Why I threw away my seven-step, sure-fire, principle-based problem solving methodology in favor of watching my son learning to stand up.
 

Most people believe that their problems are unique to them. Many people believe problems are not a good thing to have. Some people make a living solving other people’s problems. And then there’s me: my problem is that I see problems like mosquitoes hovering around me in the woods and frankly they just bug me. I want to know the nature of problems—and, more importantly, how to get rid of them.

This is what I know so far:

• Problems are, by nature, problematic. Collectively, we have environmental, political, economic, and social problems. Individually, we have health, emotional, mental, social and spiritual problems. All problems can be frightening, challenging and controversial.
• Problems are persistent. They keep coming back if not solved properly.
• Problems are timeless and universal. Everyone who has every lived, everyone who is living now and everyone who will live in the future has and will have essentially similar problems.
• Problems are paradoxical and hierarchical. We have global problems and we have local problems. These problems can be simple or complex. Whether global or local, simple or complex, some problems are more important at different times in different places.
• Problems are common and ordinary. Everyone has problems and everyone solves problems in their own way. We are addicted to problems. We love to talk about our problems and we especially love to solve the problems of others! Problems are rationalizations and justifications for just about anything that happens in this world. We fill our newspapers and TV’s with them. Books and movies are built around them. Yet problems also are the very essence of human progress and individual growth.

Studying problem-solving doesn’t help

With this profound clarity about the nature of problems, I have come to this staggering self-evident conclusion: If you live, then you will have problems. Problems are requisite to life as we know it. Yet even if we know that problems are problematic, timeless, universal, paradoxical, hierarchical, common and ordinary, we still haven’t determined how to solve them.

So, I embarked on a study of everyday problem solving. I watched my neighbors solve problems. I talked to business people about their problems. I listened to politicians talking about problems on TV and in newspapers. I read books about famous problem solvers and I researched problem-solving on the Internet.

I came away more confused than ever.

Finally, I concluded that the world needed a new problem-solving methodology that was simple and easy. Based on my research into the principles of integrity, I created a seven-step, sure-fire, principle-based problem solving methodology.

That went out the window when I watched my ten-month old son solve the basic problem of standing. I couldn’t teach him the seven step approach— and besides, he seemed to be doing fine all by himself.

The built-in method

That son of mine cannot hold a conversation in any language and is just now grappling with the notion of “no”. He barely understands the notion of balance, let alone the laws of physics required to stand up.

Yet he was solving the problem of standing naturally. It was as if some internal compass pointed to the problem and the internal physical and mental systems required to complete the job kick-started all by themselves. Without even knowing what he expected to accomplish, he began the process of overcoming his present limitations.

He was solving the problem spontaneously and creatively as well. Every time he got the opportunity, he leveraged himself up in any way he could, using any possible physical object within reach. He was unrelenting in his pursuit. Every day in every way he was practicing and learning.

He also had a good attitude for problem solving. He was undeterred by success or failure. If he fell down, he got up. If he got up, he tried to walk. He was not looking for approval. He was not competing with anyone or for anything. He didn’t care about his ten-month-old friend who could already walk.

Problem-solving via wholeness

Integrity is defined as wholeness, consistency and objectivity. In simple words, it is doing the right thing, doing the next right thing and doing things right.

Wholeness is the state of completeness. The problem of not being able to stand was overcome in order that he could become complete a standing in order to solve the problem of walking. Becoming complete is a natural process that begins with conception.and includes a built-in compass that identifies and engages problems. Problem solving becomes a natural process that stimulates the journey to completion.

Consistency is the state of holding things together in time and space. Following the natural inclination to overcome the problem of standing, a baby is disciplined and relentless in its use of time, and incredibly creative in using everything in the immediate world to complete the task.

Objectivity is the ability to deal with the features and characteristics of the problem, not the thoughts about the problem. Babies are pure in their approach. They don’t think about the problem the way we do. They just work on it and learn from it. Nor does a baby measure success or failure the way we measure it. They are not looking for fame, fortune or power. They solve problems without competition and stress.

What does this mean for you and me?

