Un Messaggio al Generale Garcia (Italian)

Tradurre tutto il testo del messaggio che ho scritto in inglese sarebbe troppo oneroso. Ma volevo condividere alcuni punti salienti. Ho letto un editoriale molto interessante, pubblicato verso la fine del XIX Secolo e desidero farne un sommario per coloro che sono interessati.

L’editoriale fu scritto nel 1899 dopo una discussione avuta dall’autore, Elbert Hubbard, sulla guerra Ispano-Americana. Un alleato critico per la vittoria degli americani era stato il Generale Calixto Garcia, che guidava i ribelli cubani contro l’oppressione spagnola. Il figlio di Hubbard, durante la discussione, aveva sottolineato che il vero eroe della guerra era stato il Sottotenente Rowan, dell’esercito americano. Rowan era stato incaricato di portare un messaggio al Generale Garcia, da parte del Presidente americano McKinley. Il sottotenente, senza alcuna esitazione, aveva portato a termine la sua missione e aveva aperto le possibilita’ alla esecuzione di strategie che avrebbero poi assistito nella vittoria finale.

Il sommario del pensiero di Hubbard su l’impresa di Rowan e’ il seguente.

“Non ha tanta importanza come il sottotenente Rowan esegui’ e porto’ a termine la sua missione (basti dire che ci vollero 4 giorni di navigazione e tre settimane per attraversare una giungla ostile a piedi e portare la lettera a Garcia). Piuttosto il fatto che Rowan non chiese domande, ma parti’ e fece quello che gli era stato chiesto perche’ gli era stato chiesto e senti’ il dovere di farlo. Bisognerebbe fare un statua a Rowan per la sua dedizione e il suo senso del dovere.

Garcia e’ morto, ma ci sono tanti altri Garcia nella nostra vita. Il punto e’ che nessuno che abbia iniziato un’impresa, un business o qualsiasi altro lavoro in cui vi sia necessita’ di un’azione da parte di altri, abbia incontrato l’esatto contrario di Rowan, o, in generale la mancanza di abilita’, di desiderio e/o di concentrarsi su una cosa e farla. Fate questo esperimento sul vostro posto di lavoro. Chiedete a un impiegato  “per favore guardi nell’enciclopedia e mi scriva un breve memoria sulla vita di Correggio. Secondo voi l’impiegato dira’ va bene e comincera’ il suo lavoro? Scommetterei tutto quello che ho che, nella maggior parte dei casi, l’impiegato vi guarderebbe in faccia con occhi da pesce bollito e vi chiederebbe una o piu’ delle seguenti domande:Chi e’ questo Correggio? Quale enciclopedia devo usare? Sono stato assunto per questo? Vuol dire una ricerca su Bismarck? Perche’ le devo fare io e non la signorina Rossi? Questo Correggio e’ morto? E’ una cosa urgente? Vuole che le porto il libro cosi’ se lo cerca direttamente lei? Perche’ lo vuole sapere?

E scommetto ancora di piu’ che dopo aver risposto a tuttte le domande, spiegato come trovare l’informazione, e perche’ la volete. l’impiegato chiedera’ ad un altro impiegato di aiutare nella ricerca, per poi tornare e dirvi che non esiste questo Correggio. Naturalmente potrei perdere la scommessa, ma penso di no.

Questa incapacita’ di indipendenza di azione, questa stupidita’ morale, questa infermita’ della volonta’, questa ristrettezza mentale di non collaborare causano una domanda: se gli uomini non sono capaci di agire per se stessi, cosa faranno quando i benefici dei loro sforzi sono per un bene comune?
Conosco una persona molto brillante che non e’ capace di amministrare alcun affare da se stesso, ma e’ anche completamente inutile ad altri perche’ sospetta sempre che il suo datore di lavoro e’ un oppressore o intende opprimerlo. Non sa’ dare direzioni e non vuole riceverle. Se qualcuno dovesse chiedergli di portare un messaggio al Generale Garcia, la sua risposta sarebbe, probabilmente, “che lo porti lui direttamente”. In questo momento, quest’uomo vaga per le strade della citta’ in cerca di lavoro. Nessuno che lo conosce osa dargli lavoro, perche’ e’ sempre scontento di tutto e di tutti e si lamenta sempre. Non vuol sentir ragioni, e l’unica cosa che puo’ avere un’impressione su di lui e’ un bel calcio nel sedere.

Sono stato troppo diretto nella mia analisi? Non sono stato politicamente corretto? Forse, ma che dire di chi si sforza e ha successo a causa del duro lavoro nonostante le difficolta’ e l’opposizione? Prima di diventare giornalista, ho fatto di tutto a cominciare dal lavapiatti. So che non ci sono datori di lavoro perfetti, ma il mio pensiero va’ a colui che fa’ il suo lavoro anche quando il capo e’ via, e continua a farlo a casa con la sua famiglia. E colui che, quando gli viene data una lettera da recapitare al generale Garcia, la prende quietamente e senza chiedere domande idiote la recapita a destinazione. Tutti cercano quell’individuo. E se lo avete notato, non viene mai licenziato. E’ una specie cosi’ rara che nessun datore di lavoro puo’ permettersi di lasciarselo scappare. Il mondo ha bisogno di chi sa portare il messaggio al generala Garcia.”

