, the problem is getting worse, having children, planting roots -- pick your metaphor -- and we're still talking about how to talk about it.
Long ago a boss told me that if a meeting was rescheduled more than 3 times, it probably was a meeting that didn't need to happen. I propose a corollary:
It the topic of "defining a problem" requires more than 2 meetings, it's very likely you have bitten off too much to chew.
Break it down, pick a part of you CAN define and begin to work to solution. If you are creating flowcharts and Gantt charts that start with the big bang, it might be time to re-frame and simplify.
A wise woman recently told me: "If two things are a mystery, choose one." This is great advice, and this direction could kick many project teams out of the "definition vortex"!
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
The Eskimo Executive
So, out of the melange of facts and factoids formed by my formal education, casual conversations, and various apocryphal forms of entertainment, I have come to understand that Eskimo language and cultures puts an emphasis on *now* -- not to say they don't plan for the future or remember the past, but they are more hard-wired to "live in the moment." I can't confirm that this is an accurate portrayal of their culture, but it is intuitively appealing to me.
I've realized that there is a class of executive who follows this philosophy. Sadly, not in the "let's stay in the moment and squeeze the juice out it" way...but more in that they have the ability to present an opinion with absolute conviction, then change their minds up to 180 degrees -- and they never acknowledge the change. The case for the new opinion is made without a twinge or backward glance. And woe to anyone who states or intimates that there was every a different point of view.
It's difficult to appreciate the Eskimo Executive when you are directly involved in the about-face (you're too busy controlling your large muscle groups from the fight-or-flight response). But if you can watch from the sidelines, it's fascinating. For a long time, I assumed these people knew they were making massive changes in their opinions/directions. I thought it was just ego or a sense of "let's not upset the little people" or "must not show weakness; pretend nothing has changed."
But I've come to realize: they do not know they've done it. The shift is instantaneous. They truly believe they always held the same (read: correct) opinion. And if tomorrow new information necessitates a change in the correct opinion, hey, they will have always held that one, of course.
I know you've seen it. There's even a country song about it: "He was frequently wrong, but never in doubt." Now, here's a question to ponder: How do you know if you are an Eskimo Executive? I mean, wouldn't the very definition of the problem mean you could never perceive it?
So I wonder if the fact that I notice this in others means I share the trait. (This is, of course, the psychological corollary to my brother's axiom: "He who smelt it, dealt it.") Or does the simply act of wondering about it mean I am not afflicted? Hmm...
I've realized that there is a class of executive who follows this philosophy. Sadly, not in the "let's stay in the moment and squeeze the juice out it" way...but more in that they have the ability to present an opinion with absolute conviction, then change their minds up to 180 degrees -- and they never acknowledge the change. The case for the new opinion is made without a twinge or backward glance. And woe to anyone who states or intimates that there was every a different point of view.
It's difficult to appreciate the Eskimo Executive when you are directly involved in the about-face (you're too busy controlling your large muscle groups from the fight-or-flight response). But if you can watch from the sidelines, it's fascinating. For a long time, I assumed these people knew they were making massive changes in their opinions/directions. I thought it was just ego or a sense of "let's not upset the little people" or "must not show weakness; pretend nothing has changed."
But I've come to realize: they do not know they've done it. The shift is instantaneous. They truly believe they always held the same (read: correct) opinion. And if tomorrow new information necessitates a change in the correct opinion, hey, they will have always held that one, of course.
I know you've seen it. There's even a country song about it: "He was frequently wrong, but never in doubt." Now, here's a question to ponder: How do you know if you are an Eskimo Executive? I mean, wouldn't the very definition of the problem mean you could never perceive it?
So I wonder if the fact that I notice this in others means I share the trait. (This is, of course, the psychological corollary to my brother's axiom: "He who smelt it, dealt it.") Or does the simply act of wondering about it mean I am not afflicted? Hmm...
