I’m going back to one of my favorite coaching topics in this essay:  the importance of learning to speak as many “languages” as you can.  Why is the word “languages” in quotes?  Because I’m not talking about English and Spanish and Mandarin, although it would do most Americans well to learn to speak another language with some fluency.  I’m talking about, from a business perspective, learning to speak the “language” of other areas of the company:  finance, manufacturing, logistics, sales, research.  This topic is another of my famous “Tom-isms”—lessons I learned from one of my first (and still favorite) managers.  But like all Tom-isms, I have realized that this is a life lesson, not just a business lesson.

I spent about three quarters of my career in R&D, either at the bench or managing other researchers.  Here is a typical conversation I might have had with a sales person from my days developing resins for use in high performance paints:

Sales:  Hey, Sherri!  Customer Blah Blah really likes XF1234!  They’ve put it into one of their formulations and really like its performance!

Me:  That’s awesome!

Sales:  They like the pot life, hardness and scratch resistance of the paint and it performs really well on their corrosion resistance testing.  They just….

Me: (Uh oh)

Sales: ….need it to dry about 50% faster.

Me: (left eye begins twitching uncontrollably)  How about I give the customer a call and talk about formulating options to get them there?

Sales: (look on face that says they were dreading this response) They don’t want to change their formulation.  Can’t you just make the resin dry faster?

OK.  A few things about industrial paints: 1) they “dry” by reacting with moisture in the air or with a second chemical that is mixed in just before use; 2) paint formulations can contain 50 ingredients, most at well less than 1% of the volume, which means formulators never want to change their formulations; 3) change one thing about a resin to change one property like dry time and it affects pretty much everything else about the paint (see item 2); and 4) someone whose job is selling one chemical to a paint formulator typically knows very little about items 1-3.

Here, also, is a conversation I may have had with people from manufacturing:

Me: (speaking with excitement about my new development) Hey, we’ve got a new product we want to take into the plant!

Ops guy:  (silent, as he remembers the last product I introduced to the plant)

Me:  (looking at my calendar a week or two out) When do you think we could work it in?

Ops guy: (Wondering if this product will be able to be made in any of the plant’s systems) Do you have the spec sheet?

Me: Oh.  Well it’s just like XR6789.  Sort of.

Tom taught me that the frustrations work both ways.  Sales may not understand what research has to do to develop a product but research usually has no clue what is required to scale a new material from 100 ml to 1000 gallons.  We all just expect the other functions to do what they need to do and, hey, how hard could it be anyway? (See: If Something Looks Simple, It Means I Don’t Know Enough About It)  Learning to speak the “language” of the other functions has two major benefits.  First, you can explain ideas and issues in verbiage that will be understood.  Second, a healthy respect for their job will not only endear you to them (ensuring better response to your needs) but also allows you to take their needs into consideration in your own work—which just makes everything easier all the way around.  Whether your workplace employs 10 people or 10,000 people, you need this understanding of what others face in their roles.

As I introduced this lesson into my coaching sessions with younger scientists, I began to see the broader applicability.  What we are really talking about here is developing a sense of empathy.  Seeing the world through another’s eyes.  Walking a mile in another’s shoes.  After I “came out of the closet” at work, I got more deeply involved in Diversity and Inclusion efforts.  This concept of speaking many “languages” was equally useful in the context of trying to understand the microinequities that people can face—whether you are a woman, gay, Jewish or perhaps all three.  I have a lot more to say on Diversity and Inclusion, so I won’t belabor that topic here.

It leads us, though, into the discussion of how developing this sense of empathy is such a vital tool in navigating the world outside of the office.  Look, I know that the word “empathy” evokes candles, incense and eye rolls with many people.  And many also associate pleas for empathy with weakness at best and a stifling political correctness at worst.  That all misses the point.  In my opinion, very few people are truly naturally empathic.  I believe that many people have the capacity for empathy, but to really understand another person takes work and intention. 

The point I am laboring to make, here, is that it is incumbent upon all of us to actually ask questions of those whose life experiences are different from our own—be it a department in the corporate world or someone who has grown up with a different set of privileges.  If I wanted to “speak the language” of operations so as to smooth my working relationship, I actually had to go talk to someone in operations!  I had to spend some time at the manufacturing plant and learn how they do what they do.  If I want to better understand and “speak the language” of someone who grew up poor in an inner city, instead of a comfortable middle class suburb, I need to seek people out and listen.  I need to ask the questions that bust the assumptions that I inadvertently make about what their life has been like.