In aggiunta a quanto scritto da Hubbard desidero condividere un commento di un mio amico che e’ rettore universitario e presidente del palo della mia chiesa qui dove vivo. Egli ha scritto: “Trovare persone che portano a termine un compito con efficienza e tempestivita’ e una sfida quotidiana, non solo sul lavoro ma anche in ogni attivita’ collettiva, compreso gli incarichi nella chiesa. Ho un’ammirazione per quegli individui – una delle ragioni, suppongo, del perche’ un certo scrittore ammirasse tanto un certo Capitano Moroni che otteneva risultati.”

I vostri commenti sono sempre molto graditi.

adf

A Message to Garcia

Well I read the following article and I couldn’t resist sharing it with the world. Although the words are not mine, the article reflects my thoughts!

A Message to Garcia
By Elbert Hubbard
In all this Cuban business there is one man stands out on the horizon of my memory like Mars at perihelion. When war broke out between Spain and the United States, it was very necessary to communicate quickly with the leader of the Insurgents. Garcia was somewhere in the mountain vastness of Cuba—no one knew where. No mail nor telegraph message could reach him. The President must secure his cooperation, and quickly.
What to do!
Someone said to the President, “There’s a fellow by the name of Rowan will find Garcia for you, if anybody can.”
Rowan was sent for and given a letter to be delivered to Garcia. How “the fellow by the name of Rowan” took the letter, sealed it up in an oil-skin pouch, strapped it over his heart, in four days landed by night off the coast of Cuba from an open boat, disappeared into the jungle, & in three weeks came out on the other side of the Island, having traversed a hostile country on foot, and delivered his letter to Garcia, are things I have no special desire now to tell in detail.
The point I wish to make is this: McKinley gave Rowan a letter to be delivered to Garcia; Rowan took the letter and did not ask, “Where is he at?” By the Eternal! there is a man whose form should be cast in deathless bronze and the statue placed in every college of the land. It is not book-learning young men need, nor instruction about this and that, but a stiffening of the vertebrae which will cause them to be loyal to a trust, to act promptly, concentrate their energies: do the thing- “Carry a message to Garcia!”
General Garcia is dead now, but there are other Garcias.
No man, who has endeavored to carry out an enterprise where many hands were needed, but has been well nigh appalled at times by the imbecility of the average man- the inability or unwillingness to concentrate on a thing and do it. Slip-shod assistance, foolish inattention, dowdy indifference, & half-hearted work seem the rule; and no man succeeds, unless by hook or crook, or threat, he forces or bribes other men to assist him; or mayhap, God in His goodness performs a miracle, & sends him an Angel of Light for an assistant. You, reader, put this matter to a test: You are sitting now in your office—six clerks are within call.
Summon any one and make this request: “Please look in the encyclopedia and make a brief memorandum for me concerning the life of Correggio”.
Will the clerk quietly say, “Yes, sir,” and go do the task?
On your life, he will not. He will look at you out of a fishy eye and ask one or more of the following questions:
Who was he?
Which encyclopedia?
Where is the encyclopedia?
Was I hired for that?
Don’t you mean Bismarck?
What’s the matter with Charlie doing it?
Is he dead?
Is there any hurry?
Shan’t I bring you the book and let you look it up yourself?
What do you want to know for?
And I will lay you ten to one that after you have answered the questions, and explained how to find the information, and why you want it, the clerk will go off and get one of the other clerks to help him try to find Garcia- and then come back and tell you there is no such man. Of course I may lose my bet, but according to the Law of Average, I will not.
Now if you are wise you will not bother to explain to your “assistant” that Correggio is indexed under the C’s, not in the K’s, but you will smile sweetly and say, “Never mind,” and go look it up yourself.
And this incapacity for independent action, this moral stupidity, this infirmity of the will, this unwillingness to cheerfully catch hold and lift, are the things that put pure Socialism so far into the future. If men will not act for themselves, what will they do when the benefit of their effort is for all? A first-mate with knotted club seems necessary; and the dread of getting “the bounce” Saturday night, holds many a worker to his place.
Advertise for a stenographer, and nine out of ten who apply, can neither spell nor punctuate- and do not think it necessary to.
Can such a one write a letter to Garcia?
“You see that bookkeeper,” said the foreman to me in a large factory.
“Yes, what about him?”
“Well he’s a fine accountant, but if I’d send him up town on an errand, he might accomplish the errand all right, and on the other hand, might stop at four saloons on the way, and when he got to Main Street, would forget what he had been sent for.”
Can such a man be entrusted to carry a message to Garcia?
We have recently been hearing much maudlin sympathy expressed for the “downtrodden denizen of the sweat-shop” and the “homeless wanderer searching for honest employment,” & with it all often go many hard words for the men in power.
Nothing is said about the employer who grows old before his time in a vain attempt to get frowsy ne’er-do-wells to do intelligent work; and his long patient striving with “help” that does nothing but loaf when his back is turned. In every store and factory there is a constant weeding-out process going on. The employer is constantly sending away “help” that have shown their incapacity to further the interests of the business, and others are being taken on. No matter how good times are, this sorting continues, only if times are hard and work is scarce, the sorting is done finer- but out and forever out, the incompetent and unworthy go.
It is the survival of the fittest. Self-interest prompts every employer to keep the best- those who can carry a message to Garcia.
I know one man of really brilliant parts who has not the ability to manage a business of his own, and yet who is absolutely worthless to any one else, because he carries with him constantly the insane suspicion that his employer is oppressing, or intending to oppress him. He cannot give orders; and he will not receive them. Should a message be given him to take to Garcia, his answer would probably be, “Take it yourself.”
Tonight this man walks the streets looking for work, the wind whistling through his threadbare coat. No one who knows him dare employ him, for he is a regular fire-brand of discontent. He is impervious to reason, and the only thing that can impress him is the toe of a thick-soled No. 9 boot.
Of course I know that one so morally deformed is no less to be pitied than a physical cripple; but in our pitying, let us drop a tear, too, for the men who are striving to carry on a great enterprise, whose working hours are not limited by the whistle, and whose hair is fast turning white through the struggle to hold in line dowdy indifference, slip-shod imbecility, and the heartless ingratitude, which, but for their enterprise, would be both hungry & homeless.
Have I put the matter too strongly? Possibly I have; but when all the world has gone a-slumming I wish to speak a word of sympathy for the man who succeeds- the man who, against great odds has directed the efforts of others, and having succeeded, finds there’s nothing in it: nothing but bare board and clothes.
I have carried a dinner pail & worked for day’s wages, and I have also been an employer of labor, and I know there is something to be said on both sides. There is no excellence, per se,
in poverty; rags are no recommendation; & all employers are not rapacious and high-handed, any more than all poor men are virtuous.
My heart goes out to the man who does his work when the “boss” is away, as well as when he is at home. And the man who, when given a letter for Garcia, quietly take the missive, without asking any idiotic questions, and with no lurking intention of chucking it into the nearest sewer, or of doing aught else but deliver it, never gets “laid off,” nor has to go on a strike for higher wages. Civilization is one long anxious search for just such individuals. Anything such a man asks shall be granted; his kind is so rare that no employer can afford to let him go. He is wanted in every city, town and village—in every office, shop, store and factory. The world cries out for such: he is needed, & needed badly—the man who can carry a message to Garcia.