Monday, March 23, 2009
Afternoon Delete
OK, how many of you remember diskettes? Cute, little, portable, magnetic miracles that let you store - gasp - 1.44Mb of data. Yes, that's right...1,440,000K (and change). Now I know you young folk with your rock-and-roll music may not appreciate this, but at the time, it was a break-through. [Quit smirking, or I'll make you sit still while I ramble on about that heady day when Lotus 1-2-3 finally enabled us to make text BOLD and COLORFUL (albeit on a separate file) with Allways.]
Today we have so much space on our computer drives that it boggles the mind....so much space that I rationalize keeping things that I should delete. The funny thing is, within my circle of friends, I'm actually one of the more ruthless deleters (is that a word?)...deletitions? Deletionists? Hell, I have fewer than 100 emails in my inbox --- as opposed to several collegues who have (I am not kidding) +13,000 sitting in their inbox...with as many as 3000 unread. And the only reason they stop at 13,000 is that IT forces them to archive occassionally.
Here's my question....why do I save all this crap? I mean, I know what I think I save it. I think I may need it one day. But I also know that when I do need something, 4 times out of 10, I can't find the right email. I could go off on a rant about people who send me emails with subject lines of "question" and "tomorrow's meeting" so that there's no chance of identifying the true topic, but that's not really my point.
Why do we do this? Why do we save 14 versions of a project that's long since been delivered? Why do we save ever iteration of an email string? Why do we faithfully store every crappy presentation that our collegues thrust upon us? It's part lazyness, part covetousness, and part paranoia. Covynoia....that's that's the technical term.
I've yet to meet an ascetic business person....though it would be interesting. "Hello, my name is Pat, and I keep everything I need on this single 1.44MB diskette. When I receive new information, I simply delete the old. So for the near term, I look forward to interacting with you. At some point, though, your contact information will be over-written by a new bit of data, and we will lose contact. Until then, as long as you don't send me any graphic or sound files, I will enjoy our interaction. Hey, don't be sad; it's a FIFO world."
Today we have so much space on our computer drives that it boggles the mind....so much space that I rationalize keeping things that I should delete. The funny thing is, within my circle of friends, I'm actually one of the more ruthless deleters (is that a word?)...deletitions? Deletionists? Hell, I have fewer than 100 emails in my inbox --- as opposed to several collegues who have (I am not kidding) +13,000 sitting in their inbox...with as many as 3000 unread. And the only reason they stop at 13,000 is that IT forces them to archive occassionally.
Here's my question....why do I save all this crap? I mean, I know what I think I save it. I think I may need it one day. But I also know that when I do need something, 4 times out of 10, I can't find the right email. I could go off on a rant about people who send me emails with subject lines of "question" and "tomorrow's meeting" so that there's no chance of identifying the true topic, but that's not really my point.
Why do we do this? Why do we save 14 versions of a project that's long since been delivered? Why do we save ever iteration of an email string? Why do we faithfully store every crappy presentation that our collegues thrust upon us? It's part lazyness, part covetousness, and part paranoia. Covynoia....that's that's the technical term.
I've yet to meet an ascetic business person....though it would be interesting. "Hello, my name is Pat, and I keep everything I need on this single 1.44MB diskette. When I receive new information, I simply delete the old. So for the near term, I look forward to interacting with you. At some point, though, your contact information will be over-written by a new bit of data, and we will lose contact. Until then, as long as you don't send me any graphic or sound files, I will enjoy our interaction. Hey, don't be sad; it's a FIFO world."
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Consider User Needs Before the Fight Begins
No doubt there are hundreds, if not thousands, of conversations going on around the world at this moment about a deceptively complex idea: report design.
The Marketing types want a report that looks great. They get really excited about creating a mock-up that could win an award on the sheer strength of its Greeked copy blocks. Colors? Of course! Charts? The more, the merrier. Pull-downs? Filters? Ad hoc queries? Yes. Yes. and You betcha.
