Lip Service or Actual Service?

Many ideas grow better when transplanted into another mind than the one where they sprang up. - Oliver Wendell Holmes

The secret is to gang up on the problem, rather than each other. - Thomas Stallkamp

I must create a system or be enslaved by another man’s; I will not reason and compare: my business is to create. - William Blake

While my blog writing has taken a backseat to a number of personal and professional projects over the last couple of years, I’m always intrigued by the stats of my readership and the reaction to my blog posts.

While I have mused on many things over the years including but not limited to inspirational stuff, business thoughts, strategic planning, tactical execution, warnings to society and such, by far the single largest group of readers and the largest amount of emotion that I generate come from posts where I call politicians out for doing something inappropriate against the best interests of the people they claim to serve or for allowing themselves to be placed in a position of compromise to the detriment of themselves, their staff or the people they claim to serve.

While many people have egos that would be inflated by the reaction I get from such posts, I am largely unaffected by the praise (or criticism) I receive because I write the posts for strategic, ethical and moral reasons and not for ego-based ones.

The other complexity from such posts is that many readers who are inspired by such posts think I write them because I enjoy skewering people (thus fitting into something they like to do).  If they knew me personally, they would know that such beliefs are a gross misunderstanding of who I am.

The reality is that I don’t skewer people purposefully and I don’t enjoy the fact that it may appear to be my intention.  In fact, the reason I write such posts is not to skewer the individual but to invite a correction or enhancement of behavior with an idea towards creating a better result.  It is not my place to judge an individual although it may appear that I am doing just that when I critique their behavior – I leave it to Someone greater than I to judge the individual.

And so the majority of people who like such posts fall, sadly, into one or more of the following groups.

Group One – The Call to Action Ends With Lip Service

Many people love to complain and to have their complaint heard, whether in the coffee shop, in public demonstrations or on social media.  Ask people to take additional measurable action to correct what upsets them and suddenly there is silence in the room.

Try telling these people that their frustration will grow unabated if they don’ take measurable action (instead of mistaking complaining alone for action), and they don’t hear you – they’ve already moved on to the next complaint or person who supports their complaint-centric model of execution.  Many of these people also seek to be offended so that their need to complain finds a justification to attach itself to.  As the old adage goes – some people aren’t happy unless they’re miserable.

Group Two – I Have Too Much to Risk – I Need You To Take a Stand

A lot of people send complaints, salacious comments, “dirt” or insider information to me and other people who are not afraid to use their voice and ask, implore or demand that I / we reveal it.  When I inform them that stuff of importance to them should be revealed by them, I am told that “I’ve got too much to risk – you have to do it” (this includes people who serve on boards who discover inappropriate or illegal behavior and demand that people like me reveal it because they are “too important” to be involved in the imminent explosion).

I / we have things to risk also and what is a priority to someone else may not be a priority to me / us (and there is always the risk that someone else’s “irrefutable data” may be so vaporous as to put people like myself and others at risk).

By the way, this group also includes the people who believe that they can solve problems by bashing people while hiding behind anonymous social media accounts, email accounts, etc.  Standing up for what you believe in has more credibility when you are willing to be identified.

Group Three – I’m Too Busy

If you’re literally too busy, then it means that the thing you are complaining about is less important than other things that occupy your day. 

If that is the case, honor such priorities and stop complaining since we should put our time, energy and money into our priorities and avoid the things that distract us from those priorities.

Group Four – I’m Not _________ Enough (insert connected, strong, etc.)

History is filled with people that on first blush would have been considered not influential enough, smart enough, connected enough, etc.  Ask the Google god for examples – they are too numerous to list here.

Group Five – I’m Too Lazy, I’m Not Focused, My Own Purpose in Life is not Defined

Rarely admitted by people who suffer from such random execution, their Life is like a guided missile roaming around looking for a target.  Complaining is easy and requires little effort – strategic, intelligent and purposeful execution is neither.  Enough said.

I’m sure there are other groups that people fight to be members of through their preference for complaining over action and results.

While specifics about what defines the reasons for inaction vary, we rarely solve problems by merely fretting or complaining about them or by mistaking any activity (including complaining) for productivity.

The Bottom Line

Unless you’re in a country where participating in a public demonstration can get you shot or imprisoned, it takes little courage to participate in such actions.  Although the actions may initially be useful, they require follow-up action in many situations to become truly effective.

Unless you choose to do something highly illegal, immoral or unethical (translation: something highly ignorant) by threatening people using social media, complaining on social media rarely accomplishes much.  Social media has its place as a tool for sharing information or executing a call to action but action is still necessary after the “recruits” show up.  In such situations, action is more than a hashtag.

Complaining in coffee shops will do little more than cause you to eat too many donuts or drink too much coffee.

Action matters.

Results matter.

Find a way to collaborate and if collaboration is rejected, ignored or soundly attacked, then find other strategic, intelligent and purposeful ways to accomplish your objective and create solutions in the world.

If you’re not interested in bringing your time, energy, talents, strengths, skills, knowledge (and yes, sometimes money) to the table to create solutions, please stop complaining.  There’s enough useless, purposeless, negative noise in the world – don’t add to it.

If you’re complaining because in reality, you can’t honestly answer the questions “Who am I?”, “What do I stand for?”, “Why do I exist?”, “Where am I going?” and “How can I make the world a better place with the gifts that I have?” and your energy is therefore being misdirected into complaining or other negative behavior out of frustration over a misdirected Life, please find someone who can help you answer those questions in a healthy way.  You and the world will be better off as a result.

