Life Planning -- One More Time

BACKGROUND

Two years ago I wrote a short blog on the subject.  The subject continues to occupy a significant amount of space in my thinking. Why?  Perhaps, it has to do with the worldwide crisis.  Perhaps, I see one too many cases where lack of it contributed to unnecessary meandering or resulted in getting stuck in a sort of circumstances cul de sac.  The driving force for pushing this subject further is fueled by my helpful intentions.

In my earlier blog, I did not offer an how to solution.  This time I will try.  Hopefully with better results.  In the early years of my OD practice, I facilitated 3-day residential career development workshops for upcoming executives every 6-7 weeks.  After 10 such workshops, I noticed a glaring hole in my approach.  I was helping these executives to focus on an important, albeit, incomplete part of their life.  To remedy this, I expanded the workshop design by one day.  On the fourth day, I asked participants to invite their spouses or significant others to join our laboratory for the purpose of sharing the work product and getting understanding and support from the so-called better half.

I was not prepared for what transpired.  Although successful and upcoming, the majority of the participants had a darker and hidden side.  Their spouses/partners were isolated and to a certain extent despondent.  Much alcohol and drug abuse came to the surface.  Complaints centered around the  inability to communicate and, in some cases, sheer avoidance to discuss important life impacting choices.  The often repeated rationalization centered around the fact that the great majority of these upcoming executives were engineers, and the inane excuse was that engineers are not necessarily good at the soft part of the human interaction process.

During the past 40 years, I have coached and counseled many executives.  I have been most helpful when I have been instrumental in expanding the discussion from career matters to life matters, where I have convinced my clients of the importance to bring their spouses/significant others into this critical and often ignored conversation.  It is much more productive focusing on our whole life than honing any of its components.  After all, the parts have to fit together!

Wisdom from Yogi Berra

For those who do not know who Yogi Berra is, a quick introduction might help.  Yogi was a well known New York Yanks professional baseball player during the 40's and 50's.  He was known, not just for his great athletic achievements, but also for his convoluted way of speaking.  It is the latter that has made him an icon ... to the delight of those who often invoke his name.

My favorite quote from Yogi, commenting on the importance of planning is: "If you do not know where you are going, you are bound to get there!"  That is exactly the message from this blog.  If you do not engage in life planning, you are bound to find yourself a ship without a rudder.  

THE MISSING LINK

From our early years, we are encouraged to plan our academic journey, to select a path that might lead us to a satisfying and rewarding career.  In college, we are exhorted to start our career planning by charting development actions we need to implement during our professional journey so that we might achieve  satisfying and rewarding career milestones.  Later on, we are encouraged to start planning for our future financial needs.  So planning is not a new activity for us.  It is something we have been taught to do since early childhood.  

The lesson learned from planning is that what is important is not the plan itself, but the planning process -- the rumination that sorts and illuminates our thinking.  The latter is more fluid and more apt to change, and fine tuning; the latter, unchecked, has the ability to turn itself into a straight jacket that can crimp our styles and regiment our lives beyond the desirable.  

It is my strong belief that life planning is a missing link.

The late Steven Covey encouraged us to "... always start with the end in mind."  That is precisely my point.  Career plans must be directed toward a higher goal than just trying to climb the career ladder; they have to have a rationale behind.  Financial planning also must meet some need beyond a monetary measure.  After all, financial security can be (although it is not always) a means toward a better life.

The sweet spot, in my thinking, rests on the three planning activities linked together to form a whole integrated plan -- our life plan.   The three parts not only must support one another, but to a certain degree relate to one another.  

HOW DO YOU DO IT?

Like all other forms of planning, it starts with a vision of the "end in mind".   Here are some data collection questions that might help the construction of your personal mosaic.  There are no right or wrong answers per se, but the answers must fit and support the overall plan.  

1.  What is the most desirable state for you?  What are the values that drive your actions?  What are your priorities, and how are they established?   Money, status, health, desire to help others, family, etc.?  Can you answer these critical questions in one to two pages?

2.  Can you describe in one to two pages the ideal day in your life?  What is going on?  Where are you?  Who are you with?  What are you doing?  How are you feeling?  

3.  Can you write in one or two paragraphs your own epitaph?   What do you want to be remember for?  What do you want people to say about you after your demise?  What others will miss most after you have signed off?  Who would you ask to deliver your epitaph at your funeral?  Why did you select that person?

4.  Can you rank order the top 3 priorities in your life?  Choose from the following but feel free to add to the list, if you wish: family, leisure time, health, financial security, travel, philanthropy, location, religion .... 

5.  What are your gifts, talents, and skill set?  Brag about yourself!  No one is looking over your shoulder, except yourself.  

This whole process might take one to two days, spread over several weeks.  By answering diligently and sincerely the questions I suggest above, you will complete your data collection steps.  Now you need to go to the next step.  So what?  What does all this mean to you?  What do you wish to take away from the process?  

Now, you have the opportunity to translate these data points into something more specific about your life.  You can define more clearly your own success criteria.  For example.  If you peruse your ideal day and circle those things that you don't already have, you will have isolated those life goals that are implicit or hidden.  If you examine your epitaph, you will also identify things that are very dear to you, things that give meaning to your life.  If you review your list of gifts, talents, and skills, you will realize what your core capability is and hopefully stick with what you are best at rather than wandering into problematic areas.

