What Is Authentic Leadership?

It continues to surprise me how many leaders attempt to be one way at work, while their “true” personality emerges outside of work. Once a CEO reminded me, “Leadership is acting.” And it surprises me when these same leaders seem shocked or confused when their employees don’t trust them, don’t like them, and can’t really wait to work elsewhere.

Authenticity has been explored throughout history, from Greek philosophers to the work of Shakespeare  (“To thy own self be true.” –Polonius, Hamlet). Authentic leadership has been explored sporadically as part of modern management science, but found its highest levels of acceptance since

But what is authentic leadership?

While different theorists have different slants on the concept, most agree that:


1. Authentic leaders are self-aware and genuine. Authentic leaders are self-actualized individuals who are aware of their strengths, their limitations, and their emotions. They also show their real selves to their followers. They do not act one way in private and another in public; they don’t hide their mistakes or weaknesses out of fear of looking weak. They also realize that being self-actualized is an endless journey, never complete.


2. Authentic leaders are mission driven and focused on results. They are able to put the mission and the goals of the organization ahead of their own self-interest. They do the job in pursuit of results, not for their own power, money or ego.


3. Authentic leaders lead with their heart, not just their minds. They are not afraid to show their emotions, their vulnerability and to connect with their employees. This does not mean authentic leaders are “soft.” In fact communicating in a direct manner is critical to successful outcomes, but it’s done with empathy; directness without empathy is cruel.


4. Authentic leaders focus on the long-term. A key tenet in Bill George’s model is the company leaders are focused on long-term shareholder value, not in just beating quarterly estimates. Just as George did as CEO of Medtronic, and as Bezos has done for years at Amazon, leaders realize that to nurture individuals and to nurture a company requires hard work and patience, but the approach pays large dividends over time.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2013/05/12/what-is-authentic-leadership/

Self Esteem Improvement: Ways to Boost Your Confidence and Self Worth

We often encounter the word self esteem in psychology discussions but sometimes the meaning of the term is rather unclear to us. What we really know about self-esteem is that it has something to do with confidence. That is quite true, but confidence is just one aspect in self-esteem. What self-esteem really means is that it is an emotion or trait we exhibit when we have pride. Self-esteem is associated with how we value ourselves or how we see our overall self-worth.

Self Esteem Further Defined

We all have a clear picture of ourselves in our head. The projection we make is based on how others perceive us according to our own belief. This includes how we are accepted, valued, and loved by the people in our surroundings like family, friends, and acquaintances. We also have a mental image of us as to how we accept, value, and love ourselves. If all of these elements are positive then one can say that you are happy and you feel very good because the response you get from other people and yourself are in harmony. This is the reason why a person who is accomplished in his own right and is well liked in the community exhibits a positive trait of confidence and pride.

When can a Person have Low Self Esteem?

A person is said to have a low self esteem if he or she feels unwanted, underappreciated, and not loved by the people in his or her surroundings. The individual will also exhibit low self-esteem if he or she doesn’t feel good about his physical image and attitude. In addition, a person who doesn’t love himself and doesn’t know how to value his self worth is also said to possess a low self-esteem.

We all experience this at certain periods in our lives. Remember the time when our action led to a mistake and people in our lives were disappointed and saddened by our deed. Remember the time when you were in an embarrassing situation and people around you were laughing until you felt mortified and humiliated. These scenarios are some examples where your self-esteem turns into a negative trait because you feel that your identity has been compromised and people no longer appreciate or accept you. This also leads to a feeling of depreciation or devaluation in your part.

How to Improve Self Esteem

Sure you have been humiliated in the past or you felt you were the unpopular kid in your school but the good thing is that self esteem improvement is possible and it is always aimed towards our advantage. The awkward situations we have been to are just phases which we could leave in the past. We could leave our bad experiences to be able to change our trait so that we can face the things that lie ahead of us with our heads held up high.

Usually, improving self esteem can be challenging especially if the people, things, or events that put us down are still present in our lives. We can address the problem by confronting the source itself. For instance if you were constantly bullied, you can confront the person by yourself or with the help of a friend, family, or authority. If you feel underappreciated by your mom or dad, you can talk about it by arranging a meaningful discussion. Addressing the situation will help you achieve your goal towards an improved self esteem. Here are other techniques on how to value and feel good about you.

• Stop putting yourself down. One of the sources of our low self-esteem is how we poorly treat ourselves. You can be a contributor to your low self-image if you continue to perceive things around you in a negative manner. Over thinking and over criticizing can lead to poor appreciation. What you need to do is discard this negative outlook of yourself and start adapting a positive one. Instead of seeing the negative things, starts by listing down things, which make you, feel good about yourself.


• Mistakes are opportunities too. Mistakes can really put us down but there is no need to mull about it for months. Do not allow your mistakes to control you; instead view it as a learning opportunity so you can be a good person next time. Bounce back from your mistakes. Ponder about what happened but never allow it to control you.


• Set realistic goals and expectations and not perfections. It is okay to strive perfection but once the idea controls you, it will eventually ruin your life. Being perfect can sometimes ruin your self-image. For instance, you view yourself as obese when in fact you are just slightly chubby can lead to lost opportunities. Similarly if you set the bar too high, you will be depressed if you fail to achieve your goals. What you need to do is be real and learn to accept that you can set goals, which you think you can really achieve even if it is a small one.


• Make new friends. As discussed earlier, our self worth is also based on how people treat us or accept us. Making new friends can help boost our self-esteem. Befriending people who share your ideas, goals, interest, and likes will definitely leave you feeling wanted, appreciated, and loved. Stay away from people who know nothing but put you down. It is okay to be criticized as long as it is done in a good taste but being criticized because the person simply hates you for no reason at all is definitely a no-no. You can confront the person if you wish to or you can simply walk away. Instead surround yourself with people that genuinely care about you.

A positive self-esteem is what we truly need in our life. It is a very uplifting trait, which is why we should constantly strive to remain positive. Remember that there is nothing wrong with feeling down as long as we would never allow it to dictate our actions. We could always improve low self-esteem through acceptance and taking positive actions that would appreciate our self-worth.

http://selfhelptoday.org/61/self-esteem-improvement-ways-to-boost-your-confidence-and-self-worth

Is Your Job Driving You Nuts?

Be a team player but focus on your job.

Take risks but don´t fail.

Think out of the box but follow procedure.

Tell me the truth but don´t bring me problems.

Value employees but fire average performers.

Help customers but spend less time with them.

Work more hours but mind your home life.

Organizational contradictions can drive you crazy. To maintain your sanity you need to recognize and dissolve them. In this post, I will help you recognize them; in the next one, dissolve them.

 

Hard Choices

The contradictions arise from a denial of logical or material limitations.

For a given technology and a given amount of resources, there is a limit to the number of goods that can be produced or goals that can be attained. In economics, this is called a “production possibilities frontier,” or PPF. Along the PPF it is impossible to produce more of one good without producing less of the other, since resources have to be transferred from the latter to the former.

For example, a person can devote her time to work on her project, or to help a colleague. The time used in one task is not available for the other. Thus, unless one is idle, or using her time inefficiently (as in point “C” in the graph below), there is a trade-off or “opportunity cost.”



When you spend some of your time on your project (X) and the rest of your time helping your colleague (Y), you will reach a certain progress (Xa,Ya) in each project. This is point “A” on the curve. You could spend less time helping your colleague, more time on your project, and reach point “B” (Xb, Yb). Any point on the PPF is a feasible combination of progress for both projects.

The problem is that the instruction, “Be a team player but focus on your job,” seems to require you to attain point D, which is out of the PPF, and therefore not feasible! Your manager seems to say, “Devote all your time to your project,” and at the same time, “Devote all your time to support your colleague.” This is clearly impossible. And that is why crazy-making managers hate clarity. 

To get away with this, these managers use abstractions, innuendo, mixed messages and confusion. Like vampires, they loathe the light of reason. Telling them the truth, that is, that you don´t know how to attain their desired outcome with your skills and resources will produce a fit of rage.

Perhaps your manager thinks that you have free time or are working inefficiently (as in point C). Or perhaps he thinks that there is a way to expand the PPF through additional resources or an improvement in technology that would allow you to reach point D. It may be possible to make point D feasible, but you and your manager would have to rationally discuss how to make it so.

Going Crazy

When Harvard Business School professor Chris Argyris asked managers how they behave, they claimed to follow values such as humility, honesty and respect corresponding to the mutual learning model.

Argyris's extensive research found that the way managers claimed to behave is quite different from the way they actually behaved. In real life, managers followed values such as control, manipulation and easing-in corresponding to the unilateral control model .

If your manager’s behavior as a controller contradicts his self-image as a learner he must keep the contradiction hidden. Once exposed, it becomes unsustainable.