The Bottom Bottom Line

If I’m going to finish my day exhausted, having put every ounce of energy I have into creating what is within my reach to create, is it better to do so having moved the world the tiniest measure closer to something better or to have exhausted myself and those around me with meaningless complaints?

How do you like to view your results for the day?

How would you like others to view your results?

Does it matter or are you preparing to complain that you don’t like what I just said?

Create a great day because merely having one is too passive an experience.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

PS: I am entertaining an experiment with an offer to a specific group of people.  I will add additional info here when the experiment is complete.

The Next Major Epidemic in America – The Inability To Express Ideas

Those who cannot understand how to put their thoughts on ice should not enter into the heat of debate. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. - John Adams

Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - Mark Twain

As was to be expected last night, the President’s State of the Union address produced mixed opinion.  However, I didn’t see clear lines separating the two sides as I would have expected, especially the line allegedly dividing the left and the right.  (I say allegedly because I often see people arguing for the same idea when they believe they are representing opposite sides to an issue).

The line I saw represented the difference between people willing to give the President a chance or to at least analyze the data / fact side of his proposals before commenting versus those who wanted to hate or trash him simply for the emotional sake of doing so.

I was discussing his speech with a friend of mine and the importance of fact checking his speech without blindly discarding it when a person I have never met tossed this interesting statement into the conversation, claiming that President Trump’s policies will adversely impact women’s health as well as clean air and water.

The statement in itself is fair enough – someone is using their right to express an opinion.

However, as past and current teams who have worked with and for me know, any statement or position provided to me will always be responded to with:

Why do you say / do / recommend / believe this?

How do you know?

In fact, they know that they should have the answers to these questions before presenting any statement or solution to me.

And so in that spirit, I responded with a request for data.

One never knows what one will receive on social media when requesting facts but I will always give a person a chance to explain themselves and their positions.

The person responded by saying that that President chose an EPA Administrator who wants to get rid of the EPA.

Fair enough.  When I again asked for evidence that this was the case and for evidence that women’s health issues would arise from the POTUS’ policies, this person responded that they feared the total elimination of the EPA.

Ok – we’ve already established that this is her fear but she cited the problem itself as evidence to justify the reality of the problem.

So after I requested proof that the EPA would be eliminated (her words), she indicated that no one could predict the future (but she had already done so by predicting the elimination of the EPA) and that asking for data was a ridiculous standard.

When I asked her why asking for data was a ridiculous standard, she fell back on an old trick, turning the debate around so suddenly I was supposedly the one who had made a statement that required supporting evidence.

So now I need to prove she is wrong, even though she hasn’t proven that her large claims have any data or evidence to support them.

But it was the final part of the conversation that caused me to realize that this “discussion” wasn’t really going anywhere useful.

When I pointed out that she had claimed that the EPA was dead (eliminated was her exact word), she responded with a denial that she had ever said such a thing.

When I sent her a screen shot where she contradicted herself by claiming it would be eliminated and that we were now in a circular argument, she vanished.

Meanwhile, someone observing the interaction sent me a private note telling me that perhaps I should stay off social media.

To this person, I ask this question:

Why – so that emotion-laden, rhetoric-armed, fact-less people can roam around, inject themselves into conversations, attempt to whip up hysteria / fear and then vanish when presented with a request for facts or proof that their alleged reality is mine also?

In other words ….

So that opposite sides to every issue will be eliminated by being whipped into silence?

I was curious who this person was and so I looked up her personal persona.

It turns out that this person is the Senior Director of International Compensation and Benefits at Visa (a very credible, respectable organization).  She was educated at Cornell so lack of education is not the issue neither does she represent the “bored unemployed directionless” group that some people suggest represents the bulk of anti-Trump folks.

So she has influence – the question then became “does she use this influence in a useful, effective way?”

In exploring her other public sharings about how happy she was to be marching against President Trump, I came upon this nugget that she shared

And so as I looked at her Facebook posts about all the marches she is participating in, her drive-by argument with me that produced nothing of any benefit to anyone and this cartoon, I realize that she is representative of something that is killing America:

The lack of ability or interest to use facts and data in the form of a compelling discussion that convinces someone else that their position / belief is worthy of exploration with an eye towards convincing someone else to change their position or at least encourage people to find middle ground on something being explored.

After all, that is how we grow, teach, learn and become better as a species and as a society as we seek common ground to make the world a better place.

When instead, we use emotion, fear (and for some, intimidation) only, we are less likely to convince anyone of anything and will produce little of any real, tangible value.

Meanwhile, the things we fear will continue to grow, either in reality or in our mind, since we are not actually offering solutions to problems real or imagined.

As for this person, if a person wonders out loud whether they are creating or destroying today, then I know what kind of person I am dealing with.

It’s a “my way or the highway” person.

The last time I checked, I haven’t discovered too many people who created a better world because they wondered which of two choices was best – creation or destruction.

How about you?

I prefer creation and collaboration towards a solution – perhaps I’m misguided.

The Bottom Line

The noise that surrounds the POTUS is not “his fault”.  America has been forgetting more and more over the years (and across many administrations) that we solve problems by offering a hand instead of a fist, by offering facts instead of emotion, by suggesting a position instead of playing “king of the mountain”, by listening instead of just talking (or shouting) and that respectful, fact-based, collaborative dialog is FAR more likely to produce a better world than merely folding our arms defiantly and telling everyone else they are wrong “just because”.