You can now determine who else should be involved in your planning process e.g., your spouse, partner, children, friends, etc.  Children, depending on their age, can contribute to certain elements, such as to where they would like to live and why. 

By now, you should be clearer about the criteria you need to use when making important life choices, because you have examined in depth your end in mind.  

During the process, you might be overwhelmed by all the data in front of you.  This is normal! Take it easy!  Take your time! Ponder it! Distill it!  Put it to good use!

CLOSING

I was first exposed to life planning one cold February 42 years ago by a trusted professor.  At first I approached it skeptically, not being convinced that we can actually plan our lives, aware that too many variables are outside our control, and that being at the right time and at the right place was what counted.  Then, I realized that I might want to have a role in picking the right time and the right place.

Soon I began to make decisions with more confidence.  Three years later I engaged my wife in the process by suggesting we do a life plan together.  At first, Cassandra was not sure about it and asked what was the catch, but she was willing to try it.  At one point, we asked our daughter Thalia to tell us where she would like to live.  We were living in Minnesota at that time.  She was 12 years old!  She readily admitted that she wanted to return to Palo Alto, California because her maternal grandparents lived there.   

I was anxious to leave Control Data and I had opportunities in Michigan, Baltimore and Belgium.  We chose instead to return to Palo Alto because of Thalia's want.  There I started my first consulting company.  Although I had never done independent consulting work, I was optimistic about my chances for succeed because I was making an informed decision.  The plan gave me the confidence I needed to enter an unknown field as an unknown.  

Every year since then, around Christmas, Cassandra and I review our summary plan by answering a simple question:  How is it going?  The answer to this question guides us toward some adjustments.  We do not always agree on what and when to make these adjustments but we have a framework to work through the issues.  

I still have my struggles, my challenges, and my blind-sposts.  I know now how to reset my confidence button, by going back to the fundamental life planning questions.

Life planning is not a panacea, just a means to an end ... you define what that is!  

The New America

Background

I came to America 57 years ago, a month after my 18th birthday for a one year stay.  My father wanted me to return to Italy to continue my studies but events complicated the decision process.  I received draft papers from the Italian military 7-8 months after my arrival requesting that I visit the Consul General's office in New Haven -- a short train ride from New London where I lived with my parents, younger brothers, and my paternal grandmother.  As a green card holder, I was required to register with the Selective Service.  I did not want to go back to Italy.  I liked the lifestyle in America and the many opportunities it offered.  Without my father's approval, I coaxed uncle Angelo to approve my joining the US Army Reserves.   If I had chosen to serve in the Italian military I would forfeit my green card and the right to readily return to America and to my family.  

America as I found it ...

My father applied for an immigrant visa on his behalf and the entire family five years earlier.  His brother, an American citizen, was our sponsor.  Sponsors were responsible for the economic needs of those sponsored for five years.  

In those days, immigration was tightly controlled with racist overtones.  Those wishing to come from Northern Europe were given a visa pretty much upon request.  Those wanting to come from Southern and Eastern Europe were allotted an annual quota -- small enough to keep people in line for five or more years.  It was US policy to give preference to certain nationalities and to exclude others, namely Asians, Latin Americans, and Africans.  

After basic training in New Jersey, I was sent to Fort Gordon, in the State of Georgia.  After a long train ride, upon arrival in Augusta, I discovered segregation.  Blacks were not allowed to eat in restaurants; there were two different water faucets: one for white and one for colored; and they had to sit in the back of the bus.  Although the Armed Forces had been integrated after WWII, discrimination was widely practiced.  People like myself were more or less in limbo.  Some felt that I was not white, others treated me as an in-betweener.  I found this element of American society disturbing, to say the least.  But soon, I returned to New England and the memories of this experience began to fade.

Upon my return to New London, I found an interesting job in a linoleum manufacturing plant. I wanted to improve my command of English before going to the university.  I worked there for a year and one half.  Although I enjoyed the work and I was satisfied with the money I was earning, I discovered that immigrants were not as welcome as I thought.  I was ridiculed for my accent, belittled for having come "on the banana boat".  I was called a dago, wop, guinea, grease ball, spaghetti bender, and a DP (displaced person).  It was constant, unrelenting abuse.  No political correctness, no mercy.  My co-workers told degrading jokes about my and others' nationalities and laughed mercilessly.  

Jobs were plenty ... America had won the war and its economy was in high gear.  The European and Asian economies had been decimated by the war.  Gasoline was 25 cents per gallon.  A cup of coffee cost a mere dime.  You could eat a nice meal at the local diner for 75 cents.  

We were discouraged to speak Italian.  We were in America and we had to adapt as quickly as possible in order to avoid being singled out.  Italians were beginning to marry non-Italians (primarily other catholics), although the practice was discouraged on the basis of incompatibility of values, history, and yes, food tastes.  Many of these marriages ended up in divorce -- a scandalous practice to Italians.  People were telling you that America was a melting pot, yet Italians retreated to their own ghettos and neighborhoods.  There were Little Italys all over America -- New York, Boston, Hartford, New Haven, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Baltimore, San Francisco, to name a few.  And of course, you had the Chinatowns, Greektowns, Polishtowns, Jewish quarters, and Black ghettos.  The melting pot was a myth to be revered and celebrated, but it remained just that a myth..