When you combine unattainable goals with contradictory managers you get double binds, those emotionally distressing dilemmas that can cause schizophrenia. Argyris found double binds of the following kind in every organization he studied:

1. The manager gives a contradictory order.
2. The manager makes the contradiction un-discussable.
3. The manager makes the un-discussibility un-discussable.

For instance, a supervisor tells a worker that whenever he detects a defect, he must immediately stop the production line and report it. The following day, the supervisor tells the worker that when there is a rush, he should report any defects but shouldn’t stop the line. If there is no clear standard of when “there is a rush,” the worker is trapped: If he stops the line, he will get in trouble; if he doesn’t stop the line, he will also get in trouble. If he tries to get his supervisors to resolve the contradiction, he will also get in trouble. “We are too busy to solve your problems. Deal with it!”

In a double bind not only you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. You are also damned if you tell your boss you are stuck!

Individuals aren’t the only ones with un-discussable contradictions. Business scholars Manfred Kets de Vries and Danny Miller present some of the most common corporate ones. “We are good citizens of this community” (while we pollute the town’s lake). “Our workers have autonomy” (while we fire anyone who questions authority). “Quality is paramount” (while we sell defective products). “People are our most important asset” (while 50% of our employees leave every year).

Schi·zor·ga·ni·za·tion: The absence of organization, systematic arrangement, or unity. Condition characterized by withdrawal from reality, illogical patterns of thinking, delusions, and hallucinations, and accompanied in varying degrees by other emotional, behavioral, or intellectual disturbances. A situation that results from the coexistence of disparate or antagonistic qualities, identities, or activities. Organizational behavior motivated by contradictory or conflicting principles.

How to Avoid the Straight Jacket

Inconsistencies and misunderstandings are inevitable. Organizational life is too complex to avoid apparent contradictions. The good news is that inconsistencies are necessary, but not sufficient to create double binds. The condition for craziness is un-discussability.

Consequently, the best strategy to dissolve double binds is to make them discussable. A culture of mutual learning, in which people are open to discussing dilemmas, is the best antidote.

In my next post, I will give you some practical suggestions on how to dissolve double binds. Till then, I hope that understanding their logical structure can keep you sane.

Fred Kofman

https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130506143905-36052017-is-your-job-driving-you-nuts

EDIT: I will update this blog entry when the second article is published by the author

Curing the Common Cold of Leadership: Poor Listening

Leaders today are beset by overwhelming demands – scheduled every 15 minutes through the day, with an incoming barrage of messages via phone, email, texts, and knocks on the door. Who has time to pay full attention to the person you’re with?

And yet it is in the moments of total attention that interpersonal chemistry occurs. This is when what we say has the most impact, when we can come up with the most fruitful ideas and collaborations, when negotiations and brainstorms are most productive.

And it all starts with listening, turning our attention fully to the person we are with. It’s not just leaders, of course. We’re all besieged by distractions, falling behind on our to-do lists, multi-tasking.

A classic study of doctors and patients asked people in the physician’s waiting room how many questions they had for their doctor. The average was around four. The number of questions they actually asked during that visit with their doctor turned out to be about one-and-a-half. The reason? Once the patient started talking, an average of 16 seconds or so the doctor would cut them off and take over the conversation.

That’s a good analog for what happens in offices everywhere. We’re too busy (we think) to take the time to listen fully.

This leads to the common cold of the workplace: Tuning out of what that person is saying before we fully understand – and telling them what we think too soon. Real listening means hearing the person out and then responding, in a mutual dialogue.

So there you have a bad habit to replace – poor listening – and a positive alternative to practice instead.

People are notoriously poor at changing habits. Neuroscience findings make clear why: habits operate from the basal ganglia, in the unconscious part of the mind. They are automatic and most often invisible, even as they drive what we do.

This arrangement works well, for the most part. The basal ganglia’s repertoire of unconscious habits includes everything from how to operate your smartphone (once you’ve mastered the details) to how to brush your teeth. We don’t want to have to think about these routines – and our brain doesn’t want to waste on them the mental energy that would take.

But when it comes to our unhelpful habits, that arrangement creates a barrier to changing them for the better. We don’t notice them, and so have no control. We need to become consciously aware of the habit, which transfers control to the brain’s executive centers in the prefrontal area. This offers us a choice we did not have before.

The key is being mindful of those moments in your day when you have a naturally occurring opportunity to practice good listening. Most often those moments go by unnoticed and we launch into our old, bad habits.

Once you notice the moment is here, there’s another task for mindfulness: to remind you of the better habit. In this case, you would intentionally put aside what you’re doing, ignore your phone and email, stop your own train of thought – and pay full attention to the person in front of you.

Mindfulness is the secret ingredient in successful habit change. There are several resources to help you mindfully shift patterns:

- Mirabai Bush, a key contributor to Google’s Search Inside Yourself course, developed a new CD called Working with Mindfulness. It includes a guided exercise on how to be a more mindful listener.

- Tara Bennett-Goleman’s new book, Mind Whispering: A New Map to Freedom from Self-Defeating Emotional Habit, combines principles and practices from mindfulness and Buddhist psychology, the neuroscience of habit change, and cognitive therapy to offer a new lens on repatterning our emotional habits.

- Clear communication – and good listening skills – is key for managing virtual teams and connecting with long-distance clients. The CD Socially Intelligent Computing by professor and Internet theorist, Clay Shirky, offers ways to apply social intelligence for group interactions online.

Daniel Goleman

https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130502140433-117825785-curing-the-common-cold-of-leadership-poor-listening

Succeed Now and in Any Economy: The 7 Forces of Business Mastery - Tony Robbins

While these are challenging times, they are also times of opportunity. In fact, the best companies have always excelled in the most difficult eras. More than half of the Fortune 500 were birthed in an “economic winter”—a recession or a depression. Companies like Disney, Apple, Exxon, Microsoft and FedEx were launched when the rest of the business world was licking its wounds.

If you can learn, as they did, not only to become more efficient, but to also optimize sales in this environment, you’ll be able to dominate in any economy. Whether you’re an army of one or a multi-billion dollar corporation, there are principles and strategies that you must understand and master to take your business to the next level. The 7 Forces of Business Mastery are about creating a system that improves your business by empowering you with the skills and tactics you need to gain an invincible advantage—in any environment.

1. An Effective Business Map

The only true competitive advantage in today’s changing market is not just having a business plan, but also a business map that can take you from where you are to where you want to be in the shortest amount of time.

2. Constant & Strategic Innovation

As a leader in your industry, you have to strategically innovate. You must be constantly looking for ways to create something more, new or better than what currently exists. Consumers are no longer impressed with any one new feature or service for very long—they expect a constant evolution of improvement or they will go elsewhere.

3. World-Class Marketing

Have you ever seen a business that has inferior quality products or services, and yet they dominated the market? It’s because the business knows who its customers are, what they want and need, and how to tell the business story in a way that compels prospective customers to buy.

4. Sales Mastery Systems

Marketing makes people want to do business with you, but sales is what you get paid for. You must create multiple channels to capture, convert and close sales.

5. Financial & Legal Analysis

Do you know where your company is spending its money? It’s easy to lose sight of the key measurements that can predict our progress or demise. Being able to measure where your
business is, where it’s going, and being able to see the blind spots that could get you into trouble are factors that are paramount for any business.

6. Optimization

Sometimes, the biggest growth opportunities don’t come from new initiatives, but rather from taking the core processes the business is already doing and executing them more effectively. A small incremental improvement made in a few key areas can result in geometric growth to the business as a whole.

7. Raving Fan Customers

You must understand, anticipate and consistently fulfill the deepest needs of your clients. The more value you are able to add to your customer, the more you’ll dominate the marketplace.

https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130307230225-101706366-succeed-now-and-in-any-economy-the-7-forces-of-business-mastery?_mSplash=1&rs=false

Does Appreciation Make People Uncomfortable?

Here is an interesting blog post by  Dr. Raymond Jewell that clearly illustrates the Power of Gratitude.

I recently met with a person who I sent a Gratitude greeting card to, and she said to me, " I want to share something with you, the card you sent made me uncomfortable." My comment to her was "I am sorry that it made you uncomfortable, that was not the intention." She was much older than I and she said "if I didn't know you I would have thought you were trying to pick me up."

I said to her, "The intention is to send gratitude and appreciation to people who are not expecting it. But sending out appreciation and gratitude to people is counter intuitive to our culture and sometimes it might make people uncomfortable. We are always expecting something in return from people so Giving to Give is many times a foreign thought. "

She said " Now that I know why you sent it, I will be open to when you do it again." WOW! She is expecting me to send more Gratitude cards to her. Amazing how that changed her way of looking at what I did. Feeling the power of Gratitude is something that everyone in the world should experience. YOU can experience it for yourselves by simply clicking on the video to right of this article. Go ahead and see for your self!