If we allow current trends to continue, where rhetoric-laden, fear-based shouting carries the day, we may at some point create a world that actually embodies everything that everyone fears.

And if that happens, shouting won’t matter then.

If that happens, we may not have a government that allows the sharing of opinions towards common goals.

In fact, we may not have a government at all.

And by then, people who like to complain can complain all they want.

The rest won’t listen – they will be too busy just surviving.

Is that the best we can create and the best way we can create it?

Is that the best role model we can present for our children as to how a better world gets created?

I don’t think so.

What do you think?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

PS People protesting against the POTUS’ policies “just because” like to quote people like Hillary Clinton or Nelson Mandela.  Perhaps these two quotes would serve of value to those people.

A good leader can engage in a debate frankly and thoroughly, knowing that at the end he and the other side must be closer, and thus emerge stronger. You don't have that idea when you are arrogant, superficial, and uninformed. - Nelson Mandela

What we have to do... is to find a way to celebrate our diversity and debate our differences without fracturing our communities. - Hillary Clinton

We need to take the high road together lest we all end up somewhere far less desirable that we want or deserve.

But to deserve better, we must prove it and work together towards it.

Otherwise, we do get what we deserve but it’s often far less than we desire.

Whose fault is that?

Civil Unrest in America: Trump Is Not the Problem - You Are

My core belief is that if you're complaining about something for more than three minutes, two minutes ago you should have done something about it. - Caitlin Moran

Complainers change their complaints, but they never reduce the amount of time spent in complaining. - Mason Cooley

I’ve received a lot of calls, emails, texts and social media messages in the last 24 hours from people citing all the violence “caused by Trump”.  Apparently there is a run on women, gays, Muslims and Latinos, all the fault of Trump, and as a result, people reaching out to me are freaked out that their nation has fallen.  Some even asked me what I was going to do about it, apparently anointing me with powers and influence that I was unaware I had.

If I had known that I had that much influence, I would have been tackling more important issues of the day – like why isn’t the McRib on the McDonald’s menu all the time?

Seriously …. unfortunately, most of the things they are talking about are not true.

One person who called me cited a hate crime against a Muslim woman that was allegedly inspired by Trump.  I asked the person for evidence and it was provided – “I saw the post on Facebook”.  I looked at the post, did a quick Google search and realized it was an old story that has been circulating around for a while, with the name of whose fault it was being the only thing that changed over the last few years.

I pointed this out and that the post was being distributed by a person who has a history of citing unrest with unsubstantiated stores that only they seem to know about and which are clearly filled with a venomous agenda.

Sensing an opportunity for education, I told the person about a story I had just heard in Foreffsakes, Alberta, where a bunch of oil drilling thugs (this person is also anti-oil) had beset upon a gay man and tattooed “Trump” on his forehead.

He demanded that I give him a link so he could share it immediately on Facebook.

I laughed and said, “I lied.  There is no such place as For F Sakes”, placing emphasis on the place name to highlight what I had done.

I explained, “You realize when you share an unsubstantiated story that is distributed by a person known only for sharing hateful things, then you are part of the problem in this world.  Instead of looking for solutions to real problems, you take alleged problems and blindly post them, sharing hate and not light, with no effort to actually diminishing the hate you claim to dislike.”

“By the way”, I continued, “If you are going to focus on agenda-centric hate, there is always someone hurting someone, black versus white, gay versus straight, one religion versus another, etc.  If you are going to make a Life out of merely sharing these stories without getting to root causes and cures, you are going to be a very busy, very bitter person.”

I guess he had hoped that I would give him an opinion that he wanted to hear and not what he needed to hear.

He hung up and horror of horrors, he unfriended me.

I was devastated.

Not really – but in a world where we are the company we keep, my personal network IQ average just went up as a result.

When a person shares hateful, unverified, venomous stories with no intention of checking out authenticity and without an eye towards answering the questions “How can I make this world better?” and “Does blindly sharing this make the world better or worse?”, I wonder one of two things:

1. Does this person have an agenda of their own?
2. Is this person so weak or easily manipulated that they are vulnerable to be used by others who have their own agenda?

Because anyone who can think on their own and who is actually focused on measurable actions that make the world a better place could surely see that such sharings accomplish nothing of the sort.

Meanwhile, people are protesting across the country, screaming “This is not my President” in reference to Trump.

Such delicate wallflowers who have gotten too used to an overly politically correct world where saying “boo” offends someone should realize one thing:

Trump, for better or for worse, was elected fairly in the greatest democratic process on Earth (despite all its shortcomings).  That is something to be championed and not complained about.  As I noted in the past, Americans complaining about their President-elect fail to recognize that the winner is not an aberration of their society but is in fact a product of it.  Given that, who else could win other than someone who represents a natural evolution of their society?  If someone doesn’t like the result of the election, rather than examine the winner, we must examine the system that produced the winner.

Because if we protest too long and too loud about not liking the result and insist on continuing to complain until we get a result we like (however long it takes), we might wake up some day and find that someone has taken away our right to protest or to choose a leader (see my musings on Executive Directive 51).

And then we will have something to scream about.

But by then, we won’t be allowed to use our voice.

The Bottom Line

A lot of things are right in our amazing world.

A lot of things are screwed up.