adf

Tipping Point implications

Before I continue with the topic of the Tipping Point, I wish to draw your attention to a couple of friends’ blogs that I find very interesting. The first one is from Paula and she writes in a very nice prose tidbits of her life. I think I suggested her that, at some point, she should publish her collection of short stories. They are light and insightful. A breath of fresh air when it comes to reading for the re-creation of our mind. You can find Paula’s blog at the following address: http://3nthemorning.wordpress.com/

The second blog is from Bob. He teaches a religion class to a bunch of kids 14 to 18 years old. I met Bob in Italy in the mid 70’s in my hometown where he stayed for only a few months. During those few months, I came to appreciate his spirituality, which is above and beyond his own beliefs and religion but is an integral part of them as well. Bob is writing this blog for his students, but I have read what he writes and I found again that spirituality that I had met in him more than 30 years ago. Whether you are a religious person or not, Bob’s blog would feed your spirit if you’d care to listen inside your heart while you read what he has to say. Bob’s blog can be found at http://a100thpart.wordpress.com/

Finally, another friend of mine, whose name is Bob as well, has created a web domain for my blog. Now you can simply type http://albertodefeo.net/ and you will be transferred to my blog. Thank you Bob.

Few final considerations about the Tipping Point, which I hope may apply to your lives. As I wrote before, in the mid 90’s the New York City’s crime rate dropped so much that the City of New York went down to be the 136th city for crime among major cities in the USA, par to Boise Idaho. “There was a time when it wasn’t uncommon to hear rapid fire, like you would hear somewhere in the jungle in Vietnam,” Inspector Edward A. Mezzadri, who commands the Seventy-fifth Precinct, told Malcolm Gladwell. “You would hear that in Bed-Stuy and Brownsville and, particularly, East New York all the time. I don’t hear the gunfire anymore. I’ve been at this job one year and twelve days. The other night when I was going to the garage to get my car, I heard my first volley. That was my first time.”

Gladwell writes: “what accounts for the drop in crime rates? William J. Bratton-who as the New York City Police Commissioner presided over much of the decline from the fall of 1994 until his resignation, in 1996-argues that his new policing strategies made the difference: he cites more coordination between divisions of the N.Y.P.D., more accountability from precinct commanders, more arrests for gun possession, more sophisticated computer-aided analysis of crime patterns, more aggressive crime prevention. In the Seven-Five, Mezzadri has a team of officers who go around and break up the groups of young men who congregate on street corners, drinking, getting high, and playing dice-and so remove what was once a frequent source of violent confrontations. He says that he has stepped up random “safety checks” on the streets, looking for drunk drivers or stolen cars. And he says that streamlined internal procedures mean that he can now move against drug-selling sites in a matter of days, where it used to take weeks. “It’s aggressive policing,” he says. “It’s a no-nonsense attitude. Persistence is not just a word, it’s a way of life.”