Gratitude and Appreciation to you,
Dr. Raymond Jewell

http://showgratitudechallenge.com/article/does-appreciation-make-people-uncomfortable?highview&goback=.mid_I488962029*417_*1.gmp_4621839

Are You A Leader Who Can Be Led?

The other day I was having a conversation with a friend and we began to discuss the danger of being a leader who cannot be easily led.  I have continued to ponder this.

What does this leader look like?  What is at risk?  What is their legacy?

My observation is that this is a trait that can go largely unnoticed-until someone loses their leadership position.  In other words, as long as a leader is climbing the ladder and being lauded for their performance they can appear to be a pretty benevolent, well functioning leader.  But once they lose their title to someone better or because of lethargy, the cracks begin to show.  They can become really stubborn and defensive.  They can become the toxic team member of the next group they are not leading.

The leader who cannot be led is a leader who is focused solely on self.

 

The question a leader must constantly ask is, “Why do I lead?”

Do I lead primarily for the sake of others or mainly for myself?  I’m pretty sure that a leader focused solely on self will eventually lack compassion for those they lead, will constantly be creating their own agendas without regard for the organization, and will only raise up more leaders like themselves.

The prophet Zechariah in the Bible reveals some characteristics of these types of leaders.  In Zechariah 7:11 we read that there are three things these leaders readily exhibit: they refuse to pay attention, they turn a stubborn shoulder, and they stop their ears.  At first glance these terms may not seem to carry much meaning-but in context they are quite weighty.  The prophet was referring to the religious leaders of Israel before the exile.

To “refuse to pay attention” meant that these religious leaders had lost their concentration on God above them and lost their focus of observant care for those beneath them.

To “turn a stubborn shoulder” was an agricultural image.  It’s the picture of a pair of oxen being used to plow a field-but one of them “turns the shoulder” not willing to be under the harness of the master.  An ox which refuses to be under the harness is of little benefit to the farmer.  Literally they cannot be led for the purpose in which they had been employed.

To “stop their ears” meant that these religious leaders could no longer hear the warning cries of where they were headed as a result of their self centeredness.  They were moving down their own path regardless of the consequences and could not be stopped.  I think this has implications for all of us, whether we are leading spiritual entities or secular ones.

The leader who can be led will exhibit the opposite of these traits.

They do pay close attention to those above them and those they lead.  They willingly put their shoulder to the harness for a greater purpose.  And they listen, and even invite, the input of others who might be in a position to tell them where they may be off track.

Read all of Zechariah 7 for a fuller, more complete picture of what this type of leader looks like.

Let’s call these leaders “7-11 Leaders” and let’s make a commitment to not be one. Lead well!

http://garyrunn.com/2011/01/20/are-you-a-leader-who-can-be-led/

Why Trust is the New Core of Leadership

Not long ago, most discussions of leadership were about leaders – their personality traits, how to identify and groom those with ‘leadership potential,’ and what were the skills that leaders employed.
Leadership theorists nowadays stress authenticity, EQ and relationships. This makes intuitive sense. But it isn’t just a fad; there is a solid reason behind the shift. It is driven by changes in the world. Above all, it reflects the growing importance of trust.

Old Leadership: Old Business

Leadership used to be about leaders: the powerful people who had reached the top of their organizations. The rules of business were clear:

1. The essence of business was competition
2. Shareholder value was the main goal, as well as the main measure
3. Scale economies dictated being number one or two in your markets.

The leadership imperatives were equally clear:

1. Leaders were scarce and special; followers were many and common
2. Leadership was a vertical function, related to power
3. Horizontal relationships related to markets and contracts, and were the purview of strategy, not leadership.

The old leadership model implied scouring the organization for “high-potential” leaders of the future and a cult of personality (remember “Neutron Jack?”). This made good sense in a vertical, siloed, competitive business world.

New Business: New Leadership

Then things changed. The business world went from vertical to horizontal; flat, if you prefer. Or virtual.  Business processes can be sliced and diced, reconfigured, contracted out.  Businesses have become constantly morphing configurations of modular pieces.  The boundaries separating them from their employees, their suppliers, and even their competitors have become porous; while the ties to their home nations, even to space and time, have become tenuous.

In such a world, vertical power-based leadership becomes less relevant. The key success factor becomes the ability to persuade someone over whom you have no power to collaborate with you in pursuit of a common mission.

Leaders can no longer trust in power; instead, they rely on the power of trust.

New Leaders. Those who can successfully persuade others to trust them will evidence certain behaviors:

• They themselves will be skilled at trusting, because trusting and trustworthiness enhance each other
• They will be good at collaboration and the tools of influence
• They will operate from a clear set of values and principles, because opportunistic or selfish motives are clearly seen and rejected
• They are likely to be more intrinsically than extrinsically motivated, and more likely to use intrinsic motivations with others
• They will not be dependent on direct authority or political power.

In short, leaders in the new business world will be skilled at the art and science of trust.

Leading From Trust

Leadership development is not dead, but it does need reformulating.  The scale is different, for one thing; the new world needs many more leadership-capable people than did the old world. And the teaching of trust needs to be defined. Three points in particular are key.

Trusting and Trustworthiness. We too often talk about “trust” as if it were a singular thing; it’s not. Trust is a relationship established between a trustor and a trustee. It takes two to tango, and two to trust (this is true not only of interpersonal trust, but of trust between people and institutions).

The role of the trustor is to take risks; the role of the trustee is to be trustworthy. When each is good enough at their roles, a state of trust results. If either party falls down on the job, trust will disappear.

Finally, trust involves a frequent exchange of the two roles; if one party seeks only to be trusted but never to trust, the other eventually will stop taking all the risks and shut down the relationship.
This simple distinction is key to leadership development. Simply analyzing a state of trust doesn’t enable anyone to do anything. Leaders must be taught both how to trust, and how to be trusted.

Virtues and Values. Leadership development must begin using a vocabulary that’s been AWOL for half a century – the language of “virtues.” We have gotten accustomed to “values,” because those are easily described in organizational terms like “alignment.” We are less comfortable using words that sound moralistic, or judgmental – we fear being politically incorrect.

Yet “virtue” is the right word. Virtue is to the individual what values are to the organization: a personally-chosen, consistent set of principles, reflective of the person’s character. Aristotle saw ethics, virtue, character and excellence as intrinsically intertwined.  We praise those we admire as exhibiting virtues. In a diffuse, horizontal world, virtue is a leadership trait that matters.

Risk. Notwithstanding Ronald Reagan’s attempt to combine trust and verification, there simply is no trust without risk. Trust without risk is an oxymoron. If you’re verifying, you’re not trusting. At the same time, trust is much more than card-counting, or doing clever probabilistic analyses of the odds.
The trust-based leader does manage risk, to be sure. But it’s relationship risk, long-term risk, not short-term or transactional risk. Managing relationship risk is less about analytics, and more about forging bonds with others.

Sending a leader into today’s world armed with only the vertical, power-based skills of the past is like sending a Civil War soldier into modern battle. The leadership weapon of the future is trust – a change so profound that it invalidates the “weapon” metaphor itself. Winning with trust is different; it’s not a zero-sum game. We all benefit from it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/trustedadvisor/2012/04/03/why-trust-is-the-new-core-of-leadership/?utm_source=linkedin&utm_medium=social&utm_content=fda68c3c-3abc-4808-a3a3-bc07962dd95f

3 Ways to Improve Your Organization’s Culture

By Calvin Guyer

We have all heard the phrase “Culture eats strategy for lunch (or breakfast, or dinner).” But what exactly does it mean and what, as a business leader, can you do to improve your organization’s culture?

Every morning when I logged onto my system at Merrill Lynch I saw their well-known “bull” logo and the words “A Performance Driven Culture.” They are driven by performance. Big producers, wealthy clients, and large deals are all part of who they are and what they project. That culture can help and it can hurt. Their aggressive posture led to significant financial troubles in the market downturn of 2008; in bull markets, though, they tend to fare far better. Other companies, as I have witnessed, value consistency of service. The $500,000 mortgage client and the $2 million investment services client get the same touch as the newly opened savings account for the kid that mows lawns in the summer. Again, that culture can help and it can hurt. The high-value accounts may feel like they’re getting enough attention; on the other hand, small-value customers may be more inclined to recruit others or to stay longer. In both of the cases I’ve outlined here, the organization’s culture usually dictates its strategy. When it doesn’t (when strategy isn’t shaped by culture), customers and employees tend to get thrown by the bull.

So, what is your culture? How do you describe it to friends or acquaintances who have no stake in the matter? Is it clear and consistent to both customers and employees?