On the other side of the conference table, you have the Technology types who are listening, tight-lipped and imagining just how little they will see of their spouse, children, speedboats, Wii, or other distraction of the next several days. Every bell and whistle that flies so buoyantly out of the mouth of a Marketer lands like a brick on the soul of the Programmer. Often they have been trained (by Marketing outbursts) that "this will all be over quicker" if they just shut up and absorb the fantasies. But sometimes even the most stoic techies reach their breaking point. You can feel the ancient word coming from somewhere deep in their brainstem...."NO!" they finally cry.
Forgotten all too often in this power-struggle is...you guessed it: the user.
There's not an easy solution that will make Marketing and Technology hold hands and skip down the report design path. Yet, you can reduce some of the strife if you are clear about key ideas like WHO is going to use the report, WHAT they need to know, and HOW they are likely to look for answers.
Not exactly earth-shaking, I know. But I also know it's a step that is forgotten much of the time. Try it next time...take 20 minutes to really thinking about and prioritize the users' needs. You might be amazed at the outcome.
The Marketing types want a report that looks great. They get really excited about creating a mock-up that could win an award on the sheer strength of its Greeked copy blocks. Colors? Of course! Charts? The more, the merrier. Pull-downs? Filters? Ad hoc queries? Yes. Yes. and You betcha.
On the other side of the conference table, you have the Technology types who are listening, tight-lipped and imagining just how little they will see of their spouse, children, speedboats, Wii, or other distraction of the next several days. Every bell and whistle that flies so buoyantly out of the mouth of a Marketer lands like a brick on the soul of the Programmer. Often they have been trained (by Marketing outbursts) that "this will all be over quicker" if they just shut up and absorb the fantasies. But sometimes even the most stoic techies reach their breaking point. You can feel the ancient word coming from somewhere deep in their brainstem...."NO!" they finally cry.
Forgotten all too often in this power-struggle is...you guessed it: the user.
There's not an easy solution that will make Marketing and Technology hold hands and skip down the report design path. Yet, you can reduce some of the strife if you are clear about key ideas like WHO is going to use the report, WHAT they need to know, and HOW they are likely to look for answers.
Not exactly earth-shaking, I know. But I also know it's a step that is forgotten much of the time. Try it next time...take 20 minutes to really thinking about and prioritize the users' needs. You might be amazed at the outcome.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
How Now Dow Jow...er Jones
I'm confused about the fascination with the Dow Jones Index on the nightly news and water cooler conversations. It's a barometer of sorts, sure. But it's hardly the most representative. And while currently it sucks and the economy sucks (sorry, technical terms, stay with me)...it's not like the DJI causes economic problems or necessarily reflects them.
I'm not trying to say everything is peachy - every indicator is in a bad place right now. But why does DJI have a choke hold on our national psyche? Especially considering the fact that many of the people who rattle off the "number at the bell" don't really have much in the stock market anyway. If the average net worth in this country is negative (i.e., families owe more than they own)...then the DJI's trajectory is interesting, but not that compelling, eh?
I own mutual funds, and I've watched them shrink dramatically -- but I still plan to continue buying. "Buy low" right? Beats the alternative: locking in those losses.
There's two polar opposite outcomes here...first, the whole thing collapses into a pile of ruble in which case my portfolio, whether in a stock or cash position, will be as useful as Confederate bonds. OR, and I admit I think this more likely, there's a recovery somewhere down the path, in which case, staying in is the right choice.
But I digress...my really point of this was WHY is the DJI the touchstone? Just because it's quick and easy? People think they understand it (though I imagine very few do).... I dunno, it just seems weird to me that in a 180 min news update, the DJI numbers get spat out as if they had great impact on our daily lives. Or maybe I'm missing something....
I'm not trying to say everything is peachy - every indicator is in a bad place right now. But why does DJI have a choke hold on our national psyche? Especially considering the fact that many of the people who rattle off the "number at the bell" don't really have much in the stock market anyway. If the average net worth in this country is negative (i.e., families owe more than they own)...then the DJI's trajectory is interesting, but not that compelling, eh?