All these changes make good sense. But how does breaking up dice games and streamlining bureaucracy cut murder rates by two-thirds? Many criminologists have taken a broader view, arguing that changes in crime reflect fundamental demographic and social trends-for example, the decline and stabilization of the crack trade, the aging of the population, and longer prison sentences, which have kept hard-core offenders off the streets. Yet these trends are neither particularly new nor unique to New York City; they don’t account for why the crime rate has dropped so suddenly here and now. Furthermore, whatever good they have done is surely offset, at least in part, by the economic devastation visited on places like Brownsville and East New York in recent years by successive rounds of federal, state, and city social-spending cuts.

When social scientists talk about epidemics, they mean something very specific. Epidemics have their own set of rules. Suppose, for example, that one summer a thousand tourists come to Manhattan from Canada carrying an untreatable strain of twenty-four-hour flu. The virus has a two-per-cent infection rate, which is to say that one out of every fifty people who come into close contact with someone carrying it catches the bug himself. Let’s say that fifty is also exactly the number of people the average Manhattanite-in the course of riding the subways and mingling with colleagues at work-comes into contact with every day. What we have, then, given the recovery rate, is a disease in equilibrium. Every day, each carrier passes on the virus to a new person. And the next day those thousand newly infected people pass on the virus to another thousand people, so that throughout the rest of the summer and the fall the flu chugs along at a steady but unspectacular clip.

But then comes the Christmas season. The subways and buses get more crowded with tourists and shoppers, and instead of running into an even fifty people a day, the average Manhattanite now has close contact with, say, fifty-five people a day. That may not sound like much of a difference, but for our flu bug it is critical. All of a sudden, one out of every ten people with the virus will pass it on not just to one new person but to two. The thousand carriers run into fifty-five thousand people now, and at a two-per-cent infection rate that translates into eleven hundred new cases the following day. Some of those eleven hundred will also pass on the virus to more than one person, so that by Day Three there are twelve hundred and ten Manhattanites with the flu and by Day Four thirteen hundred and thirty-one, and by the end of the week there are nearly two thousand, and so on up, the figure getting higher every day, until Manhattan has a full-blown flu epidemic on its hands by Christmas Day.”

Can we actually see these things in our lives? Can we forecast a tipping point in our community or in our lives, our career, our family troubles and so on? I believe in a way we can. We need to be persistent about what we think is good for ourselves and for those around us and things, eventually will change for the best. Sometimes, they have to get even worse but if we hold faithfully to the thought that one day the point will tip in our favor, I believe it will.

Your comments are always well received.

adf

Quale e’ il Punto Critico della tua vita? (Italian)

Alcuni anni fa’ ad una conferenza canadese di Enti Locali, uno degli oratori menziono’ un libro dell’autore canadese Malcolm Gladwell intitolato “The Tipping Point” (in italiano “Il Punto Critico: i Grandi Effetti dei Piccoli Cambiamenti” pubblicato da Rizzoli). L’intuizione che Malcolm Gladwell sviluppa in questo libro è che i cambiamenti sociali obbediscono alle stesse leggi delle epidemie: allo stesso modo dei virus, un’idea, una moda, un comportamento, diffusi dal contagio del “passaparola”, raggiungono una soglia oltre la quale ottengono un effetto a valanga, Questa soglia è il Punto Critico. Quando si supera il punto critico, la reazione a catena sembra sfuggire alle normali relazioni di causa ed effetto. Un piccolo cambiamento può innescare una vera rivoluzione. Con esempi e riflessioni tratti dalla psicologia e dalla sociologia, dalla storia, dall’economia e dalla nostra vita quotidiana Gladwell insegna a essere artefici di epidemie positive.

Ho letto il libro in pochi giorni. Affascinante! In realta’ e’ un libro sul cambiamento. In particolare e’ un libro che presenta un nuovo modo di capire come mai il cambiamento accade talvolta improssivamente e con conseguenze inaspettate. Per esempio, perche’ il livello di criminalita’ in New York e’ declinato sostanzialmente nella meta’ degli anni ‘90? Come fa’ un libro scritto da un autore poco conosciuto a diventare un bestseller? Come mai ci sono sempre piu’ giovani che fumano quando tutti sanno che il fumo uccide? Gladwell risponde che vi e’ un solo motivo. Si tratta di epidemia sociali che si comportanto esattamente come si comporterebbe un’epidemia da virus come l’influenza.

Per esempio, quando analizzo la comunita’ in cui vivo e vedo come il crimine abbia influenzato la nostra qualita’ di vita, penso sempre di piu’ al punto critico teorizzato da Gladwell. Negli ultimi anni sono stati fatti tanti ottimi sforzi per ridurre il crimine ma senza successo. In questi ultimi mesi e senza evidente cambiamento nelle modalita’ di attuazione della lotta alla criminalita’, la riduzione del crimine e’ stata del 50%. Come mai adesso e non prima?

I fondamenti della teoria di Gladwell sono i seguenti e si rifanno alle tre regole delle epidemie biologiche: La Legge dei Pochi, il Fattore di Attaccamento, e il Potere del Contesto.

Il principio dell’ 80/20 afferma che in ogni situazione circa l’80% del ‘lavoro’ e’ fatto dal 20% dei participanti. Questa idea e’ centrale alla teoria della . Ma se togliamo via quel 20% di persone che fanno la maggior parte del lavoro che cosa succederebbe? Ci sarebbero altri che prenderebbero il posto di quel 20% o cosa? Ancora piu’ importante e’ chiedersi, uno nasce una persona eccezionale, uno dei ‘pochi’, o si puo’ imparare a diventare parte di questo gruppo ’speciale’?