The following three tips will help you maintain a strong culture or improve one that seems inconsistent or lacking:

1.  Align employees’ core values with the organization’s

One of the first activities that we conduct with a new coaching client at CO2 Partners is a values assessment. Values are those things that you define to be non-negotiable. They are different for every person and every organization. When organizational values align with employees’ personal values then great things can happen. Misalignment will cause stress and conflict that consumes energy and holds you back from attaining goals–personal and organizational. In “Working without a Net: How to Survive & Thrive in Today’s High Risk Business World,” Morris Shechtman says that goals are where you are going and values are how you’re going to get there. He’s right. If employees’ values don’t align with the organization’s then begin moving them out and bringing in people whose values do align.

2.  Hire around your culture, not the technical needs of the position

CarterBaldwin has a process that they define as “The Five P’s: A Client Assessment for Matching Culture” (a PDF can be found here). Those five P’s are: Power, Push, Pace, Play, and Principles.  The sales process at one company might be quite a bit different than the sales process at another company. As a matter of fact, the mere mention of the word “sales” or “sales training” may invoke a strong, negative leadership reaction–we don’t “sell” to our customers–even though a need is identified, a product is offered, and a purchase is made. Be very clear about the cultural fit that you seek not just the technical aspects of the position.

3.  Discover and address your cultural blind spots

One of your cultural strengths may lead to a blind spot or weakness. If your organization values respect and decorum highly, for instance, it may not be well-equipped to handle conflict or emergencies. The hierarchical nature of the Korean people meant that somebody of a lower status (the co-pilot) would always defer to the decisions of somebody of a higher status (the pilot) at Korean Air Lines. Further investigation showed that, at times, co-pilots were completely disengaged with the operations of the flight deck. This disengagement led to loss of life and equipment. Complex systems, like modern aircraft, require a team effort to operate. Align your organization around common values, but make sure you discover and address your cultural blind spots, so that you can avoid potential crashes.

http://www.co2partners.com/blog/2013/04/culture/

Secrets of the Most Successful College Students

College-admission letters go out this month, and most recipients (and their parents) will place great importance on which universities said yes and which said no. A growing body of evidence, however, suggests that the most significant thing about college is not where you go, but what you do once you get there. Historian and educator Ken Bain has written a book on this subject, What the Best College Students Do, that draws a road map for how students can get the most out of college, no matter where they go.

(MORE: Does College Put Kids on a Party Pathway?)

As Bain details, there are three types of learners: surface, who do as little as possible to get by; strategic, who aim for top grades rather than true understanding; and deep learners, who leave college with a real, rich education. Bain then introduces us to a host of real-life deep learners: young and old, scientific and artistic, famous or still getting there. Although they each have their own insights, Bain identifies common patterns in their stories:

(MORE: Can Tough Competition Hinder Academic Performance?)

Pursue passion, not A’s. When he was in college, says the eminent astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, he was “moved by curiosity, interest and fascination, not by making the highest scores on a test.” As an adult, he points out, “no one ever asks you what your grades were. Grades become irrelevant.” In his experience as a student and a professor, says Tyson, “ambition and innovation trump grades every time.”

Get comfortable with failure. When he was still a college student, comedian Stephen Colbert began working with an improvisational theater in Chicago. “That really opened me up in ways I hadn’t expected,” he tells Bain. “You must be O.K. with bombing. You have to love it.” Colbert adds, “Improvisation is a great educator when it comes to failing. There’s no way you are going to get it right every time.”

Make a personal connection to your studies. In her sophomore year in college, Eliza Noh, now a professor of Asian-American studies at California State University at Fullerton, took a class on power in society: who has it, how it’s used. “It really opened my eyes. For the first time in my life, I realized that learning could be about me and my interests, about who I was,” Noh tells Bain. “I didn’t just listen to lectures, but began to use my own experiences as a jumping-off point for asking questions and wanting to pursue certain concepts.”

(MORE: Highlighting Is a Waste of Time: The Best and Worst Learning Techniques)

Read and think actively. Dean Baker, one of the few economists to predict the economic collapse of 2008, became fascinated in college by the way economic forces shape people’s lives. His studies led him to reflect on “what he believed and why, integrating and questioning,” Bain notes. Baker says: ”I was always looking for arguments in something I read, and then pinpointing the evidence to see how it was used.”

Ask big questions. Jeff Hawkins, an engineer who created the first mobile computing device, organized his college studies around four profound questions he wanted to explore: Why does anything exist? Given that a universe does exist, why do we have the particular laws of physics that we do? Why do we have life, and what is its nature? And given that life exists, what’s the nature of intelligence? For many of the subjects he pursued, Bain notes, “there was no place to ‘look it up,’ no simple answer.”

Cultivate empathy for others. Reyna Grande, author of the novels Across a Hundred Mountains and Dancing with Butterflies, started writing seriously in her junior year in college. “Writing fiction taught Reyna to empathize with the people who populated her stories, an ability that she transferred to her life,” Bain notes: “As a writer, I have to understand what motivates a character, and I see other people as characters in the story of life,” Grande says. “When someone makes mistakes, I always look at what made them act the way they do.”

(MORE: The Biggest Barrier to Elite Education Isn’t Affordability. It’s Accessibility)

Set goals and make them real. Tia Fuller, who later became an accomplished saxophone player, began planning her future in college, envisioning the successful completion of her projects. ”I would keep focused on the light at the end of the tunnel, and what that accomplishment would mean,” she tells Bain. “That would help me develop a crystalized vision.”

Find a way to contribute. Joel Feinman, now a lawyer who provides legal services to the poor, was set on his career path by a book he read in college: The Massacre at El Mozote, an account of a 1981 slaughter of villagers in El Salvador. After writing and staging a campus play about the massacre, and traveling to El Salvador, Feinman “decided that I wanted to do something to help people and bring a little justice to the world.”

http://ideas.time.com/2013/03/13/secrets-of-the-most-successful-college-students/

What Makes a Good Leader Great?

No one is born a leader. You’ve heard people say he’s a natural born leader, but actually, leadership skills are learned and developed over years of practice. You don’t just wake up with all the skills to lead people or an organization to success. Some of the best leaders showed potential early on in life, but they also worked hard to harness their potential and become the leader they are now.

You may have also heard people say there is a leader in all of us. This may be true. Everyone has the capacity to lead; we all have some leadership skills ingrained in us from school and at home. Now it’s up to us to build on these potentials. There are training courses that help equip people to become better in leading and managing.

Leadership is not reserved for special people; anyone with the passion and desire to be a leader can be one. The skills can be learned and developed, and your potentials can be harnessed through continuous experience. In the same way, existing managers and supervisors need to keep learning new ways of effective leadership and people management. There is always something new to learn and there’s always room for improvement.

Below are some of the best and most essential leadership skills to master if you are to become a great leader:

• Honesty

This is the foundation of great leadership. Leaders are a reflection of the entire team. An honest leader will influence the same values to the team.

• Sense of humor

A leader must learn how to take it easy at times and find something funny in every situation. Don’t take everything seriously, laugh at hurdles, and always have a good sense of humor to lighten up the entire team.

• Confidence

The moment you lose your confidence as a leader, the entire team will go crashing down. Your team looks up to you for direction and morale, and if you fail to give that to them then you’re team is in big trouble. Also, remember to keep calm even in the face of panic and assure your team that you are still under control.

• Commitment

Leadership takes a great deal of commitment. You don’t just back out when it gets tough, you should be committed to see your team through to the end of a task or project. The amount of commitment you have will reflect on the quality of work you deliver.

• Positivity

By carrying a positive attitude all the time, you will be able to keep everyone in your team motivated. Never dwell on the negative things but highlight the positives and build culture of optimism.

• Learn to inspire

One of the best leadership skills to master is to know how to inspire your team. Bring out the best in everyone and encourage him or her to try even harder knowing that they have so much potential.

http://incedogroup.com/what-makes-a-good-leader-great/

Knowledge of Truth

By Gian Kumar

It all started twenty years back as I was galloping along in my life, earning money and  being concerned with only materialistic comforts and wealth. Then, questions started troubling my mind, in which direction should I lead my life? After all, every new phase in life requires a change. Where should I go, either towards religion, luxury or the various intoxicants of life? Why should I seek any other direction and drift away from the current ecstasies that life was offering me? How does one go about having a sound mind and body? Who am I? Where have I come from? Question after question kept pouring into my mind, from where the research commenced. Slowly, step by step, I started to climb up the tree of life, in search of knowledge of truth, where one discovers one’s true intentions, and now, writing articles for you, to opine what this knowledge is all about.

