Over the past week I have been forced to realize, as much as it pains me to admit it, that the worst enemies of women are often other women. I have been in the presence of a high-ranking female who has internalized and now embodies the outdated notion that there is room for only one Alpha Female in an organization or social setting. Needless to say, I had a miserable week.
It is truly exhausting to be in the presence of someone who is so threatened by the presence of another female who perhaps reminds her of herself when she was my age. At every turn I was doubted, questioned, harangued, and all-around disrespected, but in "that way" that every single woman who reads this will know what I'm talking about; it is "that way" that the men in the room do not pick up on, but that every single other female recognizes for what it is: pettiness.
I spent a good deal of time trying to understand her. Maybe she thinks, "I suffered professionally; so can she"? Maybe she got no support from her male bosses or clients back in the day and had to scratch for every bit of respect she got. Who knows? All I know is that she was intent on giving me no respect at all. Although it just irritated me on a personal level, it was incredibly distressing on a socio-political level because women, ideally, are not supposed to wage this kind of internecine warfare on each other.
It is difficult because men who disrespect you can be called out with great alacrity and purpose; women who disrespect you cannot because they have more devious methods than calling you "sweetheart" and talking about p*rn in front of you. This particular woman's method is to have insane expectations, and to hang on to them even when they border on the irrational. On the one hand, it certainly makes me think she is not stable. On the other, maybe that is her way of always getting to be superior to others. If no other woman can ever meet her standards professionally, then no other woman can ever be better than her or deserving of her advice and counsel.
I wonder if it is not generational. The best female boss I ever had was in her 60's back in the early 1990's. There is no doubt that she came up through the ranks when there were precious few women in power. Her reaction to me? Incredibly supportive; challenging in all the right ways. She gave me a project, told me the background, and said, "I have no doubt you will do a fantastic job. Update me twice a week and call on me any time if you have any questions at all." Done. She gave me the faith in myself that I was not yet sure I possessed. She talked to me about What Not To Say, how to know if you're being lied to, ad infinitum. She, by her age, had to have fought the fight for women's access to executive positions. Her response to having waged that fight was to fling wide the doors so that other young female upstarts like me could also have their shot at the boardroom.
This particular woman is in her 40's, so she still had to struggle but in a far more competitive environment simply because there were more women vying for those top spots. She obviously made it to the top, but rather than paying forward her success, she secretly resents those of us who may not have had to scratch our way to the top like she feels she did. Only, the truth is that the scratching is still very much a part of women's professional reality. I KNOW I was paid less than less qualified men at my last job. I KNOW that being a young woman means having to be twice as smart and a bit more serious-looking and -sounding than the average young man, because the subconscious urge among clients is to discount what a young female says no matter how qualified she may be on paper. I KNOW that women are judged on ridiculous metrics like looks, attire and femininity in situations where men are not similarly judged. The difference between my experience and Insane Expectations Lady's? The people trying to hold me back are not piggish men; they are insecure women.
If nothing else came of my Week From Hell, it is this: I resolve to be secure enough in my own skills to not require the denigration of another's. I resolve to be secure enough in my own skills to believe--and put into practice--the concept that there IS room enough for every smart and talented woman out there. I further resolve to prove how smart and talented *I* am by hiring and mentoring them for my own company.
Truly smart, talented women know that the only way to real success is to surround themselves with other smart, talented women.
Sunday, January 30, 2005
Saturday, January 29, 2005
Now THAT is multitasking
I had been in Florida from Wednesday until about 2 hours ago for a consulting gig. Besides the drama of spending time with the aforementioned difficult CEO, I also dealt with being waaaaay overscheduled. HOW overscheduled?! Well, let me share my schedule: interviews every 30 minutes with key stakeholders ON THE HALF HOUR. Which means what, my little chickadees? Yes! NO time was built in to the schedule to allow E to either eat or urinate. I'm not kidding. Finally after 4 hours I just politely said to the next round of interviewees, "would you mind giving me just a moment?" and running to my 90-second break from the action. During my 90 second break, picture the following occurring (and promise to still respect me in the morning):
Me.
Me on a hotel stall toilet peeing.
Me on a hotel stall toilet peeing while listening to my voice mails on my cell phone.
Me on a hotel stall toilet peeing while listening to my voice mails on my cell phone while eating half of a Balance bar.