I own mutual funds, and I've watched them shrink dramatically -- but I still plan to continue buying. "Buy low" right? Beats the alternative: locking in those losses.
There's two polar opposite outcomes here...first, the whole thing collapses into a pile of ruble in which case my portfolio, whether in a stock or cash position, will be as useful as Confederate bonds. OR, and I admit I think this more likely, there's a recovery somewhere down the path, in which case, staying in is the right choice.
But I digress...my really point of this was WHY is the DJI the touchstone? Just because it's quick and easy? People think they understand it (though I imagine very few do).... I dunno, it just seems weird to me that in a 180 min news update, the DJI numbers get spat out as if they had great impact on our daily lives. Or maybe I'm missing something....
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Big Box of Apathy
So, yeah, the economy is crashing around our ears and consumer confidence is lower than ever. Wouldn't ya think that retailers would rally their troops - get their front line employees (oh, pardon me: associates) to wake up and start treating active customers better? Wouldn't you take a moment to explain that the consumer who actually drives to their charming concrete haven has a lot of choices and should be given, if not respect, at least eye contact?
I visited 3 large retailers today, looking for electronics item that can cost $70-300. In none of these locations was I offered any help as I shifted from foot to foot comparing the options. And in all 3 of these retailers, the out-of-stock in this category was about 60%. So even if I was able to discern my choice from the cryptic shelf "talkers" (ha!), there was a good probability the one I wanted was not available.
I've been involved in some form of retail for more than 20 years. I get out-of-stocks. I get the challenge of conveying a message from the ivory tower down to the front lanes. I get the balance required to offer assistance to those who want it without being overly cloying to those who are "just browsing, thanks." I get it. Really.
But I also get that there is a bloodbath happening as we speak in retail. Too many stores, too much inventory, and too many employees who don't give a flying fig what I want, if I can find it, or if I'm happy with my shopping "experience."
What would it take? Here's a couple suggestions:
1. Demand that the floor associates to make eye contact.
Target recently initiated a policy (or at least the stores in my area seem to have) where every time an employee crosses paths with a shopper he or she looks them in eye and asks, "Can I help you find something." 99% of the time, my answer is no, but this is a huge improvement over chasing down the retreating back of a red shirt as it rushed on some internally critical task. At the very worst of the Big Box retailers I visited today, not only did I not get eye contact, when I finally found a person, he took out his walkie-talkie to have in internal discussion with another employee. Maybe he was in the middle of helping another customer, I give you that possibility -- but he neither acknowledged me or suggested that he'd be available to help in a moment. In fact he simply walked away.
2. Insist that the floor associates to stop talking to each other.
This one kills me. One store brand seems particularly bad at this -- and their associates hover around endcaps like 1950's steno gals around the water cooler. Asking them for help results in blistering sighs and eye rolls---as if you had to interrupt the cool kids after gym class to get to your locker back in 7th grade. I'm glad they enjoy their co-workers' company...but if they don't wake up to the fact that the SHOPPER PAYS THEIR SALARY, they are going to enjoy standing in the unemployment line when their company closes down.
3. Empower the greeter to identify frustrations ...and solve
Several retailers have people sitting or standing at the front door -- ostensibly to greet the shopper, but also as a line of defense, I imagine, on shoplifting. In one of my frustrating visits, I caught the greeter's eye and said "sure would have been nice to get some help in here." She replied, sarcastically, "have a nice day." The stores are big and the floor personnel is spread thin. It's certainly possible to not cross paths with someone during your stroll thru the aisles---but, why couldn't the "greeter" have served me with her little walkie-talkie, saying "I'm sorry, let me get you someone to help." Why? because she didn't care.
You can blame the economy all you want. Life sucks, yadda yadda. But here are people who have jobs. Here is a consumer with cash in her pocket wanting to buy an item, and willing to upsold if someone can explain the difference between the $70 and $300 version. You'd think it would be a match made in heaven. But no. I wasted gas driving to several places and ultimately bought the cheapest version that was in-stock at Big Box #3.