Politicians were all white and male.  Italians were proud to point out that Fiorello La Guardia, the well known mayor of New York, was half-Italian.  My mother was impressed to find a distant cousin to be a judge in the Superior Court of New London.  Although we had many famous singers with Italian names, few Italians were elected officials.  Often labeled by their opponents as members of or associated with the mafia, they would face certain defeat.

Things began to change ...

The civil rights struggle of the '60's ushered a decade of hard fought battles to defeat discrimination.  The Viet Nam War served as a catalyst to a number of causes, including the notion of freedom and equality for all.  Segregation was defeated.  Equal access by Blacks began to increase, although many whites resisted it. Examples of civil discontent was on page 1 of all newspapers and evening news programs. The Civil Rights Act was heralded as a major breakthrough for racial equality in America.

In my view, a less noticed act of Congress was, by and large, the biggest change yet.  Its huge impact would be felt decades later with concomitant implications.  The change was the immigration reform.  No longer quota was set based on ethnic or racial background.  All aspirants would be treated alike.  It was now possible for Asians, Africans, and Latin Americans to join the pool of applicants.  Immigration from Europe began to drop off dramatically as European nations began to improve their economic conditions and join the boom.  Therefore, most, if not all, legal immigrants were now Asians and Latin Americans.  Immigration policies were adjusted also to allow people with scarce skills to more easily come to America.  

America now accepts 1 million legal immigrants per year.  A large number of illegal (euphemistically called without papers or sin papeles) immigrants began crossing the border unwilling to wait in line for five or more years.  Bad economic conditions back home pushing them to cross the borders.  We now have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in America.  

Where are we now?

You can see the changing America in the profile of our newly elected Congress.  Never before so many Blacks, Latinos, Asians, women and gay members have been elected to Congress.  They bring a new perspective, and, perhaps a new approach.   Minorities are now approximately 30% of the electorate.  By 2050, they will be the majority.  They are already the majority in California.  The growing influence of women on politics will also bring many subtle changes.

This change in the landscape will modify the prevailing value system and the many symbols we associate with that value system.  The changing face of America looks to Gandhi, Mandela, and Obama as role models and inspiration, just as earlier whites looked to Washington, Jefferson and other founding fathers for theirs.  To see a Black man leading our country has a very strong appeal and a lot of positive symbolism for the emerging majority.

Although a 75-year old white male, I do not suffer from nostalgia of the good old days.  They were good for me, but they were not all that good for some others.  I have had the opportunity to work and associate, in addition to whites, with many friends and colleagues from Asia, Latin America, and Africa.  They bring much energy, culture, and brain power to America.  We will be better off for their arrival, and we should celebrate the future rather than mourning the past.

I am grateful for the opportunity to make America my home.  I have lived here more than 80% of my life.  New comers will fall in love with America, warts and all.  They will have their chance to make this union more perfect.

The Genetics of Power

I just returned from a week of relaxation and sunshine in Playa del Carmen, in the beautiful Maya Riviera of Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula.  As customary, before leaving for Cancun, I loaded up at the airport with reading materials for the week.  Among my purchases ... the Economist, Time, and Newsweek.

An article about the genetics of power in the Newsweek psychology section by Helen Fisher, a biological anthropologist at Rutgers University and the chief scientific advisor to Chemistry.com, caught my eye.  I must admit that the subject is totally new to me, but I found the article interesting.

Fisher tells us that recently Peter Hatemi of Pennsylvania State University and Rose McDertmott of Brown University reevaluated much of the evidence about the genetics of politics concluding that "genetic influences account for a substantial portion of individual differences in political traits"  .. perhaps as much as 40 to 60%.   She goes on to suggest that we must know who we are biologically and genetically speaking.

Her own research suggests that there are four broad primary styles of thinking and behaving within one of four universal brain systems: the testosterone, estrogen, serotonin, and dopamine systems.

Each one of us is a unique mix of the four, but we express the traits of some more than others.  For example, those of us who are particularly expressive of traits linked with testosterone, she calls Directors.  Those primarily expressive of estrogen she calls Negotiators.  Those primarily expressive of serotonin she calls Builders.  And those expressive of dopamine she calls Explorers.

Her information comes from multiple sources, including brain scanning, genetics, neurotransmitter and hormone systems, and a scientific questionnaire she constructed which resides on the dating site Chemistry.com, a subsidiary of Match.com, and which has been taken by more than 12 million people.

Here is a summary of the four brain systems that contribute to personality according to Fisher:

TESTOSTERONE

Qualities: analytical, tough-minded, direct (often blunt), skeptical, and determined to win.

Examples: Margaret Tatcher, Nicolas Sarkozy, George Patton

Not strictly a male hormone, data also link testosterone with the tendencies to be less socially aware, with poor emotional recognition, less eye contact, and less verbal fluency.

ESTROGEN

Qualities: sees the big picture, has people skills, verbal skills; imaginative, intuitive, compassionate.

