Friday, July 30, 2010

Facticity, Inspiration, and Bad Faith

It starts with understanding how we see ourselves.

Sartre says that who we are is a mix of facticity and inspiration. We describe ourselves by our facicity. These are the facts about ourselves. Our age, our height, our weight, our past. When we look at ourselves in terms of only facticity, we see ourselves in more of a biographical self. It isn’t something we can deny, these are rarely things we can change, they are essentially facts.

We can also see ourselves as inspiration. Inspiration is not who we are in terms of facts, but what we aspire to be. If I want to be a lawyer, I may start to describe myself as someone who is studious or career orientated. I may shift my attitudes so that are congruent with how I see my future self. For example, maybe if I go into criminal law, I will aspire to be a person who cares about justice and fairness.

Rarely are we all facticity or inspiration. If we see ourselves only as facts, we give no perspective to who we are. When we read a biography of a great leader, rarely do we have the insight of what that person was thinking about during their great acts. Maybe a historian can conclude what Julius Ceaser thought about himself as a husband, based on his life acts..but do we really know?

We rarely think of ourselves only as inspiration. Let’s take a very bizarre example. There is a sense, that we lose all groundedness as a human being if I think of myself as an angel or a dragon. Inspiration allows for growth and seeing ourselves outside of our current self…sort of giving a perspective to a future self.

Maybe the mixture of facticity and inspiration varies by person. Someone more realistic and conventional might see themselves more in terms of facts. Someone more artistic or unconventional, one could reason, might think of themselves as more inspiration. The funny thing is, who we are very much turns out to be, how we see ourselves.

Sartre tells us to avoid Bad Faith. Bad Faith is a term where we limit ourselves and who we could be by limiting ourselves, or by not owning who we are. An example might be a person who wants to become a teacher, but their parents want them to be a doctor. Because they disown the person they want to be, they decide they want to be a doctor, to placate their parents, they are acting in bad faith. Further, we can limit or facticity too. We might try to disown part of our own experience. If we had an experience in life we do not want to come to terms with, we are also acting in bad faith.

Of course as Robert Solomon says, Sartre’s philosophy is one of no excuses. It is a philosophy of personal responsibility and acceptance for what we are. I think by understanding who we are, and taking control of who we are, we live a life worth living. We have a fulfilling life experience.

Friday, July 23, 2010

Creating Space for Powerful Emotions

As human beings, it is so easy to mimic the behavior of other people. It’s something we do especially when we don’t have a self-reference frame. If we don’t personally have an idea of what to do, we’ll follow someone else’s idea. I think it's key in an emotional situtation not to mimic the other person's behavior, but give space to allow for the emotion.

With emotional conflicts, it is critical to give yourself some space.

I remember hearing the story of a social worker who was working with a mother who recently lost her young child. The mother was distraught, when the social worker arrived. The social worker, there to talk to the mother about her situation didn’t even open her mouth. The distraught mother poured out her emotions, talking about how her son died, talking about the economic disaster she found herself in, talking about her absent husband. While the woman spoke, the social worker, just listened. Listened and gave non-verbal cues of engagement and empathy. At some point there was a nature place to pause, the social worker got up, and walked out. There was nothing that social worker could have said to the mother with the deceased son. Nothing of value she could add. By being an empathetic person who would listen, it created the space for understanding. It created the space for both people to communicate.

Powerful emotions can make situations more challenging, because the reasoning can’t take place until the emotional storm has passed. Any of us, barraged internally by emotions: anger, enthusiasm, fear, wonderment, are not going to be rationally minded to move ourselves forward.
Recently a friend of mine was upset with me over how I handled a situation. My friend, lets call him Adam, at first was indirect. Once I engaged him a little bit, it he became much more upset.

It almost seemed as if a small fire had turned into a brush fire. Almost unsciously, I calmed my own emotions. Though my face flared up, and my heartbeat raced at first, I was able to calm my mind, and focus on the situation. From there, I listened without directing the conversation. Choosing not to guide the conversation or ask too many questions let him get some comments off his chest.

The situation was already powerful, and by being a mirror to the other person. After giving space for a person to express their feelings, then the opportunity came for reconcillation.
Emotions are powerful, even if there is not an emergency. Give them space, give them understanding.

Friday, July 16, 2010

Despair and Awe: Musings on Existentialism

Might it be time to face a movement challenging to us to face ourselves?