It seems these days that everyone wants to be understood, but few recognize the need to understand others.  We have no prayer of resolving differences if we won’t try to understand those with different points of view.  Remember the comment about work and intention? It takes no work at all to demand to be heard.  It takes a lot of work to listen just as I want others to listen to me.  And isn’t that what we all want?  We want to be heard, hopefully understood.  Not dismissed.  Not minimized.  Not “assumed” away.  This kind of learning is an active process and you will find yourself tripping over incorrect assumptions every day.  Don’t aim to be perfect.  Aim to be aware.  Be aware that there are many “languages” out there that you don’t yet speak.  But there is nothing stopping you from learning them.

It’s football season.  That wonderful time of year when I am constantly yelling at the TV.  Sometimes it’s about my annoyance with Pharma commercials.  Sometimes it’s my frustrations with poor clock management or yet another play up the middle that gets stopped at the line of scrimmage.  Trish will confirm, though, that my biggest rants are reserved for commentators who will replay one play over and over and over again and say, “This play will determine the game.”

The mother of all examples of this phenomenon, at least recently, was last year’s playoff game between the New Orleans Saints and the Los Angeles Rams for the NFC Championship.  The score was tied with less than two minutes to go.  The Saints faced a 3^rd and 10 from the Rams’ 13 yard line.  Drew Brees floated a pass to Tommylee Lewis down the right sideline.  The Rams defender flattened the Saints receiver well before the ball arrived–blatant pass interference.  No call from the refs.  The Saints lost the game.  Saints fans lost their minds.  All through the off season and still into this season we hear about how that call lost the Saints the game, the NFC Championship, maybe the Super Bowl and, to hear the pundits talk about it, probably the chance to solve world hunger.

What I keep yelling back at the TV (or grumble more quietly when reprimanded) is that IT NEVER IS ABOUT ONE PLAY!  Are you telling me that the Saints played an absolutely flawless game up until that point and that one call is the only thing that kept them from winning that day?  If that was true, wouldn’t the Saints have won by something like 120 to nothing?  Of course they did not play a flawless game.  Any number of different decisions in the preceding 58 ½ minutes of play could have made a difference in the outcome of that game.  Several assuredly did.  But that one wrong call was really obvious at a really bad time, so it gets the press.  And the poor ref gets death threats.

My point?  In football as in life, it never comes down to one play.  Success or failure never hinges on just one decision.  Don’t get too proud of yourself when one thing goes right; don’t get too down on yourself when one thing goes wrong—no matter how big that one thing is.  This essay is a nice companion to two others I’ve posted:  “It’s not about the decision” and “Personal Accountability”.  And I feel another one coming on about the importance of developing good coping skills.

It’s easy to think back on decisions or choices you’ve made and think “If only I had….” I try really hard to not do that because you just don’t know what that alternate pathway really would have brought. I loved the play “If/Then” because its premise was exactly that: intertwining the stories of the outcome of a major decision based on the two alternatives. Not to spoil the story but the two pathways each had their pluses and minuses—just like life. As I’ve written about before, there is no one pathway to success and happiness.  No one pathway ensures your success nor dooms you to failure.

I think back to what I see as major inflection points in my life.  In fact, let’s focus on a couple of major “cringe worthy” ones.  The first one that stands out in my mind was a time in 5^th grade when I confronted “the new girl” who turned out to be a bit of a bully.  It was not courage that made me stand up to her.  It was pain.  We were supposed to meet at the high school football game but she instead hung out with others she deemed more worthy.  I was 12! I was hurt!  I fought back at school on Monday and ended up getting shunned by everyone.  She was a bully but she was popular.  It was a painful time that lasted the rest of that school year.  Do I wish I hadn’t done that?  Do I think my life would have been indelibly altered had I held my tongue?  I don’t know.  But I do know this:  that time period helped me develop a strong sense of empathy for those who are pushed aside in this world.  And I believe that’s made me a better person.

Another cringe worthy incident?  (Believe me, I am choosing just a couple from a long list!)  I was 16 and driving home from my weekend stint at the local Hardee’s on a Saturday afternoon.  I was wearing my brown polyester Hardee’s uniform, including head scarf.  I was at a busy intersection, waiting to turn left.  I couldn’t really see well.  I thought there was a break in the traffic and started my turn.  I froze when I saw a station wagon barreling towards me and boom.  No one was hurt.  Traffic snarled while we stood there scratching our heads and apologizing.  And then I hear, “My baby!” and my Mom comes running over.  She’d been at the intersection in the perpendicular direction and saw the whole thing.  I think it was more traumatic for her than for me!  I played that scene out over and over again in my mind for years.  If only I’d waited for the light to turn yellow!  But you know what?  Having an accident like that when I was young turned me into a better driver.  It taught me the lesson that it can happen and you need to always assume the unexpected.  And I rarely make left turns without an arrow!