L’Attaccamento significa che un messaggio ha un impatto che rimane e non va via facilmente, come per esempio qualche pubblicita’ che abbiamo visto da piccoli e ancora ce la ricordiamo (vi ricordate di Calimero e l’olandesina che gli dice: Calimero tu non sei nero sei solo sporco). Si puo’ dire con esattezza come fa’ un’idea ad ‘attaccarsi’ a noi?

Infine, il Potere del Contesto afferma che gli esseri umani sono molto piu’ sensibili al loro ambiente di quel che sembra. Quanto siamo in contatto col nostro ambiente? Abbiamo mai sentito gli effetti dei cambiamenti d’umore a causa di cio’ che ci circonda? Per esempio, come vi siete sentiti dopo aver visto le immagini del 9/11?

Gladwell chiarisce che queste leggi non si azionano da sole ma hanno bisogno di individui particolari per farle andare avanti. Per oggi desidero lasciarvi a questa introduzione sperando di avere qualche commento e risposta alle domande sulle tre regole.

A presto

adf

Is there a ‘Tipping Point’ in our lives?

A few years ago I attended a conference of Canadian local governments in Calgary. One of the keynote speakers mentioned a book by Canadian author Malcolm Gladwell called “The Tipping Point”. The speaker used the concepts expressed in the book to make a point on homelessness: at some point the scale will tip and trends will change, even for homelessness.

I was inpressed by the speaker and so I bought the book and read it. What a fascinating reading! It’s a book about change. In particular, it’s a book that presents a new way of understanding why change so often happens as quickly and as unexpectedly as it does. For example, why did crime drop so dramatically in New York City in the mid-1990’s? How does a novel written by an unknown author end up as national bestseller? Why do teens smoke in greater and greater numbers, when every single person in the country knows that cigarettes kill? Why is word-of-mouth so powerful? What makes TV shows like Sesame Street so good at teaching kids how to read? According to Gladwell, the answer to all those questions is the same. It’s that ideas and behavior and messages and products sometimes behave just like outbreaks of infectious disease. They are social epidemics. The Tipping Point is an examination of the social epidemics that surround us.

When I look at my community, and I see how the issue of crime has effected our quality of living, I think more and more of the Tipping Point theory by Gladwell. A number of effort were put into reducing crime for many years but only now and without a clear explenation, crime reduction is dramatic (and good for the community).

There are some interesting points in Gladwell’s theory that need to be outlined. They are, in fact, the foundation of his theory. Let’s review them.

Gladwell writes that there are three rules to epidemics: the Law of the Few, the Stickiness Factor, and the Power of Context.

The 80/20 Principle states that in any situation roughly 80 percent of the ‘work’ will be done by 20 percent of the participants. This idea is central to the Law of the Few theory where a tiny percentage of people do the majority of work. But say you took those 20 people who do all the “work” away, would changes or epidemics never occur or would the next 20 people step into that role and assume the position of “workers”? Is one born an exceptional person, a ‘one of the few,’ or could someone eventually learn how to become a member of this exceptional group?

Stickiness means that a message makes an impact and doesn’t go in one ear and out the other. Take a simple, every day example of this. Think about a song that you couldn’t get out of your head or that television commercial you still remember from when you were a kid. Could you pinpoint what it is you think makes them “sticky?”

Finally, the Power of Context says that human beings are a lot more sensitive to their environment than they may seem. How attuned are you to your environment and its effect on you? Have you felt your mood change because of the surroundings even if it’s as subtle as standing near a couple in a bitter argument or being in a cluttered, messy bedroom?

In order for these rules to be effective, you need special people. They are called Connectors, Mavens and Salesmen.

Connectors are the kinds of people who know everyone and possess special gifts for bringing the world together. What kind of careers and job titles would you expect Connectors to have? Connectors are defined by having many acquaintances, a sign of social power, but do you think a Connector privileges quantity over quality? How do Connectors embody the maxim “it’s not what you know but who you know?”

Maven means one who accumulates knowledge and who has information on a lot of different products or prices or places. Could anyone be a maven if they just have the diligence and desire to learn a specific craft or area of knowledge?

Salesmen are the select group of people with the skills to persuade us when we are unconvinced of what we are hearing. Discuss what you think makes a good salesman? Think about the last time you were in a store and what you liked or didn’t like about the retail person assisting you? Have you ever felt suckered into buying something or recognized the only reason you bought an item (or even one in ever color) was because of the person selling it to you?

What happens when two people talk? They engage in a kind of dance. Their volume and pitch fall into balance and they fall into physical and conversational harmony? So, when we ‘click’ with someone, is this harmony immediately established without effort or can it be created and fine-tuned with practice or over time? Is it this synchronicity that leads to attraction? Does the way people ‘dance’ with each other indicate the presence of chemistry? What would you describe yourself as — a connecter, maven or salesman? Think of the people you know and who out of them best exemplifies these categories and why.