Yeah. I know that is revolting; to be eating, talking and peeing simultaneously. But I had no choice. I was getting shpilkedic (sp?) having had no breakfast, and my bladder, which has been discussed in this blog perhaps more than any of you would care for, was about to explode. Not to mention that I have other potential clients of my OWN that I needed to touch base with during business hours. Every single activity was necessary. And with only 90 seconds at my disposal, I did what any other person would do: I ate food while in a public toilet while peeing while chatting to another person.
Nothing says "high powered consultant" like eating food on the commode. I've hit the big time, baby!!! Up next for me: clipping my toenails on the metro while reading Foreign Affairs while shouting "Sell! Sell!" into my cell phone. Aaah. Glory Days.
Me.
Me on a hotel stall toilet peeing.
Me on a hotel stall toilet peeing while listening to my voice mails on my cell phone.
Me on a hotel stall toilet peeing while listening to my voice mails on my cell phone while eating half of a Balance bar.
Yeah. I know that is revolting; to be eating, talking and peeing simultaneously. But I had no choice. I was getting shpilkedic (sp?) having had no breakfast, and my bladder, which has been discussed in this blog perhaps more than any of you would care for, was about to explode. Not to mention that I have other potential clients of my OWN that I needed to touch base with during business hours. Every single activity was necessary. And with only 90 seconds at my disposal, I did what any other person would do: I ate food while in a public toilet while peeing while chatting to another person.
Nothing says "high powered consultant" like eating food on the commode. I've hit the big time, baby!!! Up next for me: clipping my toenails on the metro while reading Foreign Affairs while shouting "Sell! Sell!" into my cell phone. Aaah. Glory Days.
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Firemen: A Hottie for Every Generation
{Let me preface this post with a policy statement emphasizing my acknowledgement of and support for female firefighters. All I'm sayin' is that the ones I saw were fireMEN. So no lighting up the switchboard with angry recriminations, okay? Supah.}
So--I was at NIH today, enjoying AM coffee before heading to my quarterly weigh-in and my now happily-rarer doctor visits. J came with me so that I wouldn’t have to metro at 6am for 40 minutes to get there, and so was also having coffee before heading off to his work. We were talking about social security reform when he noticed that my eyes were wandering. He gave me that “why are you not listening?” look and then turned to look behind him, where he saw about 20 firefighters in full regalia walking into the building. There was no alarm going off (except the one on my pacemaker; ha ha), so it was unclear why this veritable procession of strapping lads would be converging on NIH; but converge they did.
It got us (okay, me) to talking about how all firemen pretty much meet three primary archetypes:
1) Tom Selleck, circa 1988: notable for their moustache, large build, and appeal to women over the age of about 40. They are a little older but they’ve still got it going on. They look and comport themselves like they were the inspiration for the original Brawny Paper Towel man: rugged, no-nonsense, enjoy shows like Blue Collar TV and Family Guy, and wouldn't kick Raquel Welch out of bed. They have names like Tom and Larry and George.
2) Your junior high best friend’s dad: Notable for not necessarily being hot, but for being attractive in that “older man who will ensure no one hurts you” kind of way. (Mr. Hughes, are you reading this?) You can’t quite pin down why you find them attractive, but you will not discount the critical role of a strong-yet-gentle spirit and a lifesaver’s uniform. They enjoy good chili, NPR's Car Talk, and still have a place in their heart for Cheryl Tiegs. They have names like Tim and Joseph and Charlie.
3) The young hot gardener on Desperate Housewives: Under 35, super fit, biceps bigger than my thighs, closely-cropped hair, an all-around visual display of buff pyrotechnics. They are the guys who wear the full uniform, but keep the jacket off so you can see their pecs straining mightily against their form-fitting T-shirts with....ahem! excuse me! I digress! As I was saying, they usually have a dog, OF COURSE a girlfriend, and a liking for Fear Factor. Unless they usually have, OF COURSE a secret boyfriend, and a liking for anything on Bravo or HGTV. Usually named Jesse or Ash or Christian or Josh.
What's YOUR flavor of firefighter?
So--I was at NIH today, enjoying AM coffee before heading to my quarterly weigh-in and my now happily-rarer doctor visits. J came with me so that I wouldn’t have to metro at 6am for 40 minutes to get there, and so was also having coffee before heading off to his work. We were talking about social security reform when he noticed that my eyes were wandering. He gave me that “why are you not listening?” look and then turned to look behind him, where he saw about 20 firefighters in full regalia walking into the building. There was no alarm going off (except the one on my pacemaker; ha ha), so it was unclear why this veritable procession of strapping lads would be converging on NIH; but converge they did.