Final example:  my decision to take an international assignment in Mexico in the late 90’s.  This one is not cringe worthy at all.  Just the opposite.  It was probably the best decision I ever made!  I’ve alluded to that experience several times already.  It really boosted my career.  It really opened up my mind as a person.  It really opened up my heart and soul through the people I met.  But what if I had decided not to take that assignment?  What if I’d stayed in the US and followed a more traditional career and life path?  What if I had not had the chance to live in another country and challenge myself personally in such an existential way?  Who would I be today?  Undoubtedly, I’d be a different person with a different life.  Would it be better or worse than my life today?  I don’t know and, honestly, I don’t care.

I’ve tried very hard to take each experience that has come my way and move forward with it.  I know things could have turned out very differently but different does not mean better.  I have been so blessed all along the way and I know that had I made some different decisions here and there that I would still be blessed.  No regrets.  The key is to learn your lessons and move forward.  Don’t fixate on things you’ve done and don’t fixate on things others have done.  We all make what seem like bad decisions but good can always come from them if you choose to learn from them and move forward.  It’s just never about that one play!  Don’t forget that.

My last essay was about communication.  More specifically, it was about how technology has invaded and overtaken our ways of communicating with each other to the extent that it’s removed much of what makes humans really connect.  As I was drafting that essay, another theme began to come out around my concerns with all this computer code that envelopes us every day.  And that’s where we are going to go today.

First, a disclaimer or two.  Although I am 57 years old at the time of this writing in 2019, I do not consider myself a Luddite.  (For any of you millennials or Gen Zers out there who might be reading this, a Luddite refers to someone afraid of new technology.  Look it up.  A little history would be good for you.)  Over my lifetime, I have seen computers go from suspicious room-size machines to something you carry in your pocket.  Everywhere.  And use for everything from a calculator to a phone to a navigator to an entertainment source.  I’ve seen the Internet move from a military project to a ubiquitous, unseen force that invades every aspect of our lives.  And I’ve seen the world become connected in a broad, instantaneous, rule-less way that is equal parts amazingly beneficial and amazingly destructive.  I use a good many of these tools.  However, while I have Twitter and Insta accounts, I follow without posting and Alexa has not made her way into my home.  Why?  Because of my fear of the Tyranny of the Algorithm.

An algorithm, very simply put, is computer code that provides rules and instruction for some action and output.  Algorithms are how Amazon recommends things you may like, what you’ll see next on YouTube and NetFlix, the ads you see in your Facebook feed.  These algorithms take information you provide through your browsing habits and other publically (we hope) available information about you, and the code provides the output you see.  Those rules are influenced, as well, by advertising dollars.  We all get annoyed enough at ads that pop up on Facebook for shoes you were looking at on some website yesterday, but with the explosion in artificial intelligence it’s time to get very wary. (Another disclaimer:  I know just enough about coding and artificial intelligence to be dangerous.  If this blog had broader readership, I’m sure I would be slammed on my ignorance of nuance but I think I have the basics right.) 

Artificial Intelligence, or AI, is essentially machines (computers and what they control) learning to do things on their own.  Algorithms on digital steroids.  The beneficial side of AI includes anticipating your needs—everything from populating your grocery list to improving the accuracy of surgical robots.  The bad side is the tendency for AI to “suggest” you into deeper and narrower subsets of what life has to offer by assuming that if you like a little of something then clearly you would like a lot more.  And in the absence of other stimuli, we forget that there is more out there.

Let’s take an example as simple as browsing in a bookstore.  We all have favorite genres but most people are still willing to entertain picking up something totally new and different—if it catches your eye.  I have always loved going to bookstores and browsing their bargain bins.  Not just because I do love a bargain but because of the joy I get from stumbling across a book I never would have actively searched for based on what I had previously read.  And reading things I probably never would have actively searched for is a big part of how I have grown and learned and, most importantly, evolved my thinking over the years.  If algorithms had their way, though, I would read nothing more than Jody Picoult novels and non-fiction around social science.  Broaden this example to all of media—TV, magazines, news—and you get the sense of the source of my angina. 

This narrowing and deepening of existing thinking concerns me for everyone but mostly for people who have grown up in this age of the algorithm.  So many people my own age seem to have lost the ability to be curious and seek knowledge outside of their comfort areas but at least we had decades of broad exposure before the Age of the Algorithm.  What about young people who are forming their first impressions of the world?  If they just keep going narrower and deeper into their first perspectives, our current polarization on any given topic is just going to get worse.  Try an experiment.  Go to YouTube and watch the first video that pops up.  Then just let autoplay do its thing.  You might start on a video on how to grow tomatoes, then recipes with tomatoes, then things you can do with tomatoes and then end up a couple hours later on videos showing you how to build acid filled pipe bombs.  And then you’ll get a visit from the FBI.