We make our world better when we cherish, share and magnify the things we do well and we take action against the things that we believe need to be fixed.

Merely pushing “Like” or “Share” on social media (especially when magnifying the problem with no effort towards a solution) doesn’t accomplish anything useful nor does screaming in the streets that “I’m affronted because I didn’t get my way” .

If you are not careful about finding answers and instead, merely promote problems, you will likely create the very things you are afraid of..  You can’t reclaim light and love by merely promoting hatred.

You have a voice – knowing how and when to use it effectively is what makes it a powerful tool for change.

Do you know how to use your voice?

Are you sure?

Because if you don’t know how to use it effectively for positive change, you are not part of the problem.

You are the problem.

Is that how you would like to be remembered?

Is that the best you can do for your family, your country and the world?

What do you intend to do about it?

When do you intend to start?

The world is waiting for you - what are you waiting for?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

PS Rex Murphy highlights in a calm, rational way, how Donald Trump won the election in this YouTube video. A disturbing and accurate reflection on politicians and the people who elect them.

---

Addendum - November 11, 2016

My great friend Keith G. shared this quote from Thic Nhat Hanh and an observation which I found important to share. It reads:

"When you plant lettuce, if it does not grow well, you don’t blame the lettuce. You look for reasons it is not doing well. It may need fertilizer, or more water, or less sun. You never blame the lettuce. Yet if we have problems with our friends or family, we blame the other person. But if we know how to take care of them, they will grow well, like the lettuce. Blaming has no positive effect at all, nor does trying to persuade using reason and argument. That is my experience. No blame, no reasoning, no argument, just understanding. If you understand, and you show that you understand, you can love, and the situation will change."

Keith then noted: Hate, blaming, violence will never lead to anything positive. We need to make the effort to understand each other. We’re all rational human beings and we all have our reasons. The more we understand, the more we can progress. We’re all in this together.

It is ironic (and sad) that on this day, November 11, 2016, when we pause to thank people (military and first responders) who sacrifice every day for us, that the US struggles with accepting the election of Donald Trump. Those who serve, whether in military or as a first responder, do things we wouldn't have the courage to do for people whom they will never meet so that we have the freedom to do as we please. While we must be careful to not take this freedom for granted nor the gift and the sacrifice of those who serve, people protest, not because a travesty of justice has been served, but because they didn't get their way.

In their effort to promote their fear of what could happen under a Trump government, they create the very thing they fear with protests that have turned violent, with flag burning and the like. It's as if to say, "If Trump wins, he will burn down the country - if he wins and the country doesn't burn down, then we will burn it down instead".

Where is the sense in that?

Where is the gratitude for those who have served and died, that we can be mature enough to collaborate towards a better world instead of being spoiled people who whine because we can't have our own way?

It doesn't take much courage to complain about not getting our own way and to lash out and hurt others under the guise of creating something better.

Where has the courage to do the right thing fled?

Thank a veteran today for his or her courage - these people set an example that, while we should be following, we seem to have lost sight of.

Let's work harder to rediscover the courage they showed (and show) - Lest We Forget.

---

Addendum 2 - Where Are the "Leaders"? - November 12, 2016

As the demonstrations grow larger and more violent, where are people like Hillary Clinton and Democrat Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, people who should be reaching out and asking for a proper sense of decorum during the transition of power?

Harry Reid is stirring up emotions with inflammatory remarks like this.

And Hillary Clinton is nowhere to be seen.

Neither are exhibiting the actions of a leader. Watching this blow up serves their need, even if at the expense of the people.

And so why do the minions follow them, blindly sharing unsubstantiated stories of hate to add fuel to the fire?

It doesn't matter to those in power - hatred is one of the most useful tools of manipulation and they are exploiting it to the fullest.

It's too bad that those who are manipulated aren't intelligent enough to see it.

The possibility of Executive Directive 51 looms closer.

If it gets invoked, it won't matter what your opinion is - you won't be allowed to share it.

For those who crave power, it won't matter either - they will have the power they seek.

Now that's something to collaborate together to prevent.

Politics and the Mutability of Human Values

(aka Bad Government – It’s Your Fault)

The foundation stones for a balanced success are honesty, character, integrity, faith, love and loyalty. - Zig Ziglar

Honesty is the best policy - when there is money in it. - Mark Twain

Honesty is the fastest way to prevent a mistake from turning into a failure. - James Altucher

My recent exploration of the by-election in Calgary-Foothills and the potential embellishment of education credentials by one of the candidates in the blog post PC Party and Blair Houston–Isn’t Honesty Still the Best Policy? has generated thousands of emails, private messages and texts to me (not all kind, professional and positive, may I add) and the reaction caused me to think about the general election currently underway in Canada.

In regards to the afore-mentioned by-election and my expression of concern regarding the potentially dishonest representation of education credentials by a candidate, I was told by Party execs and some MLAs that the resume embellishment is known but that it is important that the candidate stay in the race anyway without a public correction since officially addressing the issue may damage his chances.

This suggests to me that the human value of honesty is mutable and wavering within these individuals, being something that can be paraded around when convenient / useful but which can be modified or ignored when required.

But when one explores the larger political scene, is it any different for any political campaign on a municipal, provincial / state or federal level?

We have national politicians in Canada espousing the importance of legalizing pot, sending blankets to refugees in Syria and the like but I don’t hear many voters demanding specific, explicit, measurable, verifiable details regarding the economy, climate change, ever-escalating healthcare / education costs, privacy versus protection (anti-terror) legislation and the like.