It got us (okay, me) to talking about how all firemen pretty much meet three primary archetypes:
1) Tom Selleck, circa 1988: notable for their moustache, large build, and appeal to women over the age of about 40. They are a little older but they’ve still got it going on. They look and comport themselves like they were the inspiration for the original Brawny Paper Towel man: rugged, no-nonsense, enjoy shows like Blue Collar TV and Family Guy, and wouldn't kick Raquel Welch out of bed. They have names like Tom and Larry and George.
2) Your junior high best friend’s dad: Notable for not necessarily being hot, but for being attractive in that “older man who will ensure no one hurts you” kind of way. (Mr. Hughes, are you reading this?) You can’t quite pin down why you find them attractive, but you will not discount the critical role of a strong-yet-gentle spirit and a lifesaver’s uniform. They enjoy good chili, NPR's Car Talk, and still have a place in their heart for Cheryl Tiegs. They have names like Tim and Joseph and Charlie.
3) The young hot gardener on Desperate Housewives: Under 35, super fit, biceps bigger than my thighs, closely-cropped hair, an all-around visual display of buff pyrotechnics. They are the guys who wear the full uniform, but keep the jacket off so you can see their pecs straining mightily against their form-fitting T-shirts with....ahem! excuse me! I digress! As I was saying, they usually have a dog, OF COURSE a girlfriend, and a liking for Fear Factor. Unless they usually have, OF COURSE a secret boyfriend, and a liking for anything on Bravo or HGTV. Usually named Jesse or Ash or Christian or Josh.
What's YOUR flavor of firefighter?
You know it's bad weather when...
...there is snow INSIDE your Amtrak train!
I'm not kidding. Took the train from DC to New Jersey this AM. At 7:30am. It was the only train running due to the weather further north. We desperately wanted to reschedule but the client asked us to keep the meeting. We were bummed because we could see that almost no trains were running and just KNEW that we'd no doubt get to Jersey, but would find it almost impossible to get back home at the end of the day. {foreshadowing....}
Anyway, to impress upon you the gravity of our desire to cancel the trip, need I say more than "the snow was blowing INSIDE the train"? Whenever those doors at the end of each car would open, you could look out and see about a one-foot high drift of snow inside the train. At each stop, the conductors would take a snow shovel and a broom and clear the exits so people could get on and off. You couldn't really travel to the club car--or any other car for that matter--unless you wanted to wade through shin-deep snow between cars.
So we kept the appointment but arrived an hour and a half late. And how did our meeting go, you ask? Well, we arrived to find that most of his staff had stayed home due to their 15 inches of snowfall, so our "crucial meeting" turned into a "chat" with our contact and, like, two employees who owned 4-wheel drives. Yes, friends, I got up at 5am to travel for 4 hours on a train to have a 2 hour meeting that turned out to not be a meeting at all. You have never seen me more charming and effervescent with a client:
"And the Oscar for Best Actress in a Bad Client Drama goes to E. For her role as a put-upon consultant who traversed far and wide for her clients, through rain and sleet and snow and dark of night. Only to wind up stuck in the Trenton train station for 4 and a half hours, and finally returning home from her 90 minute meeting just 14 hours after she left. Her performance of a happy, chatty, client-focused professional was the highlight of this tragi-comi-drami-noiry career-defining work."
My acceptance speech would be a send-up, an homage if you will, to all the lame speeches you will hear in March when the real thing happens:
"First of all, I want to thank the Academy for naming themselves “the Academy” so that I wouldn’t have to thank something so pedestrian-sounding as “the club” or as ominous-sounding as “the pentavirate.” “The Academy” has that erudite ring to it that all celebrities crave. So thank you for your foresight in not being The Filmsters or The Needy Thesps. I also want to give it all up to God for giving me this gift, as well as my lord and savior Jesus Christ who has given me the opportunity to act in movies that denigrate women, show off my rack, and promote violence in, and a cultural coarsening of, our society. I want to thank my mom, to whom I owe everything—especially my constant need for approval and validation from external and meaningless sources like The Academy and Entertainment Tonight. I want to thank all the lackeys around me who tell me I’m so hot when we all know, that if you saw me pass you on the street and I wasn’t famous, you most likely wouldn’t look twice. I want to thank the wardrobe departments for those bust-enhancing inserts in my costumes, the clinicians for the botox and the subtle nose bridge “adjustment,” the photographers for the airbrushing, and the august Rabbi Shmuley Schneersonmendelsohnman who introduced me to the wondrous powers of ‘Kabbalah For Celebrities: Ineffable Mystic Consciousness in Three Days or Less’. Oh! I’m running out of time! So let me just say thank you to all of my fans, my friends…and who am I forgetting…oh yeah—my agent, without whom, more than even G-d, nothing is possible. Thank you everybody! Free Tibet!”