Yup, these are the time that try men's souls. These are also the times that can make a retailer stand out, if they take the time to give true direction to their front line representatives. And, Mr. or Ms. Retailer, if you discover your current employees really don't care -- go hire new ones.
We are reminded daily in the media: It's a buyer's market on hiring. So why aren't you hiring people who want to be there and want to help?
I visited 3 large retailers today, looking for electronics item that can cost $70-300. In none of these locations was I offered any help as I shifted from foot to foot comparing the options. And in all 3 of these retailers, the out-of-stock in this category was about 60%. So even if I was able to discern my choice from the cryptic shelf "talkers" (ha!), there was a good probability the one I wanted was not available.
I've been involved in some form of retail for more than 20 years. I get out-of-stocks. I get the challenge of conveying a message from the ivory tower down to the front lanes. I get the balance required to offer assistance to those who want it without being overly cloying to those who are "just browsing, thanks." I get it. Really.
But I also get that there is a bloodbath happening as we speak in retail. Too many stores, too much inventory, and too many employees who don't give a flying fig what I want, if I can find it, or if I'm happy with my shopping "experience."
What would it take? Here's a couple suggestions:
1. Demand that the floor associates to make eye contact.
Target recently initiated a policy (or at least the stores in my area seem to have) where every time an employee crosses paths with a shopper he or she looks them in eye and asks, "Can I help you find something." 99% of the time, my answer is no, but this is a huge improvement over chasing down the retreating back of a red shirt as it rushed on some internally critical task. At the very worst of the Big Box retailers I visited today, not only did I not get eye contact, when I finally found a person, he took out his walkie-talkie to have in internal discussion with another employee. Maybe he was in the middle of helping another customer, I give you that possibility -- but he neither acknowledged me or suggested that he'd be available to help in a moment. In fact he simply walked away.
2. Insist that the floor associates to stop talking to each other.
This one kills me. One store brand seems particularly bad at this -- and their associates hover around endcaps like 1950's steno gals around the water cooler. Asking them for help results in blistering sighs and eye rolls---as if you had to interrupt the cool kids after gym class to get to your locker back in 7th grade. I'm glad they enjoy their co-workers' company...but if they don't wake up to the fact that the SHOPPER PAYS THEIR SALARY, they are going to enjoy standing in the unemployment line when their company closes down.
3. Empower the greeter to identify frustrations ...and solve
Several retailers have people sitting or standing at the front door -- ostensibly to greet the shopper, but also as a line of defense, I imagine, on shoplifting. In one of my frustrating visits, I caught the greeter's eye and said "sure would have been nice to get some help in here." She replied, sarcastically, "have a nice day." The stores are big and the floor personnel is spread thin. It's certainly possible to not cross paths with someone during your stroll thru the aisles---but, why couldn't the "greeter" have served me with her little walkie-talkie, saying "I'm sorry, let me get you someone to help." Why? because she didn't care.
You can blame the economy all you want. Life sucks, yadda yadda. But here are people who have jobs. Here is a consumer with cash in her pocket wanting to buy an item, and willing to upsold if someone can explain the difference between the $70 and $300 version. You'd think it would be a match made in heaven. But no. I wasted gas driving to several places and ultimately bought the cheapest version that was in-stock at Big Box #3.
Yup, these are the time that try men's souls. These are also the times that can make a retailer stand out, if they take the time to give true direction to their front line representatives. And, Mr. or Ms. Retailer, if you discover your current employees really don't care -- go hire new ones.
We are reminded daily in the media: It's a buyer's market on hiring. So why aren't you hiring people who want to be there and want to help?
Thursday, January 22, 2009
We Rig the Game Ourselves
Today I was reading a editorial on YAHOO! Finance called "Putting an End to Magical Thinking" by Laura Rowley. It's an interesting essay, and I like the point it makes about the twisted American Dream ("Magical thinking can be defined as a perversion of traditional American optimism. Magical thinking is the can-do attitude without the do.")