And even when a candidate rolls out a half-baked answer or solution to something, it is often full of holes, has no data to back it up and oftentimes has nothing to it at all.

And yet we blindly accept everything without asking the candidate “What are the real issues?  Why do they matter?  What is your solution?  How do you know?”

And so political parties, politicians and their blind, Kool-Aid drinking minions continue to send us meaningless distractions which divert our attention away from the truth that most (not all) politicians are either ignorant, indifferent or incapable when it comes to serving the populace or creating solutions to the ever-growing list of “stuff” that needs to be addressed while it still can be addressed.

What does this say about politicians and political parties?

What does this say about us when, not if, we accept it?

Does such a stand on our part remove our right to complain when politicians let us down later, when we suddenly learn all over again that their values and ours, that our needs and their intentions, aren’t in alignment?

Why do we care more when the politician lets us down after being elected instead of caring more about the details regarding the candidates and their solutions / intentions before we elect them?

Why would we rather spend more time complaining after the fact instead of using our time productively during an election to produce the best government possible?

Why indeed.

The likely reason is that it is easier to blame someone else for the failures around us rather than take proactive steps to prevent them in the first place.

In other words, we are running short of personal responsibility when it comes to the issues that we face collectively and so it is easier to wait for the failure of someone else to manifest so that we can point a finger elsewhere instead of at ourselves.

The Bottom Line

Politicians rely on the apathy, indifference and ignorance of the electorate.

What does this say about them?

What does this say about us?

At what point will our apathy, indifference and ignorance produce a government that is actually incapable of solving our problems despite its best intentions because the problems are too large, varied, complex and interwoven?

Why do we tempt fate by potentially allowing such a scenario to be created?

Maybe we have already reached (or passed) that point and politicians have merely become feel-good, “the future is always bright” mouthpieces to serve their own needs and intentions, knowing that our needs are already unsolvable but selling us a bright future can satisfy their own desires.

Would you know the difference between promised solutions and realistic ones?

Would you bet your family’s security and well-being on your answer?

Do you care?

Are you sure?

How do you know?

It takes more than a vote to create a positive future.

It takes an intelligent, informed vote.

And last time I checked, there seems to be a significant shortage of those,

Because in the end, when ineffective, incompetent or dishonest politicians and governments are elected, it’s not their fault.

It’s ours.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Reaction and Anticipation–Choosing Simplicity Over Complexity

It’s not stress that kills us, it is our reaction to it. - Hans Selye

I believe that people make their own luck by great preparation and good strategy. - Jack Canfield

Some years ago when car bumpers were still metal, my uncle’s car engine had died and he needed a “boost” to restart the engine. When he and my father discovered that they had only one wire available instead of the typical two required to boost a vehicle, their initial thought was that boosting the engine was impossible.  My father came up with the idea of pushing the two cars together until their bumpers touched, connecting the one wire they had between the positive leads on the batteries of the two cars and relying on the hope that the cars were both grounded through their chassis (and bumpers). The idea was that this would allow them to coax the dead car battery back to Life.

They were right and my uncle was able to return home without further incident.

Some years before that, my father’s father was asked by a local merchant to build a chimney.  The merchant in question had a reputation for not paying for work delivered and despite the pleas of many of my grandfather’s friends to not perform the work for fear of being taken advantage of, my grandfather built the chimney anyway.

Upon completion of the chimney, the merchant hemmed and hawed about paying for it as he looked for things to point out that he wasn’t happy with.  He then proceeded to light a fire in the fireplace and was startled when smoke from the fire came back into his house instead of being carried up the chimney.  Looking up the chimney, he saw no obvious issues and went to my grandfather to express his dissatisfaction.

My grandfather indicated that if he was paid for the work he had performed, he would fix the chimney immediately and the merchant grudgingly complied with the request.  Upon accepting the money, my grandfather climbed up onto the roof with a large, flat beach rock in his hand.  Centering the rock over the top of the chimney, he released it and as it fell through the chimney, it smashed the thin pane of glass that my grandfather had intentionally placed across the chimney about halfway down when he had built it.

Both stories remind me of the beauty of simplicity in either solving a problem spontaneously or anticipating a simple solution to a problem perceived to be difficult by others.

The Bottom Line

We live in a world that seems to be filled with complexity and as a result, we either respond to problems with the assumption that such problems always require complex solutions or we go through Life ignoring the importance of being prepared for problems by having simple solutions at hand.

The belief that every problem requires a complex solution or that the anticipation of a problem forces us to avoid preparation because we don’t want to be bothered with embracing additional complexity in fact creates the very complexity that we are attempting to avoid.

As a long-time Wall St / Fortune 25 strategy and large-scale technology architect guy, I can state with certainty that even the most complex of things are nothing more than a combination of many simple things which can be more easily resolved on their individual merit.

The question around simplicity versus complexity becomes:

Why would we willingly embrace complexity in our Lives when better Paths to simplicity exist and why would we allow others to create complexity for us or convince us that complexity is necessary?

Each of us has an answer to this question.

Hopefully it is not more complicated than it needs to be.

How would you answer the question?

Are you sure?

How do you know?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

PS For many of my clients, I recommend the process of backcasting to translate complex intentions into simple solutions.  An example of how backcasting is used can be found here and here.

---

Is Calgary Doomed To Collapse?