Examples: Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Bill Clinton

Not strictly a female hormone, the effects of estrogen begin in the womb, contributing to a more contextual, holistic, big-picture, long term view, as well as superb linguistic skills.

SEROTONIN

Qualities:  cautious, conventional, concrete, meticulous, respectful of rules and authority, religious.

Examples:  Dwight D. Eisenhower, Colin Powell, George W. Bush

Caution, observing social norms, following the rules, respecting authority, orderliness, adherence to plans and methods, frugality, figural and number creativity and religiosity are traits associated with the serotonin system.

DOPAMINE

Qualities:  curious, creative, spontaneous, energetic, mentally flexible, daring.

Examples: Winston Churchill, John F. Kennedy, Teddy Roosevelt

Genes in the dopamine system are extensively associated, in biological literature, with novelty seeking and risk taking, spontaneity and energy.

Concluding Notes

No one is a pure this or that, in my view.  Human behavior is too complicated to pigeon hole anyone in one box or another.  Scientists have a knack about using 2x2 matrices to illustrate their insights or research findings.  They do so in order to more easily communicate with lay persons.

My own experience teaches me that we are more like a mosaic composed of many traits and qualities. some smaller, other larger, together capturing our individual characteristics

.

For example, applying the author's descriptions to myself, I can identify with most, but not all,  of the Negotiator/Explorer qualities.  Conversely, fewer qualities in the categories of Director/Builder seem to apply to me.

The article suggests that no man is an island, particularly a leader.  So the author offers a modest piece of biological advice: surround ourselves with people who do not think the way we do.

Recent data from Stanford University seems to suggest that "in the long run teams do better when they are composed of people with the widest possible range of personalities".

I am a strong believer and supporter of this advice.  There is much to be gained by diversity in approach, thinking and learning style.  The price we pay for the benefits that accrue includes being more patient, more tolerant, and perhaps less efficient.

How about your thoughts?  What is your dominant style? Would others agree with your assessment?

Joblessness Data

Let me start this blog by saying that I am not a professional statistician.  I have chosen to address this topic to shed some light on this topic using some research and a layman's understanding of what I learned.

Every month we are fed by the Labor Department unemployment rates.

The rate for September raised many eyebrows.  Several economists and management gurus questioned the validity and reliability of the method used for calculating the rate.  Others went further to suggest manipulation for political reasons.

The reasons for this debate are many.

The most compelling explanation by the skeptics is that for the rate to drop from 8.1% to 7.8% 900,000 jobs would have been created in September.  The implausible statistical quirk may be a result of the method used for determining the rate.  Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) uses a household canvass to measure how many of us are employed.  Professional statisticians advise us to discount these data because they lack reliability.

Can you be more specific?

For the rate to drop .3% in one month one of several factors must be in play, including:

First, the economy must grow rapidly and, as a result, it is creating lots of jobs.  For this to be the reason, our GNP would have to grow by a healthy rate (5% or more) -- which was not the case for September.  The number of jobs added during that month was a mere 114,000.

Second, since there is inadequate job creation millions of job seekers stop looking for work.  That has been the experience throughout the recovery.  For some reason, BLS does not count those who have given up looking.

Third, BLS counts part-time jobs as if they were full time contributing to further obfuscation of the real problem the nation faces.

So the numbers do not add up because they lack face validity.

We lost 9 million jobs during this recession.  Just 5 million have been recouped.  Even worse, the level of private sector jobs remains 13 million below the pre-crisis job growth trend.

The employment gap is a national crisis.  23 million people are either unemployed or under employed. These people are not a statistic, they are real human beings with needs, aspirations, and obligations.

Politicians, like Nero, are playing the fiddle while Rome is burning.  Except that it is not Rome burning, but our fellow Americans who are suffering.

Where is the sense of urgency?  Where is the bipartisan approach?  We need action, not excuses, and soon.  Real soon!!!

The Politics of Work

The European Lesson

I just returned from a four weeks visit to Europe.  During my stay I would watch every night one or two evening news on Italian television to keep up with world events and better understand Italian and European concerns regarding job creation and the economy.

Needless to say, the European economy varies from member-state to member-state.  German and most Northern European economies seem to be faring better than their Southern and Eastern counterparts.  The pain is most evident in Greece, Ireland, Spain, and Italy.  Why?  The global recession impacted them the most.  Why? Because their government deficit was way above the stipulated ceiling of 3% of GNP, and their total debt exceeded their GNP.  It was also evident from the various reports that the excesses of the past 40 years had come home to roost.  

During the expansionary and boom years of the last 4 decades, politicians were spending far more than their annual revenues.  On the social front, politicians eager to gain the approval of their constituencies endorsed laws and practices advocated by labor unions and other interest groups.  In addition, the spending binge fueled corruption and in some cases outright thievery.

I learned in my studies of business policy that the test of whether a policy is good or bad is dependent on a simple question.  Can the organization afford the policy under good as well as bad economic times?  If the answer is no, then the policy is not sustainable over time.  Politicians failed to ask this basic question before getting on the bandwagon of spending.  