On reading the various articles in my book, you may realize how much research one requires to acquire knowledge that reveals truth, defined and identified your way and also whether truth is subjective or objective, relative or absolute.  Success in finding the answers to most of my questions, led me to write these articles. Since they connect many thoughts on the path to realization, I could not combine all under one title. Right or wrong, these have settled as Truth in my mind, and will remain so until I learn to transcend further into this subject.

Spiritualism, spirituality or spiritual practices have their own connotations with different meanings for different people. It may connect to religion, science, philosophy, psychology, and personal development. It may also depend on the intensity of your needs and beliefs in evolving spirituality. What is important here is what you consider as true;  dedicating yourself blindly to lofty spiritual ideals, through million dollars enriched spiritual gurus, with the quest for reaching heaven, money and love; or awakening to your  own realization of truth and its values.

Traditionally, as we see now, many religions have regarded spirituality as their own authority and an integral part of their practices. Spirituality is to develop an individual's inner life with a larger reality into a more comprehensive self. Religion is imbibed with various beliefs and superstitions bending towards any one supernatural God. On the other hand, we notice that scientists, physicists and neuroscientists today consider science and spirituality to be complimentary, not contradictory, to the extent that they are even trying to learn more about how the brain functions during reported spiritual experiences.

As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own facts." I truly feel and believe that some spiritual practice is essential for personal well being. Today, as we all know, unless we understand and manage our own thoughts and emotions, we cannot be balanced, calm and happy. This science or knowledge of obtaining the truth, how to manage the churning of our thought processes, is the content in most of my articles, to the best of my learning and experience. It is this realization of knowing the truth within your inner self that is to me, the Enlightenment I wish to seek in my life, rather than devote my time to praying, chanting or believing in some mystical consciousness.

In the section of Enlightenment in Wikipedia, I read this part given according to Mandukya Upanishads, "Enlightenment is a state of freedom from the ignorance that causes suffering. There is no necessity to attain mere belief in God, but it is necessary to have profound knowledge of the truth which lies behind the concept of the word God. The idea is not to know God as a different being but to know, one's own real self and its essential nature, which is the self of all. The preachings of religion make a person dependent on priests, temples, idols, blind faith and dogma, and dependence on these is a habit of the lower mind. Such crutches may be useful at a certain stage for some people, but they do not lead one to ultimate truth. A dependent mind is not free, and without freedom, enlightenment is impossible. Religious dogmas are full of beliefs and myths that do not satisfy the human intellect and that bind believers to a narrow view of life and human potential. Such preachings instill more fear than love in the hearts of masses”.

Therefore, as you may notice, my endeavor throughout my various articles has been to seek the ultimate truth hidden in all of us, irrespective of the source or belief, as long as I can understand the meaning of how to self realize, without having to follow any blind faith in fantasies of religion or otherwise. Such a journey will awaken the truth in me about realities of life in totality, where there is no paradox, dualities, illusions or egoism. 

What you might notice in yourself as I have, is that when you know the truth, it shall set you free from bondages in life. Your behaviour will change for the better; your mind will no longer be dependent on auto suggestions from the past or nervous emotions; your mind would be under your control with clarity, necessary for right behaviour, leading you towards the natural flowering of your personality. This knowledge of being true to yourself is going to change the way you are, your mannerisms, your personality and probably your life.

http://www.speakingtree.in/spiritual-blogs/seekers/self-improvement/knowledge-of-truth 

How to Overcome Self-Help Fatigue and Make Inspiration Stick

by  Luke Redd

 

Are you addicted to "inspiration porn" like I am?

During a recent weekend, I spent nearly an entire day reading post after post by some of my favorite inspirational and personal development bloggers.

Want to know how I felt the next day?

Terrible.  

I felt bloated and heavy from my overindulgence.

But I also felt small and cynical.

And I felt envy for not being as wonderfully productive as all the goodie-goodie gurus I so love.

I had feasted on too much rah-rah advice about how to be awesome and epic and remarkable and revolutionary and badass.

It made me feel exhausted and helpless.

But why?

Why did the stuff that was meant to leave me feeling inspired end up doing the opposite?  Because I'm a loser. That was my first thought.

But it didn't feel right

So I reassessed. As I paced in front of a window and stared at the open sky, it dawned on me. 

Self-help had turned into escapism.

Reading about personal development allowed me to experience boosts to my self-esteem without the inconvenience or discomfort of actually taking action or using the advice. But the highs didn't last. Like a junkie, I had to keep indulging to keep from crashing.

But here's what really distressed me: As a blogger, I've contributed a lot of my own self-help advice. Did that make me a hypocrite? Was I a pusher?

Ouch.

I realized that the truth about self-help is sometimes pretty stark. Very little of this stuff sticks unless you take an active role in making it stick.

But I learned something else while researching why

From the standpoint of generating lasting inspiration, our brains respond better to stories of conflict and struggle in the pursuit of something than they do to lists of motivational rules meant to bring bliss and success. Scientists have discovered that our brains are hard-wired for storytelling (i.e., tales of trouble).

In his review of Jonathan Gottschall's book The Storytelling Animal, David Eagleman writes, "Story not only sticks, it mesmerizes."

So maybe the story you tell yourself about your dreams and your pursuits is the key to making inspiration stick. Maybe all that good advice needs a good story to go with it.  This is not a simple proposition, especially when you feel heavier than a sad clown on Jupiter.

It takes effort to tease out the kind of story that'll work. You can't just snap your fingers, tell yourself you're Luke Skywalker, and expect a hero's inspired sense of purpose. I've already tried.

Instead, here's a process that has worked for me (your mileage may vary):

Disconnect

I sometimes have to cut myself off—completely.

No Internet. 

No self-help books. 

No motivational pollution. 

Just me alone with my thoughts for a while.  Admittedly, this is hard. My work requires connection. And I'm always looking for another fix.

I have to do it though. I have to let myself unplug and crash. Only then can I even start to feel the freedom to be inspired again.

Take a long walk with a friend 

I'm sad to say it. I haven't done this in many—many—months. So I need to follow my own clichéd advice.

Few things are better at stirring my imagination and enthusiasm for tackling what's before me. When I was a kid,this was a sure-fire way to make me feel powerful and full of momentum. It still has that effect.  But it has to be with a genuine friend who knows me. Not a mere acquaintance.

I have to feel safe enough to be vulnerable and talk through my dreams and hopes and fears. I have to listen. And I have to do the same for my friend.

Take a long walk alone

Like many of you, I walked to and from school a lot growing up. Unless a freezing wind was blowing, I enjoyed those walks. They gave me a chance to process my day and brainstorm how I fit into the world.

As an adult, I don't do this as often. But when I do, I experience deep satisfaction from transcending a long distance under my own power. It clears my head and gives me the emotional space I need to push forward.

Watch your favorite "against-all-odds" movie

For me, it's the original Karate Kid. Or Rocky. Or both. (Not at the same time.)

This goes back to the point about storytelling. Our brains allow us to receive the same kind of boost from a fictional hero's triumph as what we'd feel ourselves in real life.

I find that it provides just the kind of spark I need to start gaining back my lost momentum.

Reaffirm your dream in writing

I'm always amazed to discover what I actually think instead of what I think I think. Writing down my thoughts, unedited, allows me to capture what's really going on in my mind (and in myheart). Nobody else has to see.

I release my thoughts and feelings from the prison of my mind and let them take shape in a way I can more easily understand. It's a better way to identify what I truly want.

With that knowledge, I then reaffirm those dreams or goals on the page. Then I put it all away in a secret place and loosen my control over the desired outcomes.

(Staying inspired, for me, requires having a mind free of many of its future-oriented concerns. I always know my dreams are available when I need to remember them.)

Make it bigger than you

I have a nasty, ugly, monster-mutant of an ego inside me that tries to make life all about him. The more I allow him to have expression, the less inspired or motivated I feel.

The world gets very small when it's just about me. In fact, it's suffocating. The only remedy is to step outside of my selfish concerns by caring about and doing good things for other people. I have to allow my dreams to morph a little for the service of the world beyond my narrow expression of "I."

I've found that the quickest way to experience a boost of inspiration is to help someone else solve a problem or surprise somebody with unexpected generosity. It can be something as simple as expressing gratitude to someone for the small ways he or she delights me.

Then I use that boost to help me imagine how my dreams and personal goals can have positive meaning or impact for other people and the earth that sustains me. Doing so feels good. It's the kind of feeling I want to have stick around.

For most of us, inspiration doesn't live long inside the hollow vacuum of greed and selfish accumulation of our individual desires. We are each a part of the world, not the world itself.

Establish your meaningful quest

When I was in the sixth grade, I co-wrote and illustrated three "epic" choose-your-own adventure books with my best friend.

The experience forced me to think about the unexpected pathways created by our decisions and the uncomfortable fact that our choices can never provide us with certainty. Anything can happen, no matter how safe a given path looks from the outset.