While sending you down a narrow and deep pathway is scary enough, remember something else:  While algorithms may seem like highly complex gifts from the gods, they are code written by humans.  Yes, they can learn, but the rules they use for “learning” are those written by their human creators. There are already concerns about bias unintentionally built into today’s algorithms by the highly homogeneous “bro” coding culture.  And unintentional bias can be insidious.  I remember crayon boxes when I was a kid.  There was a pale pink color named “skin”.  Imagine being a non-white kid with that crayon box.  There was no intention of disenfranchising non-white people by putting that label on that color, just as there is most likely no intention of coding bias into algorithms, but the effect is still the same—creating barriers for some and advantage for others.

So, we’ve seen that algorithms can take you down a narrow and deep pathway without your conscious knowledge and they can pave that pathway with rocks of micro-bias.  While few of us will let these algorithms take us so far as to result in a visit from the authorities, I fear that these algorithms are already taking away our creativity and curiosity about new thinking.  And creativity and curiosity are the backbone of our innovative culture.  Take that away and we are on a slippery slope of decline as a nation.  In the scientific community, a patentable invention is defined as “something unexpected to someone skilled in the art.”  If we let algorithms encourage us to ignore and discredit anything outside of our narrow comfort zones, how are we going to continue to make the sort of breakthrough discoveries that keep our country and economy strong?

What is it that I want you to do?  Don’t give up your phones or your Alexas.  They are wonderful tools!  But also don’t just accept their output.  Be curious.  Search out answers outside your comfort zone or area of expertise.  Go browse the bargain bin at a bookstore.  Chemists can put all the “ingredients” of life into a flask and put them under the conditions of “early earth”.  Amino acids and simple proteins will form.  But we can’t make life.  There is something more to it that the parts and the rules—more than the algorithm.  Similarly, AI and machine learning may be starting to approximate the mechanics of thinking, but they are not human.  Far from it.  Remember, though, that you ARE human.  Stay human.  And beware the tyranny of the algorithm.

I have been forming in my mind a series of essays called “Everything I Ever Needed to Know, I learned in Freshman Chemistry”.  As I was working on my PhD, I taught freshman chemistry every semester.  I truly enjoyed the teaching but also began to see that virtually every theory you learn in that survey course has an element (pun intended) broadly applicable to life.  They don’t call it a Doctorate in Philosophy for nothing.  From the Laws of Thermodynamics through Quantum Mechanics, there is always something important we can learn about life if we think about that theory in a broader context.

Today, I want to share one piece of advice about communication that I often gave to mentees (still do, in fact).  It is related to the concept of the half-life of a radioactive element.  Really.  Let me explain.  All radioactive elements decay over time, meaning they release subatomic particles and energy and become a more stable element.  If you control this process, you can use that released energy to generate electricity.  If you choose not to control the process, you can level cities in seconds.  The graph that accompanies this essay demonstrates how this process can be viewed:  the amount of the element remaining over a period of time drops exponentially; how fast this happens–the rate constant–is characteristic of that element.  The time that it takes for half of the starting quantity of the element to decay is called its half-life.  This concept is very useful, actually, in thinking about human interaction.  I call this law the “Half Life of Effective Communication”. 

When I first formulated this theory, there were limited means of communicating with someone.  You could meet face-to-face, of course.  You could talk on the telephone or leave voice messages.  You could send letters, emails, faxes.  That was about it.  Texting came later, as did video conferences and now virtual and augmented reality.  I began to realize that it was those face-to-face meetings that drove the quality of the relationship between individuals and my theory took shape:   the effectiveness of communication via telephone, email, etc. decays exponentially since the last time you met with that person face-to-face.  Additionally, the rate constant—or how fast that effectiveness decays—is a function of the relationship depth between the two individuals.  If I’ve known you for a long time or if we worked next door to each other for a while, then one face-to-face visit will mean fun phone calls and preferential email attention for quite some time.  If I’ve never met you or barely know you or it’s been ages since I saw you, then don’t expect preferential response.  You are just less on my radar.  While I admit to being very face-to-face oriented, I have found that most people are like to this at least to a degree.