Phew! Now I feel better! And after reading that little psychotic break, I’m sure you are as eager to have my business travel minimized as I am.
I'm not kidding. Took the train from DC to New Jersey this AM. At 7:30am. It was the only train running due to the weather further north. We desperately wanted to reschedule but the client asked us to keep the meeting. We were bummed because we could see that almost no trains were running and just KNEW that we'd no doubt get to Jersey, but would find it almost impossible to get back home at the end of the day. {foreshadowing....}
Anyway, to impress upon you the gravity of our desire to cancel the trip, need I say more than "the snow was blowing INSIDE the train"? Whenever those doors at the end of each car would open, you could look out and see about a one-foot high drift of snow inside the train. At each stop, the conductors would take a snow shovel and a broom and clear the exits so people could get on and off. You couldn't really travel to the club car--or any other car for that matter--unless you wanted to wade through shin-deep snow between cars.
So we kept the appointment but arrived an hour and a half late. And how did our meeting go, you ask? Well, we arrived to find that most of his staff had stayed home due to their 15 inches of snowfall, so our "crucial meeting" turned into a "chat" with our contact and, like, two employees who owned 4-wheel drives. Yes, friends, I got up at 5am to travel for 4 hours on a train to have a 2 hour meeting that turned out to not be a meeting at all. You have never seen me more charming and effervescent with a client:
"And the Oscar for Best Actress in a Bad Client Drama goes to E. For her role as a put-upon consultant who traversed far and wide for her clients, through rain and sleet and snow and dark of night. Only to wind up stuck in the Trenton train station for 4 and a half hours, and finally returning home from her 90 minute meeting just 14 hours after she left. Her performance of a happy, chatty, client-focused professional was the highlight of this tragi-comi-drami-noiry career-defining work."
My acceptance speech would be a send-up, an homage if you will, to all the lame speeches you will hear in March when the real thing happens:
"First of all, I want to thank the Academy for naming themselves “the Academy” so that I wouldn’t have to thank something so pedestrian-sounding as “the club” or as ominous-sounding as “the pentavirate.” “The Academy” has that erudite ring to it that all celebrities crave. So thank you for your foresight in not being The Filmsters or The Needy Thesps. I also want to give it all up to God for giving me this gift, as well as my lord and savior Jesus Christ who has given me the opportunity to act in movies that denigrate women, show off my rack, and promote violence in, and a cultural coarsening of, our society. I want to thank my mom, to whom I owe everything—especially my constant need for approval and validation from external and meaningless sources like The Academy and Entertainment Tonight. I want to thank all the lackeys around me who tell me I’m so hot when we all know, that if you saw me pass you on the street and I wasn’t famous, you most likely wouldn’t look twice. I want to thank the wardrobe departments for those bust-enhancing inserts in my costumes, the clinicians for the botox and the subtle nose bridge “adjustment,” the photographers for the airbrushing, and the august Rabbi Shmuley Schneersonmendelsohnman who introduced me to the wondrous powers of ‘Kabbalah For Celebrities: Ineffable Mystic Consciousness in Three Days or Less’. Oh! I’m running out of time! So let me just say thank you to all of my fans, my friends…and who am I forgetting…oh yeah—my agent, without whom, more than even G-d, nothing is possible. Thank you everybody! Free Tibet!”
Phew! Now I feel better! And after reading that little psychotic break, I’m sure you are as eager to have my business travel minimized as I am.
Sunday, January 23, 2005
A Foregone Conclusion
So I've been absent from SS Haggis (and most of life, quite frankly) for the past 2 weeks due to work responsibilities. During these two weeks I have learned a valuable lesson about people in power: They only hear what they want to hear. And they use their power to make people "hear" what they are hearing, even when it is flawed.
A client of mine. Very well-known person in the industry. Very smart in many ways. Sold a subcontract to an organization wherein more was promised than could be delivered. Conclusions leaning in a certain direction were promised before there was any evidence to support those conclusions. As the consultant, I was given the task of writing a report and presentation supporting those "conclusions."