Being involved in the creation of such a story is exciting. Inspiring even.

Just as in a choose-your-own adventure book, life makes us the protagonists in our own stories. We might not get to choose every plot point or every ending, but we do often have a say in choosing a general direction or theme.

We get to co-write our own personal narratives. We get to be the heroes who don't give up in the face of lots of bad days or enormous obstacles or paths that have dead-ends. We get to do it all for more than just us. We get to try to save our corners of the world in our own special ways.

When I'm the hero of my story, I accept challenges more readily. I brave my fears more often. I care more about riding the adventure than dreaming (and stewing) about the outcome.

Ruthlessly curate your mentors

I struggle with this one. Shiny new gurus draw me into their shiny happy places all the time. If I'm not careful (which I'm often not), I soon feel like…well, you read the beginning of this post, right?

I have to remember that no blog or book or podcast or seminar is going to move me past my hang-ups. Personal development bloggers and life coaches can show me possible paths. But it's up to me to choose which one to walk.

Then I actually have to take action. I can't just keep accumulating new maps.

So it's important to be selective. If I want to stay inspired on my quest, then I have to acknowledge that my mind only hasspace for a few good mentors.

My mentors shouldn't just tell me what I want to hear. They should challenge me. They should help me deepen my narrative and push it further. And they shouldn't care whether or not I call them master or give them money or retweet their platitudes.

In my experience, the best mentors are the ones who make me laugh, not the ones who take themselves or anything else too seriously. I'm serious enough already.

I don't nee more rules

I've got plenty of those. I need mentors who encourage me to play and explore and get dirty and scraped up. But they can't act all holier-than-thou if I choose not to.

Ultimately, my destination may not be the one I dream about. It's freeing to be OK with that.

I'm the hero in a story not yet told. It's being written now. Part of it is even in my own handwriting.

That inspires me.

What about you?

How do you make inspiration stick?

 

http://www.dumblittleman.com/2013/04/how-to-overcome-self-help-fatigue-and.html 

What is Personal Development?

10 Leadership Lessons I Wish I Learned In My 20's - Todd Wilms

10 Leadership Lessons I Wish I Learned In My 20's from Todd Wilms

Reach Your Goals with Strategic Planning

Nothing can add more power to your life than concentrating all your energies on a limited set of targets.” (Nido Qubein)

Your ability to think, plan, decide and take action determines the entire course of your life. The better you become in each area, the better will be each part of your life and the faster you will achieve your goals.

Personal strategic planning is the tool you use to get from wherever you are to wherever you want to go. The difference between a person who uses personal strategic planning as a central part of his or her life is the difference between a person who rides a bicycle and a person who drives a car. Both will get you from point A to point B, but the car, personal strategic planning, will get you there much faster and easier.

FREE REPORT: Step-by-step guide on Goal Setting, a $20 value.

Fortunately, personal strategic planning is a systematic way of thinking and acting. It is therefore learnable, like learning to type with a typewriter or drive a car. There are many different elements of this key skill, but with practice, you can get into the rhythm of thinking and acting strategically for the rest of your life. When you do, your life and career will take off like a rocket. Your success will be assured.

Strategic Planning Saves Time and Money

The reason that strategic planning and thinking is so helpful is that it saves you an enormous amount of time and money. By thinking through the key questions and concepts of strategy, you very quickly find yourself doing more and more of the most important tasks that can move you toward your key goals. At the same time, you do fewer and fewer of those things that are not particularly helpful. You do more things right and fewer things wrong. You establish specific targets for the company and for everyone in it. You greatly improve your ability to measure and track results. You move onto the fast track in your work and in your life in general.
The purpose of corporate strategic planning and goal setting is to increase return on equity.

Equity is defined as the actual amount of shareholder money invested and working in the enterprise. The aim of strategic planning in business is to reorganize and restructure the activities of the corporation so as to achieve a higher quality and quantity of outputs relative to inputs. It is to improve and increase financial results. It is to achieve superior profitability.

Overall, the goal of strategic planning is to enable the company to utilize its people and resources more effectively. The company will then function better than before. It will be in a superior position relative to its competition. This improvement can be measured in terms of higher sales, greater market share, better profitability, higher returns on invested assets and better positioning for the future.

Designing Your Life and Career through Goal Setting

Personal strategic planning is very similar. However, instead of return on equity, personal strategic planning is aimed at increasing your return on energy. Put another way, it is to increase your return on life.
The equity in a business is measured in terms of financial capital. Your personal equity, on the other hand, is measured in terms of your own human capital.

Your personal equity is composed of the mental, emotional and physical energies you have to invest in your career. Your goal should be to get the very highest return possible on the investment of yourself in everything you do. How well you invest yourself determines your income. This is the focal point of personal strategic planning.

Your Goals and Strategic Planning

You can tell that it is time to revisit your strategic plan when you are no longer getting the kind of results you want from your work or from your life. Whenever you feel frustrated or dissatisfied, for any reason, this is often an indication that you should sit down and ask yourself some good, hard questions. Whenever you experience resistance or stress, or you find yourself working harder and harder only to feel that you are getting fewer and fewer rewards, you should stand back and look at the possibilities of revising your strategy.


http://www.briantracy.com/blog/time-management/reach-your-goals-with-strategic-planning-goal-setting/?lid=more

Five Best Self-Help Books - Mike Bundrant

We need to give credit to great self-help books that encourage real growth without all the hype that is so common in the industry.

My criteria for a good self-help book are:

1. No hype – just honest information without false promises and fantasy.

2. Intelligent insight into real life – not phony or shallow “steps to success.”

3. The author is genuine – not setting himself or herself up as God’s gift to humanity.

4. You grow just be reading it! It leads to real behavior change. This requires that the information be deep and revealing.

With this in mind, here is my list of the top five self-help books. These should be considered required reading for anyone interested in personal growth.

1. The Road Less Traveled by M. Scott Peck, MD

If psychiatrists in general were as committed to real mental health as M. Scott Peck was, the mental health industry would be a different place. Dr. Peck’s classic, The Road Less Traveled should be considered a standard for anyone remotely interested in personal development.

Dr. Peck pulls no punches, yet is compassionate and thoughtful as he explains that life is difficult. He offer his ideas on the use of two basic tools, love and discipline. He concludes with and honest inquiry into the mysteries of grace.

2. Why We Suffer by Peter Michaelson

Why We Suffer is a lesser known, yet should still be considered a standard in personal development reading. Why We Suffer reveals the pervasive nature of self-sabotage, which is perhaps the single most important and universal mental health issue. Self-sabotage is what prevents everyone from applying the tools in Dr. Peck’s The Road Less Traveled.

Unless you learn how to get out of your own way, you will never reach your potential. Peter Michaelson is perhaps the world’s foremost expert on self-sabotage, inner passivity and how these evil twins ruin our lives.

3. Cain’s Legacy by Jeanne Safer, PhD

If you like smart books about sorely overlooked topics, then look no further than Dr. Jeanne Safer’s collection. Cain’s Legacy is her book about sibling strife – one of the most important psychological issues in our lives. Yet, so few have written about it!

If you even think that some of your stress in life is due to unresolved issues with a sibling, then do not hesitate to get Cain’s Legacy. What’s nice about this book is that Dr. Safer combines her vast knowledge of psychology and rigorous research with her personal experience as a sibling. It’s a tour de force!

4. NLP: The Essential Guide to Neuro-Linguistic Programming by Tom Hoobyar, Tom Dotz and Susan Sanders

Every self-help library should contain strategic information – information on the “how-to” side of the growth equation. This is where NLP – Neurolinguistic Programming – shines like no other personal growth model. With NLP, you get how-to details that you never considered because NLP understands how the unconscious mind processes information.

For years, the field of NLP has lacked a well-formed and comprehensive guide. That trend is officially over with NLP: The Essential Guide.

5. Boundaries by Drs. Henry Cloud and John Townsend

Boundaries is one of my favorite books because it was so hard for me to get through. Boundaries is all about relationships and how to keep them safe and respectful. The principles in Boundaries apply so thoroughly that you may have to put it down several times, take a break for a few days and work things out before you pick it up again.

In other words, understanding the words in this book requires you to grow and make changes in your life. In Boundaries, you will discover how you’ve been creating stress in your life by taking on unnecessary suffering and pain. This opens the door to changes you never considered.

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/nlp/2013/04/best-self-help-books/

Self-Improvement: An Essay in Kantian Ethics

Robert N. Johnson, Self-Improvement: An Essay in Kantian Ethics, Oxford University Press, 2011,
Reviewed by Sorin Baiasu, Keele University

The project of Robert Johnson's book is very specific: to defend a non-derivative duty to develop oneself in non-moral respects. More exactly, the project aims to defend the claim that a human being owes it to himself to cultivate his natural powers. Whereas the topic is the moral development of oneself, this does not necessarily mean the development of one's moral self, of one's moral capacities; the project defends a non-derivative duty to develop oneself in non-moral respects.