Well, I believe the topic is huge and so I will have to write more. In the meantime, is there a Tipping Point in your life? I hope to hear from you on this first blog on the subject. I will write again in a few days.

adf

The Goldilocks Dilemma – Final Considerations

I have received many good comments on the Goldilocks Dilemma. I wish to share some with you.

My friend John wrote: “A person who isn’t making mistakes, is not trying hard eneogh. You talk about things as if they are right or wrong. Hurdles come in different sizes, shapes and colors. Your path in life has many bumps, potholes and detours. Stick to your goals, family, work and self. Work on your objectives, don’t let others distract you, learn from them.” John, I really appreciate your insight. I, like you, believe that our life path is not a black and white thoroughfare but a shaded road with many colours and grades of black through white. My personal past life has taught me to embrace change and to appreciate the challenges that come with it. I guess that, once in a while, I need to stop and reflect before I can move forward. Thank you pal.

My long-time friend Bob from California (who worked for Lucas Films Ltd.) wrote: “Ciao Uncle Alby! This time last year, I hit what I might refer to as my Goldilocks Dilemma…stresses at home, and stresses at work. I decided to take a leave from a good job and focus on the situations at home, knowing that my job would not be available when my leave was over. Although I had to persevere four months of unemployment, and accept a new job at 40% less pay, I am certainly much happier and relaxed one year later. I have been able to search other job offers looking for “the right one” while still collecting a paycheck, albeit not yet what I would like it to be. I just have to retain the faith that a certain Higher Power is looking out for me as only a loving Father does.” Bob you know me, I admire you for you what you did and do. Your words confirm some of my thoughts and analysis I laid out in my blog. Continue to persevere.

Jason has offered the following comments: “I heard at a management seminar once that there are 4 progressive stages to career development:

1. Survival
2. Stability
3. Success
4. Substance

The Goldilock dilemna is probably not going to be very applicable to people who are in (or have been thrust back to) stage 1 or 2, however, I have reached a point where I am still hungry but the menu is limited to porridge that is too hot and too cold.

For me the work ahead is to “responde, as best I can, to those things uniquely encombant on me” (or find substance) that drives my appitite. For me the search for meaning and purpose cannot be limited to my work. I have had to make an effort to connect with the humans on a personal level. Many of them like their porridge just right.

This is a introspective process and remains a work in progress.” I agree Jason and this confirms that we are all different and we take our paths in differente ways. This is why, it is important to know what other people think and would do in similar situations. Thank you to you, too. Can you tell me why you want to be called commissioner now?

Steve instead wrote: “In your case, I don’t think I could or should offer you advice except to say that I will support whatever decision you come to.  But I think you understand that everyone needs to have a balance between a work life and home life to ensure one situation doesn’t overwhelm the other.”

Geoff shared some thoughts that really made me think hard:”When you listed your options the only one that didn’t throw everything to the wind was to throw the job security out the window and do what you think needs to be done. Just looking professionally, leaving will give you all the same security issues staying would. Although it would increase the chances of reducing your influence in any new position. This is only looking professionally though, moving, family and religious influence/community would take on there own……………’struggle’ if you will. Finding the balance is a huge cliche. If you asked a child what to do when you’re not getting enough of something and it’s a problem, you can bet they would plainly state; ‘Then just get more of it!’ We cloud decision making with every way we’ve been taught to strategize and analyze and in the end use these ‘formulas’ to avoid the truths we can see coming. Conflict and emotion are the scariest things (hahaha……..scary…….emotion……..cracked myself up!) for planning and direction because of their radical and irrational natures. As I am seeing in my own family’s business, insecurities can grind anything to dead halt. All I can suggest is that you look hard at what you feel are your strengths and if they will guide you through the paths you are looking down. I have found it extremely helpful for myself to evaluate my own level of ‘tolerance’ for conflict and stress. When I know what I am willing to put up with I have always been able to forge ahead confidantly and achieve my goals.” Geoff, thank you. You helped me looking into the glass as half full.

I wish to also thank John, Ken and Vaughan for their insights. They were also very enlightening. I am most thankful for your wisdom and help.

I wish to conclude my thoughts on the Goldilocks Dilemma by sharing some of Dr. Berglar’s comments on how to solve the impasse when we find ourselves in a Goldilocks situation. He introduces a principle called Chronic Diversification, which means that if a person’s self-esteem has mutliple infusions of positive feedback it grows more stable and less vulnerable to the emotional consequences of failing at innovation and change. The first step toward overcoming the anxiety inherent in reconceptualizing your career this way is to understand that the strengths that give you a professional identitycan be reorganized and reallocated just as a broker moves assets among investments.

In the end, Dr. Berglar gives some simple tips to help us repackage or reorganizing a career:

1. Relax: you are reapplying your strengths, not reinventing yourself. Your personality usually does not change but adapts. For instance, if you are an introvert you may learn to overcome a fear of social gatherings, but it is doubtful that you will ever be the life of the party.
2. Be an origin, not a pawn. If you dictate the time and place and place to begin reorganizing yourself, you benefit in several ways: not only you are more mentally equipped to cope with the stresses inherent in such risk taking but you exude confidence to those who may facilitate your success.
3. Embrace bad news. Never wear rose-coloured glasses when readjusting your career as by doing so you are prone to engage in denial. But anticipating the consequences of your actions makes experiencing a painful outcome manageable.
4. Don’t forget that Eustress (positive stress) is a cousin of Distress. Remember what Epictetus said in 135 C.E. ‘Men are disturbed not by things, but by the views they take of them’.