At a party recently, I sat toe-to-toe with a good friend, who told me blankly that we all go alone. Though not physically upset, there was a sense I gathered that he was contemplating the absurdities of life. To be direct, many of us would admit there is the problem of meaning inherent in living life. In the end, our families, our friends, collegeues, lovers, enemies, and people who we made some sort of an impression on…it all amounts to us facing our aloneness.
How do we face a moment of like this? Generally, we refer to it as an ‘existential crisis’, but I think that distances the problem from the very personal nature of existence Our lives often taking a safe ride from moment of safety and familiarity to the next. It is in these moments of loss faith, or maybe awakenings that we take the look around. We all are aware, to some level that our lives may fall short of living up to our grandiose dreams.

I think existentialism gives us a different perspective.

Robert Solomon, recently deceased Austin University professor, has some of the most eloquent and thought-provoking youtube video series I’ve found that expounds on the work by giants of existentialism. These figures include: Camus, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Sartre and Heidegger.
Solomon isn’t interested in dead beliefs, but rather, blows the sand off the scripts and literature of these literary giants. Existentialism I gather, is more then a 1940s literary movement or philosophical reaction.. There are certain attributes that I think are relevant to existentialism: 1) emphasis on the individual 2) truth in subjectivity 3) confronting despair and death and 4) living life passionately.

One thinker that resonates strongly with me is Soren Kierkegaard. Writer of “Fear and Trembling” and “Either/Or”. Kierkegaard was keenly aware of his sovereign journey. Unable to follow the ‘crowd’ or take the presumptions of his culture, he took a path unique to his own, spawning many existential thinkers. Kierkegaard starts with the premise “Truth is subjectivity”, a risky and alienating idea. Like other existentialists, he recognizes that we don’t life according to any noble truths, but rather our personal truth. Our commitments. Our passions. Our meaning. Regardless of how we feel about religion, or politics or any sort of collective feeling, there is a pervasive sense that the meaning we derive from life is one we have to feel it for ourselves.

Kierkegaard talks of the 3 levels that provide individual meaning.
The aesthetic level is the venture. Whether in our party college years or chasing the satisfactions of pleasure in our later years, it is easy to see the way we suit ourselves to a passion. Benign passions like arts, achievement, or status seeking, or more hedonistic pursuits of drugs, drinking and sex…all of which lead to a lack of satisfaction. In the short-term, these aesthetic pleasures feel a void. The question remains. How many games do you have to win, to feel vindicated? How many people do you need approval from to feel secure? The answer for Kieekegaard, and if we look honestly at ourselves, is that these pleasures are temporal. The aesthetic level is not enough.

The ethical level is one of self-development. One where we strive to be the best human being that we can be. There is a satisfaction here, one in which we are meeting the criteria of our society and trying to live a life according to our cultural scripts. Through these efforts we improve ourselves – kindness, ability, openness, honesty. All of which Kierkegaard would say is a positive step up from the empty pursuit of pleasure. Again we are faced with the existential dread of our finality. The ethical level, improves the individual, and perhaps separates the individual from the ‘herd mentality’. But the elevation is still man-made.

Kierkegaard takes the leap-of-faith. For him, this i a commitment wholly to something he can live and die for. For Kierkegaard, the answer is an individual commitment to Christ. He professed, even if there were no other Christians, it would be the right leap forward. Even if the religion were proved a lie, it is the right step forward. Again, the emphasis is not on a rational logical answser, but rather the subjective truth that makes the purpose meaningful.
Kierkegaard, the father of existentialism, an intense individual by all accounts, gives us an answer which at once has us face despair, but gives us a vision toward a higher calling. The vision is unique to Kierkegaard, one he recognizes as having a meaning only to him. Many existentialists have had different visions: Nietzsche a reactionary, Sarte a Marxist, Camus an atheist, and Heidigger a fascist. The thread that binds these thinkers is the sense of personal commitment, and personal meaning.

Existentialism may offer, and I believe does offer us a compelling vision for our own lives. It is not an ordained or always appreciated viewpoint; but the message is one that we are responsible for our lives, and further responsible for our destinies. What the answer is, one gathers, really is not the point. The point is that the passions in life not only give us a sense of identity, but can give us the foundation for which to live our life.