As Johnson acknowledges, his main claim (that a human being owes it to himself to cultivate his natural powers) was properly defended by Kant. But he takes what Kant says only as a starting point, and he aims to develop certain aspects beyond that.

Although there is no claim that Kant would have developed this project in the same way, the 'Kantian ethics' in the subtitle of the book does suggest that the account developed stays close to Kant's approach.

'Kantian' is taken to refer to an opposition to attempts to ground notions of 'right' or 'obligation' or 'virtue' in value. In fact, Johnson maintains that a plausible argument can be formulated in support of a duty of self-development precisely because of this feature of the Kantian approach. Thus, for Johnson, it is this Kantian feature of the account that makes the imperfect duty of self-development action-guiding. An implication of this Kantian account is that several criticisms of Kant's ethics fail, in particular those that regard it as hostile to the importance of self-concern and as reducible to a moralistic message of self-mortification and rational austerity.

Duties to oneself have been discussed either in general or, when in particular, mainly with specific focus on wronging oneself. These discussions have mainly been concerned with a presentation of Kant's position and arguments; Johnson, by contrast, aims to focus on the construction of a defensible position, grounded in a broadly Kantian ethical theory, but not primarily concerned with Kantian scholarship.

In terms of the challenges the book responds to, the project aims to overcome the difficulty of accounting for why we owe it to ourselves, not to others, to develop ourselves, and why we do not have an obligation to perfect others. Moreover, the clarification of this duty to ourselves throws light on how we come to have duties toward anyone at all.

One reason for the Kantian character of the theory is that it puts Johnson's account at an initial advantage over consequentialist, perfectionist and virtue ethicist accounts. Self-development for the consequentialist will only be justified if it leads to the overall good, and this is an empirical issue; moreover, the overall good may require that I contribute to the development of another person's capacities, rather than to my own.

For the perfectionist, self-development is the ground of morality, which means that concern for others becomes secondary and, moreover, any self- and other-regarding obligations will have to be forms of self-perfection, although they usually are not. Finally, the virtue ethicist would be able to defend an obligation to develop our capacities, if a fully virtuous and, hence, a fully developed person would be disposed to do so in virtue of her character; but, obviously, a fully developed person would not be disposed to develop her capacities.

To avoid problematic implications, Johnson makes a few clarifications. First, his argument does not imply that poverty and the resulting failures of self-improvement are due to a moral failing in the poor. Nor does it suggest that failures of self-improvement are more important than injustices that prevent many from enjoying moral improvement or at least those forms that are demanding in terms of time and means. Moreover, the argument does not suggest that poverty is never the result of a moral failing. Finally, there is no suggestion that those who have less are relieved of any obligation to make what they can of themselves.

Having presented the project, its Kantian features, the contribution it aims to make, some of its attractive features, and some of the problematic implications it can avoid, I will now focus on the book's argument. The first chapter aims to explore the nature and extent of the Kantian duty to develop natural capacities. This is offered as a background for the discussions, in the following chapters, of the justification of the duty of self-improvement. Since it is meant to present also the extent of this duty, the first chapter concludes with a description of five ways, in which we can fail ourselves, that is, of five ways in which we can overstep this obligation.

The second chapter makes a first attempt to justify self-improvement. The justificatory ground is given by the first formulation of the Categorical Imperative, the Formula of Universal Law (FUL). As most commentators acknowledge, Kant's Groundwork suggests that this formulation is able to justify the duty of self-improvement by rejecting a maxim of non-self-improvement or of letting your abilities rust; however, Johnson argues, on Rawls's interpretation of how the FUL is supposed to test maxims, the argument for imperfect duties implies a false claim. So, a justification on the basis of the first formulation of the Categorical Imperative fails. I will come back to this shortly.

Before trying two other justifications, on the basis of the other two most discussed formulations of the Categorical Imperative, Johnson needs to clarify another issue: how is it possible for the Kantian obligation to improve oneself to be owed to oneself? The main problem is that, on Kant's account, duties and rights are reciprocal; hence, the person to whom I owe a duty usually has a right to my performance and perhaps also a liberty not to exercise that right; if I owe that duty to myself and I do not perform it, then, since I can waive my right to my self-improvement, I can no longer claim I owe anything. This is the problem tackled by chapter 4.

The sense in which we can talk about the Kantian duty of self-improvement as owed to ourselves, according to Johnson, is the following. We can talk about an imperfect duty to others in promoting their happiness without any person in particular acquiring in this way a right to any of my possible particular performances. The right holders can be those who need my help, but this right will not be that of a particular person and to a particular performance I can make; it will be the right of the group to some of my possible actions. The crucial implication, therefore, is that no particular person can waive this right.

Let me now move on to the duty of self-improvement: according to Johnson, as imperfect, this Kantian duty will require that I adopt my improvement as a goal, so no particular action will be owed to me. I owe it to myself to develop at least one or another capacity at least at some or other time and to some extent. Hence, my right is not to a particular action and cannot be waived. One could think that I can perhaps waive the obligation to develop any capacity at any point and to any extent, but this would simply mean to waive the obligation to adopt the development of my capacities as a goal; this, however, I cannot do, since to adopt this goal is a morally required end.

One way to make this clearer is offered by Johnson in terms of competency requirements -- assuming there is a minimum competency requirement on having obligations, there is probably also a minimum competency requirement on having a corresponding liberty right, and waiving a right against someone. If the former is less demanding than the latter, then I may have obligations to myself, but I may not be sufficiently competent to waive them and to release myself from those obligations.

I do not choose to enter into an obligation of self-improvement; since I must use my rational nature, I inevitably come under an obligation not to use it as a mere means, and this includes a duty of self-improvement. Moreover, I use my rational nature when I use also the others' rational natures. Hence, in clarifying this duty I have to myself, Johnson's project also clarifies the duties I have to anyone else.

Chapters 5 and 6 justify the duty of self-improvement on the basis of the second and third formulations of the Categorical Imperative, the Formula of Humanity or of the Ends in Themselves (FH), and the Formula of the Kingdom of Ends (FKE). Chapter 7 explains why, according to Kant, we have a duty of self-improvement, as a duty to improve ourselves, but not one to improve others. Finally, if we have an obligation that we owe to ourselves to develop a range of abilities, then the implication is that abilities are things we can improve and we can monitor their development. The final chapter of the book argues this is the case by focusing on the notion of an ability and providing an account of abilities. The claim is that abilities are essentially improvable into praiseworthy skills to realise some ends. Hence we can improve and monitor the development of our abilities.

Of course, here, I cannot do justice to this fine book, but I can focus on what seems to be a very important argument; thus, as I have said, I would like to return to Johnson's claim that the Kantian duty of self-improvement cannot be justified on the basis of the FUL. This, I think, is a very important claim, since it is one clear instance where Johnson's argument parts ways with Kant's account. That we can offer a justification of the Kantian duty on the basis of the other two, very often discussed, formulations of the Categorical Imperative (FH and FKE) is not surprising. In fact, according to Kant's famous assertion, these three formulations "are at bottom merely so many formulations of precisely the same law "; moreover, the differences between them are "subjectively rather than objectively practical"[1] (GMS 4: 436) This suggests that, as far as guidance concerning the moral validity of particular maxims is concerned, any of the three formulations can be employed. The differences between the three formulations do not affect their objectivity, but the extent to which they are actually accepted by moral agents. Hence, their differences are subjectively practical and lead to different degrees of intuitive plausibility.

A claim which is rarely quoted in discussions of the formulations of the Categorical Imperative and of their ability to offer moral guidance follows shortly after the claim above. After presenting the differences between the three formulations, Kant says:

It is, however, better if in moral judgement we proceed always in accordance with the strict method and take as our basis the universal formula of the categorical imperative: 'Act on the maxim which can at the same time be made a universal law'. (GMS 4: 436-7)

In this sense, it is surprising to read Johnson's claims that the FUL fails to justify the duty of self-improvement, whereas the other two formulations succeed. From a different point of view, however, this is less surprising, given recent developments in Kantian literature. Thus, following multiple attempts to interpret this version of the Categorical Imperative so that it would provide a genuine test for maxims, commentators repeatedly left themselves open to criticism that such interpretations of the FUL either exclude maxims that are intuitively permissible or allow as permissible maxims that are intuitively impermissible.