Here is one way this plays out for me and this requires a bit of a confession:  I really, really hate talking on the phone.  I hate calling people I don’t know.  I hate calling people I do know.  I hate the phone.  Whenever I want to be a really good partner to Trish, I volunteer to call and order the pizza.  I’m still trying to convince her that is an effort worth recognizing.  If you get a phone call from me, know that I’ve had to work up a certain amount of courage and/or overcome a significant amount of “eh” to dial you.  If I actually answer the phone when you call me, consider it a small miracle (unless we’ve arranged a time for a chat and I’ve had a chance to prepare myself emotionally).  I just hate talking on the phone.  But if I recently saw you, I still have warm fuzzies from that personal interaction.  Picking up the phone feels like continuing that recent face-to-face.  It’s easy.

When you think about it, this theory makes sense.  We humans have at least five senses (many consider intuition a sixth sense and who knows what else our bodies may be doing that we don’t yet know about).  However, in phone calls we are using only one of those senses—hearing.  You have the advantage of hearing tone, but you get no body language.  In the written word, which we have become increasingly reliant on, we are using only sight in the form of reading.  Not only are you not getting body language, you are not even getting tone (no matter how many emoticons someone uses).  And we wonder why there is so much miscommunication!  In person, we use sight, hearing, smell, touch, maybe even taste as an adjunct to smell.  And our intuition is in overdrive, pulling on data from these senses and more.  Relationships are built on all these data.  In fact, they require all this information to get a holistic picture. 

What happens if you are only using sight (in the form of reading) and maybe sound?  Your brain fills in the gaps with assumptions.  And you all certainly know how I feel about assumptions!  How many times have you begun a relationship with a colleague by phone or email and when you finally meet them they are totally different from what you had pictured in your mind?  Or a long distance working relationship seems rocky but YOU HAVE NEVER EVEN MET?  There IS no relationship yet.  How many times have you tried conflict resolution by email?  Did that ever work for you?  This phenomenon is even worse in our personal life, either on-line dating or social media, when people purposely try to show you only a small part of who they really are. 

When video conferencing first came out, it was marketed as a way for companies to save money on travel since it would be “just like being there”.  Except that it isn’t, even while increases in bandwidth have smoothed out early jerky movements.  I worry that virtual and augmented reality are being touted anew as substitutes for being there IRL (in real life).  We rely so much on social media for connection, but even Facebook is most effective with those with whom you have a deep personal relationship.  There truly IS no substitute for IRL for honest relationship building.  These other tools are all wonderful for extending the effectiveness of getting together face-to-face, but they can’t replace it.

I remember a commercial many years ago for some airline.  The Big Boss had called his subordinates into a conference room and talked about how doing business had changed.  They were doing so much more by phone and email and less in front of their customers face-to-face.  In fact, he had recently gotten berated by an old friend and longtime customer for that lack of attention.  He then tossed airline tickets on the table to each person, sending each out to see a key client.  He held up his own ticket—one to go visit that old friend.  Corny and self-serving to be sure—but with a big dose of truth.  We MUST get face-to-face to build and maintain relationships.  Don’t shy away from calls, emails, texts, video conferences, VR/AR–but remember the Law of The Half Life of Effective Communication.

As with Leadership Characteristics, tackled in an earlier essay, much has been written on Gratitude.  While I do not intend to compete with Oprah and Eckhard Tolle on this topic, I do have a take on gratitude that has been bubbling around for a while.  I’d like to discuss it with you.

It’s only fitting that the formative thoughts on this essay happened while discussing life with Trish and my sister, Wendy, during a week-long stay at my timeshare in Aruba.  It’s a little hard not to feel grateful for what you have while sitting on the beach at sunset, sipping a mango-tini and being served the best scallops you’ve ever eaten.  Spending a week in Aruba is a once-in-a-lifetime, dream vacation for many.  For countless others it’s even outside of the realm of possibility.  I go there for a week every year, unless I’ve decided I have somewhere better to go.  I am grateful for this opportunity and for the station in life that I’ve achieved that make this possible.  But that’s not what I want to talk about when I talk about “gratitude”.

Sure, Sherri, it’s easy for you to be grateful.  You were born into a position of privilege in this country as a white child in a middle class home, had a great education, chose a lucrative field of work and had countless unbelievably lucky opportunities.  You were fired before your 54^th birthday and yet were able to happily slide into retirement.  Don’t freakin’ talk to me about “gratitude”.

Oh, but I will!  Because that’s not the type of gratitude I want to talk about.  Look, I know I have had countless advantages but there are many people more advantaged than I am that are totally miserable and have made a mess of their lives.  Just watch Entertainment Tonight or scan the tabloid headlines in the supermarket.  When I talk about gratitude, I’m not talking about privilege or wealth or even about hard work to take advantage of those lucky breaks. 

All the discussion along those lines is about gratitude as a comparative measure, almost as a punitive tool: 

“Eat your dinner.  There are starving children in the world.” 