Integrity based problem solving simply means getting back to these basics:

• Problem-solving is a natural and essential process that we are well equipped to do even if we have forgotten how. And problems never go away even if we want them to. So we better get good at it!
• You have everything you need right in front of you to solve problems. You have all time you need and more than enough resources. Even if you are not good at one type of problem, you can always hire someone who is.
• Problem-solving will teach you purity of thought and objectivity in action. Aren’t these goals enough of reason to engage any problem?

The next time you have a problem, try the integrity-based approach. Do the right thing, do the next right thing and do things right.

Technorati Tags: problem-solving, problem solving, doing things right, finding answers to our problems, integrity in action, natural problem solving approach

How to spot those who will screw-up as a leader, manager or supervisor

First, two facts. The vast majority of employees who quit their jobs do not leave their company; they leave their boss. The vast majority of leaders, managers and supervisors who are fired, replaced, removed—or who derail—are not deficient in technical skills, expertise or know-how. They are fired, or fail, because of their lack of effective interpersonal skills.

Many of today’s workplaces are deficient in the kind of learning and development that addresses issues of self-discovery, as well as the principles and practices that promote conscious and healthy relationships. Truly knowing yourself, which includes seeking the feedback of others, creates a healthy sense of self-esteem and forms the basis for successful relationships. Read the full story

Today’s executives are still being driven to make decisions that address
short-term financial performance at the expense of the long-term
best interests of the company. When will it end?
 

With the global economy still working its way through a seemingly interminable series of financial crises and yo-yoing oil prices, companies are struggling to manage all the repercussions. Airline business models surely weren’t built with high oil prices factored in. Banks didn’t foresee the credit crisis on the horizon. Auto makers didn’t anticipate interest in SUVs crashing. Why aren’t these companies able to see these things happening with more notice? Wall Street and its investors—which means almost all of us who have savings or pension plans—may well have a lot to do with it, along with incomes based on hitting the quarterly targets Wall Street demands.

Most investors seek the best and quickest possible return on their investments, so companies often make decisions based solely on the short-term impact on bottom-line results. Investors see quick returns and reward companies by continuing to invest in their shares.

However, this short-term financial focus often comes at the expense of companies making longer-term, more strategic, decisions that might not have as good a short-term financial effect. Unlike Warren Buffet, who has been quoted saying “our favorite holding period is forever,” most investors do not have a very long-term focus. Since they’re paying the piper, they call the tune leaders must dance to. Read the full story

Can we learn more from bad leaders than from good ones?

Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator

Who is this? He was born into a poor family in the distant provinces, terrorized by a brutal father who died when he was still young, and never completing his education. Instead, he drifted through a succession of dead-end jobs. Few would have imagined, seeing him living in a working-man’s hostel at the age of thirty, that he would ever amount to anything. A voracious reader and tireless autodidact, he overcame all these obstacles — as well as an awkward social manner and a thick provincial accent — to become leader of a major political party and prime minister of his country at the age of forty-five.

Of course, Adolf Hitler was not all good news: to the tens of millions who perished in the Second World War, he was very bad news indeed. But his case does illustrate, in unusually stark terms, that we can sometimes learn more from considering the careers of bad leaders than good ones. Read the full story

How to renew yourself as a leader (Part 2)

 
Many leaders—I’m tempted to write ‘most leaders’—don’t trust those who work for them to do what they’re paid to do and do it properly. The continual primacy of command-and-control methods of leadership proves this.

There’s a whole management mythology out there to support the idea that people are basically lazy and feckless. If you aren’t on top of them the whole time, they’ll slack off and try to avoid working. That’s in addition to the ego-centric belief many leaders have that nobody can do anything as well as them, let alone better; and all the anal-obsessive bosses out there who think ‘leadership’ and ‘micro-management’ are the same thing.

Trust, in today’s workplaces, is more of an endangered species than any giant panda or rare, South American frog. No one amongst the great and mighty, it seems, is even remotely interested in its survival. Read the full story

Another podcast tale from Coyote himself

Coyote deals with an unfortunate outbreak of BS that threatens the smooth running of his part of the world. When Badger gets confused and Owl suffers from toxic contamination, it takes someone like Coyote to sort it all out — and have some fun at the same time.