The doom of a nation can be averted only by a storm of flowing passion, but only those who are passionate themselves can arouse passion in others. - Adolf Hitler

You can calm down now.  I like the quote because it speaks many truths even though the person to whom the quote is attributed to was a monster.

When Joe Arvai (@DecisionLab) suggested in a Globe and Mail piece that data points to the possibility that Calgary could follow the path of Detroit into oblivion, he upset a lot of people also.

I agree they should be upset but not in the revengeful, caustic way some of them have been towards him.

It’s because his data should be a wakeup call, a call to use data to either prove him wrong OR to prove him right, the latter being followed by a strategic plan to create a stronger future.

It’s like getting upset with your car because the brake light has come on.  The sensors are merely using the data available to suggest that there may be a problem if corrective action is not taken and a warning light comes on as a result.  Yelling at the light itself serves no valuable purpose whatsoever.

We live in a curious world where realities and rationalized myths compete for our attention.

Politicians, diplomats and corporate leaders sell us the mantra that the world continues to get better and better and that anyone who would say anything to the contrary is a pessimist. 

I posit that many pessimists are in fact realists who acknowledge that the world is a beautiful place but who also recognize that such beauty could be interrupted or lost if we don’t choose to fix things that threaten it.

They are optimistic realists (or realistic optimists).

Consider these items ….

1. Airline security keeps the amateur from doing something stupid to us.  However, there are plenty of opportunities for the professional terrorist (or idiot) to take down a plane or gain access to the “impenetrable cockpit”.  We know that acknowledging this will severely hamper the aviation industry (and thus the economy overall) and so we don’t talk about it.

2. As long as nuclear and bio weapons exist in the world, there is the potential for us to wipe ourselves out either accidentally, purposefully or through the acts of a third party (e.g. a cyber attack that deploys the weapons).  We invent useless things like duck-and-cover to help people feel safe in the meantime.

3. Our national and international infrastructure (including the distribution of food, water, energy and other critical services) is at high risk  for compromise for a number of reasons.  Talking about it makes people too nervous … and so we don’t.

4. We cannot protect ourselves from terrorist attacks (including on a large scale) unless we are prepared to give up 100% of our freedom.  We insist on having both our freedom and our safety, a mutual exclusivity that is impossible to create and so the results are predictable.  However, we reserve the right to act surprised / affronted when an event occurs.

5. Wall St. and our government financial models remain a ticking time bomb, filled with unsustainable practices that benefit the minority while punishing the majority when the occasional hiccup (artificial, accidental or intentional) occurs.  Sooner or later, the hiccup will be really big but we dismiss such talk as gloom and doom – we are told to be grateful to “live for today”.

6. Built-in obsolescence, while driving our economy quite nicely, is ultimately unsustainable for the economy or the planet.  We do a little recycling to show how this small act has somehow saved the planet.

7. There is no emergency preparedness plan for the masses should a large-scale emergency take place.  There are many ideas that will be tested during an event and there will be political rhetoric during and after an event about “how we rose to the occasion” but so far we have been lucky. A Life built entirely around luck eventually encounters a patch of bad luck.

8. 80+% of the IT systems being built today are garbage, being overcomplicated by over zealous architects, being little understood by developers who rely more on their tools than their brains, are too lightly tested “because we’re in a hurry”, etc.  People who refute such suggestions point to the great frameworks, architecture and processes they embrace while being silent about how their projects run way over budget, extend well past their implementation deadlines, are largely untested, are routinely compromised, etc.  Since much of our society runs on these systems, this also a fundamental problem that we choose not to talk about.

Examples such as these aren’t examples of pessimism.  They are examples of reality.

There is also no irony lost in the fact that people who bring these things up with the intention of making the nation stronger end up on the same watch lists as those who would seek to tear our nation down. 

Paranoia under the guise of preparedness doesn’t discriminate. :-)

We can choose to ignore examples such as these, knowing that statistics, stupidity, greed or Murphy’s Law will eventually catch up to us.  We can also label people who discuss such things as pessimists like those who criticized Prime Minister Chamberlain’s famous “Peace for our time” quote only to be proven right a year later when World War 2 erupted.

Voltaire noted the problem of ignoring reality when he said:

Everything's fine today, that is our illusion.

When someone appears with data that suggests that something needs to be fixed, it is ok to get passionate about such warnings.

In fact, getting passionate about them is often a good thing as long as we use our passion to objectively verify the existence of the problem, validate a solution if necessary and take action where appropriate instead of engaging in a game of “shoot the messenger” just because the messenger’s data has created a sense of unease that we would rather turn our back on.

Data offered in theory requires data to challenge it.

Only then will we know if the person who proposed the original theory is wrong, insane or an absolute pessimist or if that person is a realist who is merely trying to save us.

When the “brake light of society” comes on, we must have experts examine the data that illuminated it to determine if it is merely a “faulty sensor” or if something actually needs to be corrected.

Because merely yelling at the warning light doesn’t solve anything and could produce a result that, while potentially fatal, could or should have been prevented.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Addendum – December 10, 2013

Edmund Burke once said:

Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it.

Hegel more pragmatically / critically said (roughly translated):

History teaches us that history teaches us nothing.

I’d like to add my own variation:

History teaches us that we choose to learn nothing until forced to and then we relive history. Unfortunately, relearning history is like the pendulum in "The Pit and the Pendulum"- every swing gets a little lower and a little closer to producing finality.