“Stop feeling sorry for yourself.  You have so much more than so many people.  You should be grateful.”

“I know you wrecked your car, but be grateful that it wasn’t worse.” 

“Get off the couch and exercise!  At least you can.  Think of all the people who can’t exercise.  You should be more grateful.” 

We’ve all beat ourselves up numerous times with thinking like that above.  But that’s not really gratitude.  That’s a rank order of privilege.  Should you keep things in perspective?  Yes.  Should you also recognize that someone’s pain is their pain, regardless of comparative measures?  Yes again.

I started to flesh out a different meaning of “gratitude” listening to a meditation given by Deepak Chopra.  This particular meditation was part of a series he did with Oprah entitled “Manifesting Grace through Gratitude”.  (Mindfulness Meditation, while something of a recent fad, is a practice that kept me from climbing walls during my professional days.  Now it helps me fall asleep.)  Somewhere during that 22 part collection of 10 minute meditations, Deepak said something that blew me away.  True gratitude, he said (and I’m paraphrasing), is not about comparing yourself and what you have to others.  True gratitude is about recognizing all the abundance around us every day.

Think about that for a minute.  We, as human beings, are incredible creatures biologically and otherwise.   Anyone who has taken a biology or biochemistry class knows that even the simplest protozoan is a complex miracle. Humans are absolutely amazing beings!  We think, talk, love, learn and grow with our complex brains.  Even the most annoying, frustrating, seemingly “worthless” person is an absolute marvel.  Similarly, the world around us is filled with the abundance and beauty of nature—the sunshine, the rain, the plants and animals.  We are blessed just to be who we are and with every breath we take.  I know this sounds like crunchy granola speak from someone that has no worries in the world.  And I DO understand that unless your basic needs for food, shelter and personal safety are met that it is a challenge to see the abundance around us all the time.  However, I doubt anyone reading this essay has much of an issue with the bottom rung of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (food, shelter, security). 

This is the challenge that I have with respect to gratitude.  On a beautiful, sunny day with the birds chirping and time to read and to think, I don’t have problems feeling grateful.  I have problems when I’ve got a pounding headache and everything and everyone is getting on my last nerve.  Or when I watch too much of the news and get this helpless feeling and anxiety about such pervasive hate and distrust and evil in the world. Or when I am witness to too much heartache and pain in people I love.  Those, though, are the times we need to learn to see and feel the abundance around us and feel that basic gratitude for life and our world.  Not because it could be worse, but because it couldn’t be better!  We are surrounded by so much and are such miracles ourselves!  Oh, how I want to able to feel that all the time!

I mentioned earlier that the foundational thoughts for this essay formed in Aruba.  I find it equally fitting that the final edits on this essay are happening almost six months later during the Jewish High Holy Days (the 10 days inclusive of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur).  These are days of significant introspection for me.  I take stock of myself, look back over the last year and think forward to the coming year.  The comparisons I draw are not external.  I do not make comparisons with other people.  The measure I take of myself is internal—versus what I expect of myself.  My goals are around personal improvement, looking inward.  Gratitude comes from there and there alone.

We’ve all seen the stories of the desperately poor or disabled or however unfortunate being amazingly positive and optimistic and/or doing unbelievable acts of giving.  They aren’t like that (necessarily) because they see someone worse off than them.  They have that attitude and do those things because they are grateful for the life they have, for the abundance they see around them, and the fundamental need to give to and help others.  Let’s all work to focus more on the magic of the world we live in.  There’s something to the cliché to “stop and smell the roses”. That is true gratitude.

From 1975 until his retirement in 1988, Senator William Proxmire from Wisconsin published a monthly winner of his Golden Fleece Award.  A fiscal hawk, Proxmire aimed to expose what he considered a wasteful use of taxpayer money.  The idea was quite popular and I remember many a newscaster gleefully exposing the latest in government waste.  Years later, in some discussion on scientific research, the Golden Fleece Awards came up again.  The grant money for fundamental R&D came overwhelmingly from government agencies like the DoE, DoD, NIH, etc and research grants were often the “winners” of Proxmire’s award.  We discussed one of these winners in depth: a research program to understand the sex lives of roaches.

I can see the eye brows raising.  The sex lives of roaches?  That seems a fairly ridiculous thing to study.  Except it wasn’t.  The researchers were investigating pheromones, those naturally produced agents that attract a member of a species to breed.  All jokes aside about actually wanting roaches to breed more, the identification of a cockroach sex attractant led to a fairly useful invention:  The Roach Motel.  Pre-Roach Motel, you would need to spray a poison around your kitchen or bathroom to hopefully banish the beasts (good luck with that).  The Roach Motel, however, attracted the roach to the “device”, which it entered and found the nicely contained poison.  (“Roaches check in….but they don’t check out.”)  For anyone with small children or pets, this was a huge safety improvement.  Now, pheromones are part of our common vernacular and are a critical part of the pest control industry.  Worth a little basic understanding of the sex lives of roaches.