And with this, I conclude my few entries on the Goldilocks Dilemma. To all my friends that wish to know if my personal struggle is now over, I would respond: it’s never over if you love a full life. As far as there is a dilemma, there is something positive going on.

Thank you again for all your reading, pondering, and responding. Next on my blog: the fascinatin theory of the Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell.

adf

Riflessioni sul Dilemma di Goldilocks (Italian)

Come si puo’ raggiungere un equilibrio che possa darmi sufficiente motivazione professionale e allo stesso tempo sentirmi sicuro senza preoccuparmi di fare degli errori?

Prima di rispondere, voglio condividere il seguente commento del mio amico Ray.

Mi ha scritto: “Il punto non e’ Goldilocks e neanche i tre orsi. Io voglio la polenta. Essendo lavoratore indipendente, la battaglia essenziale e’ sopravvivere che e’ cio’ in cui ci troviamo in questi tempi. La sfida e’ nel trovare lavoro, clienti soddisfacenti e nel sentirsi soddisfatti per il compimento di un progetto.” Ray Ha una domanda piu’ imporatnte della mia ed e’ una questione di sopravvivenza. Io ho gia’ un lavoro e quello che provo e’ importante ma non critico per la mia sopravvivenza. D’altro canto, la polenta di cui Ray parla e’ assolutamente essenziale al proprio futuro. Questo e’ ancora piu’ vero a chi ha un lavoro indipendente, ma si applica anche a tutti coloro che hanno un lavoro dipendente o hanno perso lavoro a causa della crisi economica e non sanno cosa fare.

Benche’ devo riflettere un po’ sul dilemma della polenta, penso che parte della soluzione si trova anche nel rispondere alla domanda che mi sono posto.

Domande or opzioni conseguenti che possono definire meglio il dilemma sono le seguenti:

1. Cambiare lavoro, per esempio. Ma e’ possibile o desiderabile o ideale?
2. Cambiare gli obiettivi sul lavoro e recreare me stesso?
3. Abbandonare la sicurezza del lavoro e rischiare per avere piu’ soddisfazione?
4. O cercare sicurezza sul lavoro a tutti i costi?
5. Infine, cercare di trovare un equilibrio in tutto questo e realizzarlo?

A prescindere da quale approccio prendo, ognuno puo’ facilmente capire che ci sono sempre delle varaibili che devono essere tenute in considerazione, come l’ambiente di lavoro e di comunita’, la famiglia e gli amici, i miei principi e valori, che fanno di me la persona che sono, il mio datore di lavoro, e, la cosa piu’ importante forse, la mia visione di me stesso e se e’ ancora valida.

Sono d’accordo con Epitteto quando scrisse: “Una vita piena non si realizza attraverso delle tecniche particolari. Non puoi convincerti artificialmente di una vita ben vissuta. E non si realizza neanche attraverso semplici passi o seguendo qualche personalita’ carismatica. Una vita piena dipende da come meglio rispondiamo a tutto cio’ che incombe su di noi e ci capita quotidianamente”.

The Goldilocks Dilemma – Reflections prior to Part 2

How do I reach that balance that can get me to both enough challenge to feel motivated in my career and secure without fearing making mistakes?

Before I try to answer my question, my friend Ray sent a comment that makes a lot of sense to me. He wrote: “Never mind Goldilocks, or even the three bears. I just want the porridge. As someone who is self employed, the essential battle comes down to survival and that’s where we are right now. The challenge comes in finding work, satisfying clients and feeling good about a project on completion.” Ray has a more important question than mine and it is a question of survival. I have a job and how I feel about it is important but not critical to my survival. On the other end, the porridge Ray is talking about is absolutely essential to one’s future. This is more so for self-employed individuals, but it applies to many others who have lost their job because of the economic crisis and do not really know what to do.

Well Ray, I will have to think about the porridge. However, I feel that the solution to my dilemma may have some implications to the bigger picture question of substance that you posed.

So, let’s see if we can get somewhere by thinking of any options. I see some but I may need help to find more:

1. Change job is one. However, is it feasible? Is it desirable? Is it ideal?
2. Change focus on the job and recreate myself? Same questions apply to this options.
3. Abandon job security and ride the rollercoaster?
4. Forget about the motivation from a continuous challenge on the job and seek security rather?
5. Understand where the balance is and try to achieve it?

No matter how I approach a possible solution, I think everyone understands that there are and always will be variables that will need to be considered such as the environment in which I work and live, family and friends, my inner set of principle and values, whether I wish to subject myself to any of some of these options. And what about my employer? The community and my ‘circle of influence’? And finally, what is my vision for myself and is it still valid?

There is a lot of thinking that needs to be done. So, I hope, in the next few days, to really find something that makes sense. In the meantime, I hope you will provide me with some ideas. I agree with Epictetus when he wrote: “The flourishing life is not achieved by techniques. You can’t trick yourself into a life well-lived. Neither is it achieved by following easy steps or some charismatic fihure’s dogma. A flourishing life depends on our responding, as best we can, to those things uniquely incumbent upon us.”