As governments have been applying the ax to many policies to bring spending under control, it is evident that the burden has fallen most heavily on the lower economic classes.  Increase in taxes, postponement of retirement, unemployment, and inflation have led to confrontations of all kinds, some violent, and a steady deterioration of the social fabric.  It was painful to watch nightly elderly folks, the handicapped, the youth, and the unemployed display their anger and plight.  

As political parties jockey for advantage, a bit of reflection is in order.  Asking the arsonist to put out the fire seems to me to be foolhardy.  But that is what it seems to be happening, including here at home.

It is evident to me that labor laws need modernization in Southern Europe and that the narrative about finding permanent positions needs to travel in a different direction ... the direction of finding meaningful and higher paying work.

Work versus Jobs

In Italy, there seems to be a fixation with job security.  

People want permanent jobs. Period.  Anything less than that is seen as uncivilized.  Unions want government guarantees that no one will be laid off for economic reasons or fired without "just" cause.  Their rationale is simple.  Temporary workers cannot get a mortgage without it.  And as a result, they cannot start a family or lead a "normal" life.  This kind of thinking, of course, fuels the notion that the best place for job security is to work for the government.  Never mind that government rolls are bloated and need to be cut down.  

I found it curious that an administrative judge would be asked to rule on "just cause",  most often ignoring the need to reduce costs or to eliminate inefficient practices.  The unions are most vehement on this issue.  The ranks of the administrative judge cadre is dominated by union-friendly judges. Once the progressives, unions are now hanging on to obsolete and often uncompetitive policies.  Once innovators, now unions are conservators of the status quo.

These antiquated labor policies are stifling growth and investment.  Global and domestic companies shy away from countries with high labor costs and from countries with labor laws that make it impossible to fire workers in case of economic downturns and restructuring needs.  

Italians are proud to point out that, unlike Americans, they work to live.  To them, the purpose of a job seems to be to meet one's economic needs. Never mind the fact that work is as natural as play and that we can gain tremendous satisfaction and self worth from our work.  Of course, this is a great generalization.  Not all Italians see it that way.  Although of Italian descent, I find the view that work's sole purpose is economic as antiquated and obsolete.  It ignores the psychological and social rewards we gain from work. At the same time, I too yearn for la dolce vita.

From childhood, we have been encouraged to work.  We are gives chores to do. We have homework to do.  We have to study.  We have to do our part. Sure, some types of work are more satisfying or less physically draining than others, but, in my view, all work is noble.  

The American Conundrum

The American story is very different.  Americans, by and large, live to work.  It has been ingrained in us since the beginning.  Maybe to a fault.  Our problem is not enough jobs.  

We are not as obsessed by the permanent versus temporary nature of jobs.  We understand that businesses might have to lay off workers when sales decline or when  unprofitable.  The problem here seems to me availability -- not enough good paying jobs to go around.  Why?  Because some work has shifted elsewhere, some overseas, in search of lower costs.

Germany has solved this issue by concentrating its efforts on niches where their competitive advantage is not derived principally from cost but rather from quality, service and reliability.  

Because we are in a political season, politicians are looking for wedge issues to attract voters.  I find this approach as divisive and not conducive to problem solving.  The dialog should be postponed for the legislative season when principled policies can be discussed and enacted.  

The most common topics are:

1.  Equality

While everyone is entitled to equal access, is everyone entitled to equal rewards?  There are those who believe that rewards should be dispensed based on results, while others believe that fairness requires that we share the rewards equally.  Some might argue that not everyone's inputs into the pot are equal to begin with: some have higher or more skills, others might work harder, etc. The equal pay for equal work issue, though, has a lot of merit on its own.  We do under-pay women and we have for centuries.  It is time to get into the 21st century on this issue.

2.  Proportionality

Some advocate that fairness is determined by the proportionality of one's contribution. Others disagree saying that everyone is entitled to be cared for, that every one should get a living wage, regardless of his/her contribution.  Is this another way to spin the equality argument? Possibly.

3.  Procedural fairness

Honest, open and impartial rules should be used to determine who gets what.  There is lot of agreement on this point, regardless of political persuasion.  The system is rigged with far too many loop holes.  People will point to affirmative action as an example of a partial rule.  Others will point out that the wealthy have far greater access to college education because they can simply afford it.  And, we all know that the old buddy network is alive and well.  

Summary

At this point you may wonder what the above three points have to do with work.  My view is that many people are left out of the workforce because they lack access, because their contribution is unfairly determined, and because dependency on government hand-outs makes it easy for some to forego work because the handout received is greater than the paycheck one might receive.

What is your view?  

Farewell to Steven Covey

Steven Covey died on July 16, 2012 following a bicycle accident. He was 79 years old. I remember fondly meeting him at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Bahrain following his workshop with our management team at Zain. I remember shaking his hand and thanking him for his wise counsel. 

 Covey was well-known all over the world for "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" which sold more than 20 million copies. He argued successfully that personal character, purpose and self-discipline mattered a great deal. I still carry in my wallet a business card (a gift from his organization) summarizing on one side the 4 Imperatives of Great Leaders: Clarify purpose, Align Systems, Unleash Talent and Inspire Trust, and on the other, the three leadership conversations: Affirm worth and potential, Be a source of help, Clarify expectations and accountabilities. 