There are several jumping off points from here on which to build an essay.  I could talk about how important basic research is and how scary it is that the US has severely reduced its support for fundamental knowledge building.  I could talk about how the practical application of knowledge is often a twisty turny unexpected road and most often cannot be managed through the use of Gantt charts, but patience in funding R&D is a topic for another time.  No, I want to go more general.  What the above example inspires in me today is this thought:  If something looks simple, or ridiculous, or stupid to me, my first thought is that I just don’t know enough about it.

A wonderful aspect of being retired is that I now have the time and the mental energy to read a whole lot more than I did while I was working.  I was a great skimmer, before.  And a great buyer of books and magazines that would pile up.  Now, not only do I have time to read these things; but being a lover of non-fiction, I have time to let my curiosity take me further into answering those follow on questions.  What I invariably find is that the truth has nuance and what I thought was fairly clear cut is not quite so clear.  For example, right now I am reading a lengthy treatise on Cliven Bundy—the Nevada rancher who has been fighting the Federal government for the right to graze his cattle on federal grasslands without paying a fee.  Reading the backstory is giving me a much greater understanding of where the Bundys are coming from.  While I still don’t agree with most of their positions, I do see a different way to have the conversation to come to an agreement.  And couldn’t we all do with a bit more understanding of where others are coming from?

Before I went to grad school at Penn State, I was a city girl who ardently opposed sport hunting.  I remember walking on College Avenue one day, seeing a car drive by with a deer strapped across the roof rack.  “How can they just kill these magnificent creatures?!” I would judgmentally exclaim.  Then I began to talk with my new friends, many of whom had been sport hunters all their lives.  I learned about deer overpopulation because their natural predator, the mountain lion, had been driven out.  I learned how deer were starving.  I learned about the true sport hunter and the ethics of sport hunting:  only fire when you can make a clean kill, use the meat, follow the state game rules.  I still abhor people who sit on the tops of hills with a high powered rifle, just knocking off animals for the fun of it.  But I understand and appreciate true sport hunting.  I appreciated it even more after I had a car accident with a deer!

In a business environment, assuming “easy answers” brings a lack of understanding across business functions that need to work together to accomplish a goal.  Things always look simple from a distance.  If you are in sales and you need a tweak to a product to close the deal, that tweak can often seem pretty minor–unless you are the process engineer who needs to figure out how to do that tweak.  Magnify this difficulty ten times when someone gets the “bright idea” to enter a new market without sufficient research.  Distance from the details always makes things look simple and straightforward.  We’ve talked about assumptions.  Don’t assume that just because you don’t know how difficult something can be that it must be easy.

This issue is exasperated in large organizations where those several layers above the people doing the work do not understand what it takes to get something done.  I remember a time when a hurricane flooded out a production facility.  Once the flood waters receded, a team was put together to assess the damage and execute repairs.  These people worked day and night for several weeks.  It was an amazing effort!  The quick turnaround saved the company loads of money in lost sales.  I was in a meeting where this result was brought up in side conversation. The senior manager’s take was “Geez, why can’t we get people to work like this all the time?” DO YOU HAVE ANY FREAKIN’ IDEA WHAT THOSE PEOPLE WENT THROUGH?  No, you don’t.  You were too far removed from the details of the effort. That was not sustainable! 

In this current world, where we are inundated with sound bites from all directions, resist the temptation to just accept what you read and hear.  Consider the source.  Dig a little bit to find all sides of the story.  As with other topics we’ve discussed, though, you do need to pick your battles.  It is time consuming and mentally exhausting to try to research every little thing.  However, never doing it is just as dangerous.  Even just retaining the consciousness that you may not know enough to judge is a very good thing.  Certainly you would want people who might judge–or misjudge–you and your actions to take the time to understand.  So even if you don’t have the time to dig into it, at least remember that if what you are hearing sounds ridiculous, simple or dumb, you probably just don’t know enough about it.