As a result, some commentators began to think that there was something fundamentally wrong with the attempt to test maxims with the help of the FUL, rather than with the particular way in which it was developed. One conclusion was that the first formulation had a different function than the second and third. For instance, according to Mark Timmons, the first formulation tests motivation, rather than the moral permissibility of the maxims; the second tests the morality of maxims and can be used as a moral criterion. (Timmons 2006)

Of course, such alternative approaches go against some of Kant's claims, for instance, those I have just quoted above concerning the normative equivalence of the three formulations or the importance of the FUL.[2] Hence, they indicate clearly ways in which accounts of moral validity (Johnson's included) depart from Kant's.[3] What is Johnson's argument against the FUL?

As I have just mentioned, the first formulation sets a condition on the maxims of action. Johnson starts, in the first section of the chapter, with a discussion of maxims. He understands maxims as plans of action. In its general form, a maxim can be expressed as follows: (I will) A in C in order to achieve E, where A is the act description, C is the circumstances description, and E the end description. Maxims should be neither too general nor too specific, since, as plans of action, they need to be able to guide action.

Two aspects are the focus of Johnson's critical attention. First, on some accounts, a plan of action is a maxim only when one makes it one's principle to act on that plan. In contrast to this account, Johnson regards maxims as principles or plans which actually guide action, whether or not the person who so acts has also made it her principle to act on those maxims. I think this is a correct observation: for Kant, maxims are subjective principles of action, and our plans of action are such subjective plans whether or not we have made it our principle to act on them.

Secondly, Johnson is unhappy about Kant's reference to laws of nature -- for him, it is irrational to will for a maxim to become a universal law. Only God can reasonably will something like this. He suggests that, instead of regarding the first formulation as testing whether we can will for our maxim to become a universal law of nature, we can look at it as testing whether we can will that the maxim be universally accepted and acted upon. I find this suggestion much less convincing than the first. It seems there is little difference between willing for a maxim to become a universal law and willing for a maxim to be universally accepted and acted upon. If there are differences (and I think there are), these are not in terms of being more feasible for us (as human beings and not as God) to bring it about that our maxims be universally adopted and acted upon. There is no morally relevant point in willing for the law of driving on the left to become a universal law (although there is no contradiction in so willing), although there is a point for the law of non-mendacity.

In the second section of this chapter, the claim defended is that the irrationality that is presupposed by the attempt to act on a morally impermissible maxim is not simply that of acting ineffectively and inefficiently in achieving one's ends, nor in ignorance of facts about one's circumstances or the likely consequences of one's actions. The inconsistency in the attempt to act on a morally impermissible maxim is displayed by deliberative procedures introduced by the FUL.

The third section spells out these procedures. The account adopted is Rawls's and the claim is that a perfect duty is obtained when the universalisation of the contradictory maxim is not conceivable, since a world in which everybody adopted that plan of action could not exist. An imperfect duty is obtained when a world in which everybody adopted the contradictory maxim could exist, but I could not consistently will that such a world come about. I could not consistently will that such a world come about because I have happiness as a necessary end, and, if I am rational, I must will the necessary means to my happiness, which is contradicted by willing a world in which everybody adopted the contradictory maxim.

The final section applies the test to the duty of self-improvement. The claim is that such a test cannot justify the maxim of self-improvement as an imperfect duty. This is because, even in a world in which nobody develops their abilities on purpose (in contradiction to the maxim of self-improvement), people may still develop their abilities in order to achieve one end or another. It might be necessary that, as a necessary means to my happiness, I will that others develop their abilities, but not that we will others adopt their perfection as an end. Yet, according to Johnson, what we need for the duty of self-improvement is that others adopt their perfection as an end, and this is something that cannot be derived from the FUL. Moreover:

That is what is lacking in those who we find to be selling themselves short, letting themselves go, not making anything of themselves when they should be. It is not that in fact they have no developed capacities; the moral failure is in not taking themselves seriously enough. (64)

I find this argument puzzling mainly for two reasons. First, according to Johnson, Kant needs as part of the duty of self-improvement, that those who act to fulfill it make their perfection an end. If the FUL cannot show that the maxim of self-improvement includes the feature that perfection be adopted as an end, then the FUL fails to justify an important part of the duty of self-improvement. Yet, this form of moral failure is not among the five ways in which a person may fail herself by acting without concern for this duty.

Secondly and crucially, to show we cannot derive the imperfect duty of self-improvement with the help of the FUL, Johnson uses the same argument he formulates against the derivation from the FUL of the imperfect duty to help others promote their permissible ends. Yet, I do not think the argument is in fact working. Thus, what we would need for the derivation of the duty of helpfulness would be to show that, as rational beings, we must will that someone, sometime, assist us in some way, to some extent in our pursuit of happiness. We can will this, since, (1) happiness is a necessary end for us, (2) help from others is a necessary means to this and (3), as rational, we will the "necessary and available" means to our ends. (58)

The problem with this argument, Johnson says, is the following:

First, . . . it is enough that in the usual course of events, our ends are interlocking, such that even if I do not adopt the wellbeing of others as one of my own ends, in fact I will help them because it is necessary to my own selfish plans. Second, this argument also falls short of establishing an obligatory end of the sort that Kant argues for in the Metaphysics of Morals, namely, "the happiness of other human beings, whose (permitted) end I thus make my own end as well". For what follows, again, from the three propositions in the prior paragraph is not that it is necessary that anyone make my ends their own, but only that they offer help in the pursuit of mine, whether they have made them their own as well or not. (59)

I think this does not work because, although happiness for Kant is indeed a necessary end, it is an end which cannot be determined for us limited rational beings. (GMS 4: 418) I am not going to insist, since Johnson acknowledges this, but I will mention that this is the result of the fact that what makes us happy (in the Kantian sense) is almost entirely an empirical matter. If my happiness and the happiness of the other limited rational beings are indeterminate, then there is no way in which we can know whether our ends are indeed interlocking and, hence, whether I will help anybody by pursuing my own selfish plans. Moreover, if my happiness is indeterminate, then the only way I can rely on the help from others, given that I cannot be sure what will constitute happiness for me, is if they make my ends their own as a matter of principle. Hence, not only should I will that they be willing to offer help to me in pursuit of their own ends, which is a necessary means; I should also will that they offer help by making my ends their own, which makes the necessary means available to me. That the means I will must be necessary and available is explicitly formulated by Johnson himself (58), as I have just made clear above.

It is certainly sufficient for my happiness that someone, sometime, help me in some way and to a certain extent; but, if I do not specify that this is the result of the fact that someone does this by adopting my ends as their own, then the principle we can derive with the help of the FUL will only be: someone, sometime, help me in some way and to a certain extent, if it so happens. This, however, leads at least to this problem: if duties are to be selected from among maxims with the help of the tests offered by the FUL, then they need to be action-guiding in the way in which Johnson says all maxims should be; but, 'help in an indeterminate way, if it so happens' is not action-guiding.

This is, of course, not to suggest that the Rawlsian interpretation of the FUL, which Johnson employs, is more or less accurate than others. I have only attempted to challenge the suggestion that, unlike the FH and FKE, the FUL cannot justify a duty of self-improvement. As this seems to be one clear point where Johnson's account departs from Kant, the departure seems less radical than initially thought.

The book attempts to carry out a valuable project and many of the issues it raises are tackled in a convincing way. The account of the duty of self-improvement that it develops and defends may be closer to Kant's than initially expected, but the book is well-argued and presents an excellent contribution to both ethics and Kantian studies.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baiasu, S. (2011) "Metaphysics and Moral Judgement", in S. Baiasu, S. Pihlstrom and H. Williams (eds) Politics and Metaphysics in Kant. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.

Herman, H. (1993) The Practice of Moral Judgement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kant, I. (1900-) Kants gesammelte Schriften. Ed. by the Königlich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, subsequently Deutsche, now Berlin-Brandenburg Akademie der Wissenschaften (originally under the editorship of Wilhelm Dilthey). Berlin: Georg Reimer, subsequently Walter de Gruyter.

Kant, I. (1996) Practical Philosophy. Tr. and ed. Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Timmons, M. (2006) "The Categorical Imperative and Universalisability (GMS, 421 -- 424)", in C. Horn and D. Schönecker (eds), Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.

[1] In referencing Kant, I use the following abbreviation GMS: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten (1785)), in Kant (1996). Pagination references in the text and footnotes are to the volume and page number in the German edition of Kant's works (1900-). Unaccompanied page references are to the reviewed book.

[2] According to Barbara Herman (1993), the FUL (of what she calls the "CI procedure") should not be expected to apply to maxims and to result in derivation of duties; rather, it applies to "generic maxims" and issues in "deliberative presumptions". (132-58) These are then supplemented by the value of rational agency and result in deliberation.

[3] I do not think that necessarily all such alternative accounts will mark a departure from Kant. In fact, I attempt such an alternative precisely as a better account of Kant. (2011)


http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/39291-self-improvement-an-essay-in-kantian-ethics/