 I admired his exemplary life. He was a great scholar, successful entrepreneur, and a respected family patriarch. He walked the talk -- a feat worth celebrating and imitating. He indeed practiced what he preached -- a deed that often escapes most of us. He also helped confirm my notion that the power of any religion rests on its ability to influence and, indeed, become a way of life. There is no doubt that his Mormon religion contributed to his philosophy of life. His seven habits are, more or less, the distillation on Mormon teachings. 

 The seven habits will be his enduring legacy: 

1. Be proactive. 

2. Begin with the end in mind. 

3. Put first things first. 

4. Think win-win. 

5. Seek to understand, to be understood. 

6. Synergize -- learn to work with others for mutual benefit. 

7. Sharpen the saw -- keep yourself physically, mentally and spiritually refreshed. 

Covey adopted these principles to the family later in life by publishing the "Seven Habits of Highly Effective Families". He had 9 children and 52 grandchildren, who revered him and admired his righteous life style. He was disappointed to learn that his belief that highly effective people would result in highly effective businesses did not prove to be true. 

We have learned that it is one thing to be effective as individuals and a completely different thing being successful as a company. His own experience at FranklinCovey proved that. 

I have tried to adopt the seven habits to my own life and I report that, whenever I do, they help me a great deal. But, I have not been successful in applying all of them. Two habits that I have not been able to fully apply are number 5 -- seek to be understood, and number 7 -- keeping myself refreshed physically and spiritually. But I remain committed to keep trying. 

 We mourn his passing, and we celebrate his many contributions to mankind.

Great by Choice

One of the great benefits of air travel is to get caught up in our reading. I took two books with me on my latest vacation. Great by Choice by Jim Collins and Morten Hansen, and A Passion for Adventure by Saad Al-Barrak, my old boss at Zain.

GREAT BY CHOICE

Collins is a well known management researcher and former faculty member at Stanford University. His other books include Good to Great, Built to Last, and How the Mighty Fall. Hansen is less known but he too has a formidable background in the academic world at INSEAD and Harvard. 

Together, Collins and Hansen spent five years searching for historical cases that met three criteria: 1. The enterprise sustained truly spectacular results for at least 15 years relative to the general stock market and relative to its industry. 2. The enterprise achieved these results in a particularly turbulent environment, full of events that were uncontrollable, fast-moving, uncertain, and potentially harmful. 3. The enterprise began its rise to greatness from a position of vulnerability, being young and/or small at the start of its 10X journey. The final choice of companies that met these criteria included: Amgen, Biomet, Intel, Microsoft, Progressive Insurance, Southwest Airlines, and Stryker. 

Their research soon questioned the validity of these well entrenched myths: ...The best leaders did not have a visionary ability to predict the future. ...Being the most innovative is not necessarily a prerequisite for success. ...Fast decision making and fast action do not necessarily lead to advantage. ...Just because the world is rocked by radical change, it may not be wise to inflict ...radical change on oneself. ...The most successful companies did not generally have more luck. In the book, Collins and Hansen introduce the reader to a 10x leadership model composed of three elements: Fanatic Discipline, Empirical Creativity, and Productive Paranoia coupled with level 5 Ambition. This model can help the reader diagnose and improve his/her own organization's desire to become great. 

A PASSION FOR ADVENTURE

In his book, Saad Al-Barrak chronicles his life and how he turned Zain in a telecom giant. Having worked for Saad, I was able to ride along his incredible story telling and witness first hand Zain's rise to world class level. In his journey, Saad broke all the rules, challenged all the assumptions, and led the organization toward unequalled levels of performance. His charisma and intellectual brilliance left a deep mark on both the culture and stature of Zain. When in 2003 Saad took over at Zain, the company's valuation was $ 1.5 billion dollars; when he left in early 2010 the company's valuation had climbed to $ 28 billion dollars. Zain would surely meet the 10X criteria that Collins and Hansen write about, albeit he did not stay at Zain for the full 15-year period. 

 In this short blog, it is not possible to do justice to either book. The intent is to wet the appetite for you to read them yourself. I learned much from doing so. I came away with the reinforced idea that there is no single best way, that it all depends on a number of factors. The older I get, the more skeptical I am of "the best way" to do anything. Neatly packaged, these recipes for success are often just that, interesting recipes. There are too many outliers out there that show us that there are many, although unequal, different ways to skin a cat. I am sure that you have seen a cat or two traveling along your learning curve.

In Search of Employee Happiness

Before boarding my last flight to Europe, I bought the latest copy of the Harvard Business Review (January-February 2012). The front page title had captured my interest: "The Value of Happiness - How Employee Well Being Drives Profits."

Over the years I had often pondered the question of employee satisfaction and its impact on the bottom line. Line managers, I found, are pretty skeptical about the notion that happy employees are more productive. The research I had studied during my graduate years pointed to a negative correlation between job satisfaction and productivity. That is, over the longer haul, employee dissatisfaction affects productivity because employees might decide to leave, file grievances, increase their absenteeism, show up tardy, or behave in an unsafe manner, thus increasing the associated costs of hiring, grievance processing, accidents, or work scheduling.

In humorous terms, I would point out that happy cows might not yield better or more milk, but unhappy cows might gore you. I would get a thunderous laugh and that is about all.