Here’s how the story starts:

Coyote was used to Badger’s moodiness, but he’d never seen his old friend quite as downhearted as this. It seemed all the life had drained out of him, leaving him without even the energy to eat. That really alarmed Coyote. One thing you could be sure of with Badger was his appetite.

”That I needed a big, hairy, audacious goal. Well . . . I think he said goal. Maybe it was gull. Some of those seagulls are very big, aren’t they? And audacious. But not hairy. Do you think he meant some kind of spider? There are some very big, hairy spiders around here. They taste good, too. Honestly, I’m so confused.”

Instructions

You can listen to the story here, using this built-in, Flash MP3 player.

Alternatively, you can listen to the audio files through your computer or by downloading them to another device. To listen to the audio files through your computer, use your mouse to left-click on the link below. To download the files, right-click, select ‘Save as’ or ‘Save link as’ and specify the destination to which you would like to save the file. Using Safari, you can right- or Control-click and choose ‘Download linked file’.

I hope you enjoy it.

Technorati Tags: BS, buzzwords, jargon, management jargon, thinking outside the box, seeing clearly,

You don’t have to stay with fixed stereotypes or rigid rules

 
“I often think it’s comical
How Nature always does contrive
That every boy and every gal
That’s born into the world alive
Is either a little Liberal
Or else a little Conservative!
Fa! La! La!

— Gilbert and Sullivan’s opera “Iolanthe” (1882)

There are times when it’s extremely tempting to believe that Gilbert had it right and that the world is composed of two kinds of people: stiff-necked, puritanical and rigid conservatives; and free-flowing, wishy-washy, politically-correct liberals.

Here’s what Thomas Jefferson wrote, long before “Ionlanthe” came on stage in London:

Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties: 1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes. 2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, although not the most wise, depository of the public interests. In every country these two parties exist, and in every one where they are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare themselves. Call them, therefore, Liberals and Serviles, Jacobins and Ultras, Whigs and Tories, Republicans and Federalists, Aristocrats and Democrats, or by whatever name you please, they are the same parties still, and pursue the same object.

This view of the world as based on a simple dichotomy between right and left is tempting, but, I suspect, probably wrong. We all have both of these tendencies within us. Sometimes we’re concerned with stability and respect for the past, sometimes ready to take risks and pursue our freedom. The problem comes when one or other tendency gains a sufficient upper-hand to suppress the other one entirely.

This is certainly the case in a leader. A rigid, rule-bound, change-resisting leader can cause havoc. But so can a leader who applies such alight touch — and is so averse to setting any kind of boundaries or rules — that no one is quite sure of what they are supposed to do, and there is little or no co-ordination between people working towards the same goal. Read the full story

The fundamental flaws of the conventional approach to getting things done

Image: © artSILENSEcom - Fotolia.com

The conventional way to achieve success, in your life or in a work project, is to start with careful planning. First you build your plan, then you track progress against it. If you’re in a business setting, you’ll add a detailed budget. Corporations especially measure someone’s success by how closely their results match the original budget and plan. The plan becomes a straitjacket on later action.

Don’t do this!

Using such an approach commits you to a path you almost certainly can’t follow. Events rarely, if ever, work out as you planned. Then you must either stick to the plan — and stray further and further from reality — or abandon the previous plan and put action on hold while you start planning again.

Detailed planning too easily forces you into dangerous actions, like remaining rigid in the face of life’s natural fluidity, or ignoring warning signs and trying to force reality into the path you planned for it. It blocks you from responding creatively to whatever comes along. You become an actor following a script, instead of responding freely to the ebb and flow of events; you judge progress against the plan itself, not against how well you’re moving towards to your final objective.

Even the best plans are only thoughts about what to do if things go as you imagine. Forecasting the future is a risky game with a miserable chance of success. Trying to make the future conform to your plans is downright foolish, since you have no control whatever over what will happen. Reality will run you over like a railroad train hitting a gnat. Read the full story