Friday, July 9, 2010

Traits of Future Leaders

This list is also from "The 2020 Workplace: How Innovative Companies Attract, Develop, and Keep Tomorrow's Employees Today" by Jeanne C. Meister and Karie Willyerd.

Here the focus is on the traits of a 2020 Leader. One of the things I take away from this list is that these are values ingrained young people because it is part of their education. One point that Meister and Willyerd make is that not only are companies needing to get great talent, but that young people will be taking over leadership positions very quickly - the baby boomer brain drain is happening very soon.

So from Meister and Willyerd here are some of the traits of leaders needed in 2020.


Collaborative Mind-set: Inclusive decision making, genuine solicitation of feedback

Developer of People: Mentors and coaches team; provides straight feedback

Digitally confident – uses technology to connect to customers and employees

Global citizen- diverse mind-set, prioritizes social responsibility

Anticipates and Builds for the Future – builds accountability across levels, champions innovation


Many companies GE, Zappos are already trying to deal with these trends. Rounds (getting experience, formal observation, shadowing, after-action review, team workshops). I think it is important for young people to get engaged now in their fields of endeavor. Why not build yourself up now. The wisdom of the ages is here: virtual learning, audiobooks, mp3s, and immediate access to all this information.

Learn now, learn well

Greg

Friday, July 2, 2010

Surviving the Future: Preparing for the 2020 Workplace

If science fiction has taught us anything, we always are interested in what the world will look like. Asking someone what work will be like in 5 years: we might consider the new technologies that will effect the world. For example in 10 years, maybe we have a more green economy, with products and careers centered around sustainability. We might also consider our values and our visions of our shared future. The type of work we engage in, how much we work, the reasons why we work, could all be challenged.

The good news is that even if we can't see the future yet, we can use the data from today about the emerging trends with evidence and current data.

"The 2020 Workplace: How Innovative Companies Attract, Develop, and Keep Tomorrow's Employees Today" by Jeanne C. Meiseter and Karie Willyerd is a brillant book that helps guide us in that ponderous exercise.

Here are the findings from Meiseter and Willyerd about the changes we will see in the 2020 Workplace. All 10 terms are directly from the book, and I expand on each idea.

1. Shifting Workplace Demograpics - We're going to see a huge shift in the demographics of the developed world. The number of workers aged 55 and older will grow from 13 percent of the labor force in 2000 to 2020 to 20% (page 16), and generally the population is aging and shrinking (p.17). Even in the U.S. that has a stable birth rate and strong immigration will have to deal wit the baby boomer retirement in 2020

2. Knowledge Economy – The skills and knowledge levels needed to get and keep a job in a global economy. This requires complex interdisciplinaru skills. Many white collar jobs (3.3 million and $136 billion in wages) are going to India and Russia by 2015 (p.21). This changes the very type of work that many of us will be doing.

3. Globalization – Things are moving so quickly, that organizations have to contend with moving these quickly changing market; tapping into a global talent pool. Companies will deal with a number of pressures not just external (environment, politics, terrorism) but internal ones (organizational design, finding talented employees, central vs decentralized decision , making).

4. Digital Workplace – This is the continued expansion of knowledge. General point, but so important

5. Ubiquity of mobile technology. As of 2008 more then 2.5 trillion text messages were sent (p.27). This is even more central in developing world; less setup is needed with a mobile device. Also, who isn't fascinated about the latest Iphone coming out this year.

6. Culture of Connection – becoming hyperconnected; social media, can be any age (though 60% are under 35 (p.29), RSS feeds, companies use social media for internal purposes, connect with customers

7. Participation Society – Contributions from individuals are valued. Companies will use collaboration and knowledge sharing to improve business results. Consider web forms, websites, and even blogging

8. Social Learning – Some of values here are: collaboration, immediate access and relevance. All of these are central to social learning and social media today. Many companies are reinventing training and corporate excercises that are virtual and more experiential.

9. Corporate Social Responsibility – Increasingly, companies are trying to differentiate themselves and attract top talent. Some of this can be done by having a company that values more than the profit margin. Think of environmental values, religious values and humanitarian values.

10. Millenials in the workplace - These are the latest generation to enter the workplace and they do work differently. They value collaboration, they value feedback, they value quick learning and they are tech savy.

Lets see how this holds out in 2020.

Greg