The HRB article does a great job of documenting how the pursuit of contentment has shaped the West's culture and economy. The author Peter Stearns walks you through some interesting comparisons. For example, most East Asian cultures have lower expectations than North Americans are accustomed to. Some Latin American cultures, on the other hand, have higher expectations than their North American cousins. Stearns goes on to point out that attitudes toward happiness do not just differ, they can also change. Understanding the nature of such change can better illustrate the context for happiness and allow us to assess its advantages and downsides.

Research by my alma mater, Louis Allen Worldwide, shows that focus on mere satisfaction should not be the end point. Rather, we should focus more attentively on the level of employee engagement. That is, the extent to which employees are willing to go the extra miles matters a great deal. Employee satisfaction might be a pre-determiner, but it is not necessarily the end result. Research by several organizations shows that highly engaged employees make a greater contribution to the success of their organization than less engaged or disengaged employees. Consequently, the more highly engaged are your employees, the better is your competitive advantage. In a scenario where honing our competitive advantage is key to our survival, the focus on employee engagement is not only an offensive but also a defensive weapon.

During my career, I have had the opportunity to work in highly engaging work cultures where the focus on organizational success outweighs personal stardom and 'lone ranger" temptations. The energy is more formidable, and the satisfaction level much higher than what I have experienced working in cultures where co-workers were not as connected and committed.

Our choice as leaders is rather simple: highly engaged employees and better results versus less engaged or even disengaged employees and lower results. On the surface, the choice seems simplistic, yet in practice, as we focus on other factors we take this fundamental choice for granted.

I am sure that you have your own war stories to tell. I bet that you will find in the recesses of your mind many examples where some organizations you worked at treated this subject differently and with different results. I welcome your observations and comments.

Why Executives Fail?

I recently received a summary description of professor Sydney Kinkelstein's article of 8 years ago: "Why Smart Executives Fail". In the article the author shared his field experience. Executive failures can be seen through the lens of bad habits. Here we go:

Habit #1. Executives see themselves and their companies as dominating their environment. This lack of respect for the competition can be fatal. Someone sooner or later will invent a better solution, if you are not vigilant. I worked many years ago for Control Data Corporation. The company does not exist anymore. Senior executives thought that dominance of the large computer systems world would make them invincible. Guess what? Here comes the PC.

Habit #2. Executives identify so completely with their company that there is no clear boundary between their personal life and their corporation's interests. This total association might be a manifestation of the character of the executive. You know the type. They introduce themselves with their titles because they have nothing else that matters to them more.

Habit # 3. Executives think they have all the answers. Leaders who have all the answers typically have no great followers. Know-it all leaders are shunned by bright subordinates. I had the opportunity to work for a brilliant man who unfortunately surrounded himself with claques -- clapping at every word, laughing at every joke, hiding their real feelings. A palace coup eventually toppled this executive.

Habit # 4. Executives ruthlessly eliminate anyone who is not completely behind them. This habit creates many yes-men and yes women, and idol worship. People with different ideas are essential in any great organization. I witness the presence of consultants inside an organization whose primary role was to police the loyalty of people toward the leader. Anyone suspected of being less than 100% compliant was soon relegated to the dust bin or pushed out. However, those who live by the sword tend to die by it, we are taught.

Habit # 5. Executives are consummate spokespersons, obsessed with company image. This blatantly way of seeking attention turns people off. Few like soap boxes. I have attended too many rah-rah meetings where everyone is driven to a high degree of fervor. That fervor, however, was not matched by results. Soon the top guy became a joke, not to be believed.

Habit # 6. Executives underestimate obstacles. Excessive hype plus yes-people eventually leads to painful lessons. The air of invincibility masks the potential for disaster. I witnessed during my career executives minimizing problems only to be overcome by them. In one case, a leader in hammer type printers company ridiculed the threat of the jet printer as being dirty and unable to print multiple copies. The growth of the jet printer industry followed. A missed opportunity!

Habit # 7. Executives stubbornly rely on what worked for them in the past. Changing times and changing situations often require a new set of answers and approaches. Talking about the great feats of the yesteryear is no antidote for pressing and tough issues. Getting trapped in a problem solving paradigm is akin to having blinders on.

Anyone of us can associate with at least one or more of the bad habits.

To know which one(s) apply to us makes us aware of the pothole in front of us. There are no perfect people but there are aware people. Awareness can facilitate clearer thinking and decision making. The most dangerous people inside an organization are those who do not know what they do not know. They are blind and ignorant at the same time.

Reflect on your own vulnerability. Manage it. Turn it into a positive. Have fun!

Work Place Democracy ... A Utopian Dream?

I remember well the late 1970's and the 1980's. The landscape was full of experiments ... Quality of Work Life (QWL), quality circles, autonomous groups, self-directed groups, you name it, organizations tried to outdo one another with these workplace experiments.

The search for the ideal organization and job design was fueled by the ever increasing success of the Japanese model which included higher worker participation. From Scandinavia, experiments in socio-technical job design, captured the imagination of HR practitioners. Management gurus all over the Western world promoted the notion that increased worker participation in the traditional functions of management such as selection, pay program design, and work organization would improve employee satisfaction and, as a consequence, productivity. Some Northern European countries went much further by imbedding the notion of worker participation in their labor laws, and they mandated the worker council -- including representatives of the employees in all strategic and operational decision making of the organization.