Canadian Senate: Choosing Solutions Poorly

You must never underestimate your opposition. - John Scarlett

Do not underestimate the determination of a quiet man. - Iain Duncan Smith

A few years ago, I was having a problem with my vehicle transmission where it was shifting sluggishly and making unusual noises.  Since it was still under warranty, I brought it into the dealership and explained my concern.  They said they could see nothing wrong and returned the vehicle.

As the problem got worse (and louder), I brought it into the dealership twice more and twice the vehicle was returned with an “all good” designation.

When the vehicle was 90 miles past the warranty, the transmission failed completely.

As a dedicated customer of more than 20 years, I complained to no avail to the dealer and corporate HQ and was informed that my only options were to buy a refurbished transmission for $2500 or a new one for $4000.  Not wanting to take a chance on a refurbished one, I paid $4000 for a new one.

It lasted a single day before failing.  When the dealership took it apart, they discovered that it had failed because an extra washer (a part costing a few pennies) had been added incorrectly at the factory. They took the transmission apart, repaired it and reassembled it.

Meanwhile, I now protested that I was in fact getting a refurbished one since it had only lasted one day before having to be rebuilt by the dealership and I should be refunded the difference.

It didn’t matter to the dealership or the national brand and I was left with a decision.

I could sue somebody for $4000.

Or I could do something much more expensive to the brand.

When I had purchased this vehicle, more than 40 other people had purchased the same vehicle on my recommendation, to the tune of more than $1.6 million.  As a matter of fact, every time I buy a new vehicle, many people follow my lead and buy the same vehicle on my exuberant recommendation.

And so when I shared across my network what had happened, these same people chose another brand when they bought their next car.

Cost to me – $4000.

Cost to the brand – A couple of million within my immediate network, plus the cost within my 2nd degree network, etc.

They thought that forcing me to pay $4000 was a smart solution on their part.

They had underestimated the power and reach of the customer they were ignoring

Meanwhile at the Senate …….

For the sake of a couple of hundred thousand dollars in allegedly inappropriate spending, Canada now has a Senate and a Parliament spending an inordinate number of cycles, paying an inordinate number of consultants and auditors and everything else to “make it go away”.

I’m willing to bet that the cost of the solution has already far outstripped the cost of the problem – at least the problem that we are aware of. <<Case in point – CBC Report: Senate expense audits cost taxpayers $528K>>

Equally as important, the impact on the perception of the Senate, the impact on the PMO and the impact on Prime Minister Harper himself remains unknown but potentially very expensive since it appears that we haven’t seen the last of the bombshell revelations.

The issues with the Senators are a symptom of a larger problem in the Canadian Senate – problems that will not get solved in the theatrics, diplomatic time wasting, obfuscation and evasion that is currently in progress in the Senate and Parliament.

The Government of Canada needs to get on top of these issues in a manner that appeals to the public – with transparency, with haste and with a long-term solutions that makes sense to “the customer” – the electorate.

The “transmission” of the Canadian Government is not shifting well and is making a lot more noise than it should be.

I think someone needs to fix it soon before the customer seeks another brand that offers a better solution.  The other brand may not actually be able to deliver a better solution – but we won’t discover that until we buy their product.

What do you think?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Governments, Solutions and Citizen Expectations

As the Province of Alberta moves past the initial phase of shock and survival of the disastrous floods of 2013 and proceeds to recovery and rebuilding, the inevitable debates are arising as to which solutions will work best moving forward.

For people who wonder why solutions don’t manifest magically or why problems couldn’t have been prevented, whether for the flood in Alberta, the bankruptcy of Detroit, the decaying confidence of the US government at home and abroad, the struggling economy, etc., they should consider the following.

A simple, effective, proactive solution to prevent all of our problems in the future must factor in the following.

Definition and agreement upon the solution:

- Think it’s easy? Ask a bunch of kids to decide where they want to go for dinner.  Take that complexity and multiply it a bazillion-fold.

- Oftentimes, people can’t agree on the definition of the problem and so they never get to defining the solution.

- Who defines the group of people who define the problem and solution? That argument alone can take months or years to solve.

Assuming that a problem and solution have been identified, define  …

Solution cost:

- partial solution cost

- full solution cost

Risk of solution choice, accepting that cost is balanced against the risk of implementing / not implementing, return on investment, etc.:

- no solution

- a partial solution

- a full solution

Cost types including but not limited to:

- capital cost

- administrative cost

- social cost

- productivity cost

- GDP impact, nationally and internationally

- personal, national and international security cost

- individual, corporate and government privacy impact

- health of the individual and “the system”

- reputation cost

Reputation cost, many which are maddeningly difficult to measure yet impact us deeply, include but are not limited to:

– international

- national

- provincial / state

- city

- personal

- political

Voter satiation factors:

– what the voters say they want

- what the voters think they want

- what the voters actually need

Political perception:

– what the politician perceives as acceptable voter satiation levels

- what’s in it for the politician

- what’s in it for the organizations and groups that lobby governments incessantly

Then throw in ….

Climate change impact:

– regardless of whether manmade, naturally occurring or some combination

- we are spending more time arguing over the previous point than actually looking for measurable solutions that are known to be helpful

Global economic factors impact:

– too complex to understand, our economic engine has long outstripped the ability of its creator to control, direct or even predict the behavior of.  Don’t believe me?  Ask 10 economists what the key challenges of our present and future are and see how many opinions you will get.