I hope these reflections make any sense at all. If not, you have a confused blogger.

adf

Il dilemma Goldilocks (Italian)

Do’ qui di seguito un sommario del mio primo post.

Sto leggendo un libro del Dr. Steven Berglas uno psichiatra americano che lavora molto con societa’ del settore privato specialmente per aiutare i dirigenti che hanno problemi associati con il loro ruolo dirigenziale. Il libro si intitola in inglese “Reclaiming the Fire: How Successful People Overcome Burnout”. Ho cercato una versione del libro in italiano, ma non c’e’. Comunque il titolo in italiano suonerebbe “Reclamare la Passione (per il proprio ruolo/lavoro – si intende): Come, persone di successo, superano l’esaurimento da troppo lavoro” (traduzione molto libera).

Uno dei temi maggiori trattati dal Dr. Berglar si chiama il dilemma di Goldilocks. Goldilocks e’ la bambina monella che si reca nella casa della famiglia di orsi (madre, padre e cucciolo) mentre loro sono a farsi una passeggiata prima di cena. La bambina e’ una curiosona e crea disordine nella casa. Prima vede le sedie dei tre abitanti della casa. Una e’ troppo grande, una e’ troppo piccola e la terza e’ giusta per lei. Poi sul tavolo trova la cena (un piatto di porridge per ognuno). Una porzione e’ troppo calda, un ‘altra e’ troppo fredda e la terza e’ a giusta temperatura e se la mangia. Alla fine trova i tre letti. Uno e’ troppo duro, uno e’ troppo soffice e il terzo e’ quello giusto. Si mette a dormire e arrivano gli orsi che si arrabbiano per la confusione e l’invasione e Goldilocks si sveglia e scappa. La scelta di Goldilocks e’ sempre la piu’ sicura e bilanciata.

Il Dr. Berglar sostiene che un professionista generalmente raggiunge un certo equilibrio tra le sfide del lavoro, e quindi la motivazione di continuare nel proprio compito dirigenziale, e il desiderio di proteggere se stesso da errori e imbarazzo. La scelta (il dilemma di Goldilocks per i professionisti) e’ tra continuare a sfidare se stessi e accettare un alto rischio di fallimento e imbarazzo ma con lo scopo di sostenere un alto livello di eustress (stress positivo) o proteggere i risultati raggiunti e ‘accomodarsi’ nella propria posizione (poco rischio ma possibilmente noioso).

La domanda che mi pongo, visto che sto attraversando un periodo in cui il dilemma e’ reale per me, e’ come superare l’inpasse e trovare un altro equilibrio e andare avanti. Affrontero’ questo problema nel prossimo post, ma se avete delle idee, per favore condividetele con me

The Goldilocks Dilemma – Part 1

Well, this is my real first post. Let’s see how it goes. It took awhile tonight to figure out again how to get back on the website and write something. But here I am.

Today, I wish to address a leadership/management issue that all good professionals have encountered or will at one point of their career. I am reading a book by Dr. Steven Berglar titled “Reclaiming the Fire”. In it, he addresses issues of burnout by highly successful people and how they occur. Obviously, the intent is also to provide some advise and possibly move out of what he calls the Supernova Burnout and move on with life, hopefully with a renewed freshness and zest.

One of the major issues he discusses in the book is what he calls the Goldilocks Dilemma. You know the story about the family of bears that goes out for a stroll before dinner and the little rude girl called Goldilocks. She enters their house unbeknownst to them and makes a mess out of it. The girl’s dilemma, in the story and while she explores her new environment, is to find what is comfortable or suitable to her. The chair is too big or too small, the soup is too cold or too hot, the bed is too hard or too soft. Goldilocks always finds the middle ground and chooses one of the three chairs, or one of the three soups, or one of the three beds that are suitable to her level of comfort. Dr. Berglar tells us that, as time goes on, professionals usually become creative and self-directed. Ultimately, though, everyone of them reaches a point where the need for eustress (positive stress or healthy stress) and the predilection to feel in control and protected from the embarassment or shame of failure achieve a perfect balance. At this point, according to our good doctor, the Goldilocks dilemma ensues, which is: Endure an already mastered task whose challenges are too cold (understimulating and likely to precipitate frustration and ennui), take on challenges that are too hot and threaten to disrupt self-esteem, or find a mechanism that will free you from remaining between two undesirable alternatives.

So, how many that are reading me have experienced the Goldilocks dilemma in their careers? There is no age rule for this to occur. Some face it later in their career, and some face it sooner. But sooner or later, all of us will face it.

I am facing it. Right now! So I ask myself: What should I do? How do I find that balance? Dr. Berglar suggests that directing people to resolve this dilemma by adjusting the challenge in their career to a level that is ‘just’ right is equivalent to telling them to climb Mount Everest by putting one foot in front of the other, planting a few pitons, and moving upward. In other words, people cannot transition from a point of optimal satisfaction and reward to one that introduces invigorating challenge unless they are forwarned about, fully understand, and take steps to cope with the way challenges can become threats to self-esteem.

So what does Dr. Berglar suggest? And what do I think I should do? I will let you ponder on this article first and in the next few days, I hope to have an answer, or a few, that may be helpful to me, and, why not, to some of the readers.

adf