I have been anticipating writing this essay since the idea for this blog went from idea to reality.  People who know me know that this concept of owning your decisions and actions, owning your own role in creating the situation you are in, is a BIG hot button of mine.  I’ve built your expectations of an “essay to beat all other essays” as I’ve teased the appearance of this entry.  We’ve been building up to it over the last three essays, discussing first identifying the RIGHT problem to solve, then thinking forward a few steps in your decision-making process to ensure you are making the best decision, followed by a discussion on the consequences of the actions (or inactions) you take.  It all boils down to this thought, though:  whatever decision you make, whatever actions you take (or don’t take), whatever consequences occur because of those decisions and actions, you must own the outcome and deal with it.  So, here we go. (Steps up onto soapbox)

All of you out there, whether you’ve been in large multinational corporations or small “mom and pop” shops know someone like this:  They walk around every day grumbling about how unhappy they are.  “This place SUCKS,” you will often hear them sneer.  “I hate it here.”  After a while, you lose your patience and ask the obvious question:  why don’t you leave?  Invariably, the answer is “I can’t.  I’m stuck here.”  Oh, I got so tired of hearing “victim talk”!  You were not stuck there!  You just didn’t like the consequences of your other options.  You chose to stay, whether you wanted to admit it or not.  That was usually when I wanted to scream, “Shut up about it and make the best of the situation!  Own your choice to stay.”

I know another person, a serial small time entrepreneur.  He has had glimpses of brilliance, but invariably within a year or two each venture has failed.  Miserably.  Every time our paths would cross, there would be another sob story about what went wrong.  It was always due to issues beyond his control:  I couldn’t find good employees; the location was bad; there was too much local competition; and, my favorite, I was misled about the opportunity.  Do you know what I have never heard from him?  I have never heard any such version of:  this is what I’ve learned from this venture and what I know to look out for next time.  Never, I repeat, never has anything ever been his fault, or had he done anything which he could consider learning from for his next venture.

While I hesitate to go here, there is an awful lot of victim-playing going on in our current social environment.  The types of opportunities available to certain groups of people have changed as our economy has evolved.  Accepting that and asking the hard questions about what you need to do differently to get on a better path is hard work.  And often depressing.  And can leave you feeling helpless and hopeless.  For many, it is easier to play the victim and blame the “other”.  Unfortunately, our current social environment has embraced blaming the “other” to a violent and clearly counterproductive degree.  I know it’s hard, but OWN your situation.  Life may not have treated you fairly but blaming someone else is not going to make your situation better.

Although I’ve now spent about half this essay talking about how annoying, frustrating or even dangerous it is when other people don’t own their choices, I want to focus on you.  Or, rather, get YOU to focus on you.  As much as I’d like to complain about the behaviors of others, I can’t make them act any differently.  I can only affect my own actions, just as you can only affect yours.  So, as I step down from my soapbox, let’s discuss some ways to resist playing the victim and set strategies for successfully owning your own decisions and their consequences.

First, let’s be clear and honest about one thing:  consistently owning your decisions and their consequences, consistently resisting playing the victim, is difficult work.  It is downright exhausting.  And it is hard.  You will, at times, blame others or something out of your control.  That’s ok.  Sometimes that becomes a self-preservation mechanism.  The key is to not do this most of the time nor to get stuck in that mode even for a given situation, like a job loss or relationship crumble.

I hear the cries from the gallery:  “Sherri, what do you, or anyone else, care about how I handle my own crises?  It’s none of your dang business.  Leave me alone and stay in your lane.”  I hear you and in some cases that is true.  However, in most cases, you not owning the consequences of your decisions affects many others.  And those of us affected care very much!  Even if we don’t care much about you, personally, we care that you’ve impacted our situation.  So, gallery, it’s not just about you.

Over the years, I have sat on panel discussions aimed at various age ranges, to discuss “what should students/young adults do to best prepare themselves for success in the ‘real’ world?”  I would listen to my fellow panelists wax poetic for extended periods of time discussing various strategies for success.  When the mic came to me, I always shared some short version of this:  Show up on time; do what you say you’re going to do; own the consequences of your decisions and actions.

As someone who has hired and managed scores of people over my career, these were always my guiding principles for evaluating employees and the standard to which I tried to hold myself.  It’s not rocket science, but nor is it necessarily easy.  I promised strategies, so here is what I recommend:  as noted above, no one can hold themselves to this standard 100% of the time.  It’s ok to give yourself a little pity party.  We all do it.  But make it short and keep it as private as you can.  Remember that you are not doing this to be accountable to anyone but yourself.  Others will benefit, but no one more so than you.  You are worth it.  You want to like what you see when you look in the mirror.  It can be extraordinarily frustrating to see many others around and above you shirking responsibility but I guarantee this:  over time, it will in some way come around to them; and the longer it takes the worse it will be.  Shut them out.  Focus on yourself.  Show up on time.  Do what you say you’re going to do.  Own the consequences of your decisions and actions.