- we are riding the wave, not controlling it, while providing a strong PR message that we are “in control”

Then sprinkle in …

Common human characteristics:

– fallibilities and frailties including fear, hesitation, greed, apathy, indifference, distrust, misdirected passion, dishonesty

- competing priorities / needs

- varying degrees of “what’s in it for me” or ‘not in my backyard”

Let’s not forget that …

The world changes incessantly:

- what we perceive the world to be today changes by the minute, and with ever-increasing speed, complexity, ferocity and impact, providing a moving target

We have multiple problems to solve, all equal in complexity and competing for the same, finite list of resources:

- in the areas of the economy, aging infrastructure, healthcare, social security, world peace, cultural differences, judicial concerns, poverty concerns, etc

It is easier to be an opposition party than the political party in power:

- they just need to spin how easy it is to fix everything, without explaining their strategic or tactical intentions or how they will pay for those intentions.  They count on the fact that citizens always ask “why” and “how do you know” of the party in power but rarely of the opposition party, with citizens easily falling susceptible to emotion-laden promises without any facts to back them up.

Then demand the solution be solved by …

Political will:

– balancing (hopefully) what the citizen needs versus what the politician desires (too often leaning towards the latter)

While still not forgetting that …

We still have to clean up the current mess, finding money that doesn’t exist for the current situation, let alone for the proposed solutions in the future:

- recognizing that the clean-up method chosen is impacted by the choices we are making for the future, making the current / future solutions somewhat linked together in a chicken and egg scenario

And expect it as soon as possible, as complete as possible, as simple as possible, as cheap as possible, as __________ as possible.

I guess it IS pretty simple, isn’t it.

Hardly.

And this was the simplified, 2%-of-the-problem definition.

Anyone who demands a quick, simple solution is deluded.

And any politician who makes it sound simple in a “my x steps to preventing this in the future” plan is either deluded or is assuming that you are.

I could have said “idiot” instead of “deluded” but that would be impolite and most people who are misinformed came by it honestly, through their genetics and life experiences.

If Life were as simple as “follow these x steps”, then our Life would already be problem-free.

And if the problems were “so easy” for some “experts” to have predicted in the first place when they present their master plan for the future, why didn’t they identify the problems before they manifested?  It’s like when a psychic greets you and asks “how can I help you?”.  Shouldn’t they already know? :-)

Meanwhile, the rest of us do the best we can with what we have to produce the best result possible.

And we keep an eye on what the future holds – good and bad.

Which camp are you in?

How do you know?

How do we know?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Problem Solving - Choose Your Solution Wisely

Last week I was meeting someone at a coffee shop in one of Canada’s primary coffee chains and sat down at the only table available.

Noticing it was covered in crumbs, I proceeded to sweep the table clean when I realized that in fact, the “crumbs” were small dead flies – about 30 or 40 of them.

Having had a few issues at this particular coffee shop before (which I had reported to staff but which weren’t acted upon) and knowing someone who worked in corporate for this chain, I decided to take action that I knew would produce a result instead of wasting my breath with the staff.

I took a picture of the dead flies and SMS’d it to my colleague in corporate.

The corporate folks acted swiftly and decisively (which I knew they would).

Returning to the same coffee shop for the first time in a week, I noticed that when some customers pulled out their smartphone, the staff was quick to tell them that picture-taking was not allowed even though the customers were not taking pictures.  As a result, I noticed a few awkward moments between customers and staff and a lot of poor assumptions being made.

It appears that the solution to the little dilemma I created last week when I reported the dead flies was to be more aggressive on cracking down on how violations are captured.

Perhaps if the business owner in question was as quick to manage the store more effectively and proactively, the need to finally send a photo wouldn’t have been necessary.

Meanwhile, I now see that the business owner is not only not proactive in effectively managing their business but they are paranoid as well.  Covering up future issues (and the reporting of them) appears to be a key priority.

It reminds me of how some people feel about breaking the law – that their actions are not illegal unless they are caught.

Stuff happens

In business, as in Life, it is important that we do the best we can to proactively meet or exceed the expectations of others.  On the occasions when we don’t achieve such an intention, it is critical that the action we take demonstrates to the other person that we really care about resolving the problem to everyone’s satisfaction.

Since problems are often inevitable, how we address them is often as important (if not more) than the existence of the problem itself and sends a clear message as to how much we really value the relationships that we create.

How do you resolve challenges that are often inevitable?

Do you go out of your way to acknowledge and fix the issue with the other person, showing others that you care about their perception of you and your relationship with them, or do you put your energy into other areas, including ignoring or burying the issue?

The choices you make become an important predictor regarding your future success – personal and professional. 

The actions you take based on the choices that resonate with you will speak much louder than any intention you may claim to have.  Failure to do “the right thing” may also create more issues, as it did for the customers in the coffee shop today who were accused of doing something that they were not.

How much value do you place on your relationships?

How do you know?

More importantly, how do they know?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Addendum: In reflecting upon one customer who was challenged today, it occurred to me that this customer is a regular who usually sits at the table where I was sitting last week when I filed the report.  It wouldn’t surprise me if the staff thought it was this customer who filed the report which is why they zeroed in on him so quickly.  This is another example of what happens when one chooses to solve a problem in an ineffective or inappropriate manner or when someone jumps to inappropriate conclusions – potentially burning unrelated, previously undamaged relationships.