You can read it here: http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/moneyhappy/136030
I agree that a scary sense of entitlement is one of the roots of the current economic woes. Both at the highest level of corporate America and in the most average Joe Schmoe. You can find it in people of all ages, races, education levels, and social strata. And, yes, it's exacerbated by reality TV shows were contests whine that they "deserve it because they want it so badly" -- as if your just deserts were correlated to your heart's desires.
Don't get me wrong. I grasp that we don't live in a meritocracy (as much as I wish we did). And who you know often trumps what you know. And people do get breaks (good and bad) along the way. At the same time....there is, IMHO, a huge correlation between effort and result. And the fact that someone may have won the lottery (literally or in terms of wealth, beauty, or intelligence) doesn't UNDO the fact that we each have our own lever in this world - our determination and perseverence.
The reason I started this rant is one of the responses that was posted to the YAHOO! essay. Someone's post included: "The game is rigged, and you will never be wealthy if you are at all honest and hard working."
That belief makes my soul ache.
Yes, the game is rigged, but not by "the man" or some power outside of us. This person has rigged his or her own game with a mindset that says "I am broke; therefore, I am honest." Hard-wire that into your brain, and you'll never be anything but broke.
I despise the oft heard "trusim" that anyone with money must have cheated, lied, or stealed to get it. Yes, some people did all those things, and I believe they will find a true reward for their behavior in the end (the very, very end).
On the other hand, many millions of people around the world have money because they worked, planned, saved, and made hard choices rather than using easy-credit to expedite an American Dream built on a rotten foundation.
The self-imposed, self-limiting beliefs we carry with us (some burnt in by our parents, some by culture/media, and some self-rationalizations we created ourselves)... these are the "truths" that stop us from using our innate talents, human creativity, and a dollop of discipine to create the life we want, rather than the life the Visa commercials tell us we deserve.
That's my two cents. And those two cents are in the bank earning a whopping 1.45% interest; does that make me evil?
You can read it here: http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/moneyhappy/136030
I agree that a scary sense of entitlement is one of the roots of the current economic woes. Both at the highest level of corporate America and in the most average Joe Schmoe. You can find it in people of all ages, races, education levels, and social strata. And, yes, it's exacerbated by reality TV shows were contests whine that they "deserve it because they want it so badly" -- as if your just deserts were correlated to your heart's desires.
Don't get me wrong. I grasp that we don't live in a meritocracy (as much as I wish we did). And who you know often trumps what you know. And people do get breaks (good and bad) along the way. At the same time....there is, IMHO, a huge correlation between effort and result. And the fact that someone may have won the lottery (literally or in terms of wealth, beauty, or intelligence) doesn't UNDO the fact that we each have our own lever in this world - our determination and perseverence.
The reason I started this rant is one of the responses that was posted to the YAHOO! essay. Someone's post included: "The game is rigged, and you will never be wealthy if you are at all honest and hard working."
That belief makes my soul ache.
Yes, the game is rigged, but not by "the man" or some power outside of us. This person has rigged his or her own game with a mindset that says "I am broke; therefore, I am honest." Hard-wire that into your brain, and you'll never be anything but broke.
I despise the oft heard "trusim" that anyone with money must have cheated, lied, or stealed to get it. Yes, some people did all those things, and I believe they will find a true reward for their behavior in the end (the very, very end).
On the other hand, many millions of people around the world have money because they worked, planned, saved, and made hard choices rather than using easy-credit to expedite an American Dream built on a rotten foundation.
The self-imposed, self-limiting beliefs we carry with us (some burnt in by our parents, some by culture/media, and some self-rationalizations we created ourselves)... these are the "truths" that stop us from using our innate talents, human creativity, and a dollop of discipine to create the life we want, rather than the life the Visa commercials tell us we deserve.
That's my two cents. And those two cents are in the bank earning a whopping 1.45% interest; does that make me evil?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