We have not heard much about this subject in the past ten years or so. Although the worker councils still exist, they are more or less relics of well intended social experiments. I have seen no empirical studies that show a significant benefit to the bottom line or to the job satisfaction level of employees.

THE MONDRAGON MODEL

There is one experiment that is worth noting here. The Mondragon Model. It is an experiment dating back to 1954. I first read about it in the book "The Organization of the Future" published by the Drucker Foundation, editors Frances Hesselbein, Marshal Goldsmith and Richard Beckhard. In chapter 11, Joel Barker summarizes the history, driving force, and success of this model. The setting is a poor region of Spain beset by high unemployment, poor education, and no positive outlook for the future. A young Jesuit priest by the name of Don Jose Maria Arizmendiarreta set out to change all of this. First by starting a vocational school and later embarking on an entrepreneurial experiment that created a mushrooming number cooperatives. The group by the early 1990's had a revenue volume of $ 2.6 billion and employed more than 21,000 people.

The principles of Mondragon included democracy, worker ownership, innovative financial management, pay equity, and self-funded retirement schemes.

I have not followed the success of this model in the latter days. However, I remain impressed to this day with the notion that worker democracy and ownership can be a powerful alternative to the stockholder model. I also admire the community building benefits the model created for the affected region.

I invite the reader to comment on this subject. At a time when jobs are scarce, communities are suffering from high unemployment and overall decline, the Mondragon Model can be a source of inspiration for job creation by stimulating communities in joint, collaborative initiatives.

Enjoy the ride on the learning curve!

Thinking Outside the Box

Thinking outside the box has become a cliche'. We use the expression often, but, I wonder, how well we know what it means. It is easy to get trapped into a pattern of thinking, to get stuck in a standard way of looking at things, to fit the mold, so to speak. We humans are easily lulled into a business as usual way of thinking and acting.

In the late 1980's I met Joel A. Barker in the lobby of Tektronix, in the State of Oregon, where we were both doing consulting projects. I asked Joel what type of consulting he did. He responded that he was in the paradigm consulting business. Afraid to admit that I had no idea what he was talking about, I kind of nodded and moved along. My curiosity drove me later to look into Joel's background. I learned that he was a futurist and the well-known author of the widely popular video "Discovering the Future". I immediately ordered a copy of the video. I have used this video often during the past 25 years to illustrate the power of paradigms. I have also relied on the video to examine my own patterns of thinking and my own limitations.

Joel teaches us, that a vision without action, is merely a dream. That action without vision just passes the time. And that vision with action can change the world. 

I saw and experienced the power of these words during my work with the CEO of Zain, Dr. Saad Al-Barrak. Recognized as a truly transformational leader, Dr. Al-Barrak had such a powerful vision that he was able to change the Arab world's view of its capability by creating one of the top telecom brands in the Middle East and Africa.

We all carry a bag full of paradigms with us. Unexamined, these paradigms limit our creativity and ability to think outside the box. Some of the paradigms are generational, others academic, cultural, geographical. Regardless of where they come from, unless we are able to make the necessary shifts at the appropriate time, we risk falling behind, of falling into the dustpan of obsolescence.

Let me list some well known paradigms:

JOB SECURITY. Depending on your age, you might have grown up thinking that if you join a good company, do good work, and behave loyally, that you will have a job for the rest of your working life. In the early 1990's we were shocked to find out that this way of thinking was no longer valid. We were admonished by our leaders that the only job security we will have comes from the quality of our skills. Some folks never got the message. Most got laid off as companies began to restructure or as companies began to move to maintain or enhance their competitive advantage.

MOBILITY. Again depending on your age, geographical location or culture, you were taught that you are born in a town, you go to school there, you marry a local person, you join the local workforce, and you stay close to your extended family. Guess what? As companies moved, you too had to consider moving. You too had to examine the notion of living elsewhere far away from close family members.

LEARN A TRADE. We assumed growing up that if we learned a trade or a profession that our future would be secure. That is what our forefathers told us. Unfortunately, some of the trades or professions have been on the decline or have disappeared all together as new technologies have made them obsolete or in lesser demand. The notion of continuous learning was not part of our box yet.

There are other paradigms that impede our success in more subtle ways. Take the role of HR. In most organizations HR is the butt of jokes, criticisms, and scorn. Why? Because HR seems to be stuck into an administrative, policy-driven role, acting more as a police force rather than a force for change. In the functional context, HR is often trapped into a one-size fits all mentality when it comes to pay schemes, learning strategies, and role definitions. More out-of-the box thinking is needed to align the approach we use to the needs of the organization we serve and the people who work there.

It is easy to say that HR is a business partner, but it is another thing to become one. In my view, business partnering is not a job title, but the description of how line management might see HR. Business partnering is more than doing what line management is asking us to do, it includes providing expert advice to solve complex organizational and human issues, and to implement the needed changes that make HR relevant and an integral part of the management process.

I welcome your thoughts! Good luck on your journey along the learning curve. There are many paradigm shifts that will be required of us in order to survive and prosper in the 21st century.