You can already tell how things went, can't you? Total f'in misery, my friends. I felt like I was in a non-funny version of the Who's On First shtick:
Client: "We need numbers in here proving that X = Y."
Me: "I have not been able to find those numbers."
Client: "Well, can't you google them?
Me: "Let me reword that. The numbers don't exist."
Client: "Of course they exist! Just google them! Did you try site A, B, C, D and E?"
Me: "Yes. I'm sorry to say that I can't find any stats to back up that assertion. In fact, the stats and our in-person interviews with the stakeholders actually point in the opposite direction, unfortunately."
Client: "What?! What have you been doing for 3 weeks? Are you even working on this at all diligently? The numbers are out there. Go find them. I thought you knew what you were doing!"
Me: "I'll take another look, but I have to warn you that it's not promising. There is no evidence to support that conclusion. Could we modify the conclusion somewhat?"
Client: "You obviously don't know what you are talking about. There is no way to modify it. It is what it is and I'm paying you to find the numbers."
Okay. Now repeat that exchange EVERY SINGLE FREAKIN' DAY for the past two weeks until 4pm on Friday when she stormed up to my desk and said, "I just got your latest draft of this presentation. It's clear that I'm just going to have to do this MYSELF. Grrr!"
To which I replied, "Okay!"
I think she was expecting me, like her other little lackeys, to say "oh my goodness, how have I upset you? What can I do in a codependent way to re-establish your authority over me as an underling? I am wrong and you are right and I am not worthy of breathing the air you have burped."
What are the odds I'm gonna say that, dear friends? Yeah. Slim to none. So I handed her all the paperwork, emailed her the presentation so far, and told her to call me if she needed a hand over the weekend. Oh--did I mention we are presenting these "conclusions" to the organization on Monday? Yeah. That would be in 27 hours. She is still cranking out the "conclusions" and I am watching the Patriots game.
Don't get me wrong. I've been working with her over the weekend, tracking down stats, putting graphs and charts together in support of her erroneous conclusions. But the way I see it, there is no point in embarrassing ourselves in a meeting with a client. There is nothing I can say now or in the future to get her to see reason...or basic business ethics (see post from a couple of days ago!). All I can do at this point, from a professional standpoint, is make sure HER fingerprints are all over this document rather than mine, go to the presentation and smile pretty, and then get the F out of Dodge as soon as I finalize my other client work.
I am stunned at how people make it to the top by basically forcing others to support their erroneous conclusions. Where are all the people who refuse to be mouthpieces for incompetence? Maybe we're all unemployed, writing blogs, while watching football...?
A client of mine. Very well-known person in the industry. Very smart in many ways. Sold a subcontract to an organization wherein more was promised than could be delivered. Conclusions leaning in a certain direction were promised before there was any evidence to support those conclusions. As the consultant, I was given the task of writing a report and presentation supporting those "conclusions."
You can already tell how things went, can't you? Total f'in misery, my friends. I felt like I was in a non-funny version of the Who's On First shtick:
Client: "We need numbers in here proving that X = Y."
Me: "I have not been able to find those numbers."
Client: "Well, can't you google them?
Me: "Let me reword that. The numbers don't exist."
Client: "Of course they exist! Just google them! Did you try site A, B, C, D and E?"
Me: "Yes. I'm sorry to say that I can't find any stats to back up that assertion. In fact, the stats and our in-person interviews with the stakeholders actually point in the opposite direction, unfortunately."
Client: "What?! What have you been doing for 3 weeks? Are you even working on this at all diligently? The numbers are out there. Go find them. I thought you knew what you were doing!"
Me: "I'll take another look, but I have to warn you that it's not promising. There is no evidence to support that conclusion. Could we modify the conclusion somewhat?"
Client: "You obviously don't know what you are talking about. There is no way to modify it. It is what it is and I'm paying you to find the numbers."
Okay. Now repeat that exchange EVERY SINGLE FREAKIN' DAY for the past two weeks until 4pm on Friday when she stormed up to my desk and said, "I just got your latest draft of this presentation. It's clear that I'm just going to have to do this MYSELF. Grrr!"
To which I replied, "Okay!"
I think she was expecting me, like her other little lackeys, to say "oh my goodness, how have I upset you? What can I do in a codependent way to re-establish your authority over me as an underling? I am wrong and you are right and I am not worthy of breathing the air you have burped."
What are the odds I'm gonna say that, dear friends? Yeah. Slim to none. So I handed her all the paperwork, emailed her the presentation so far, and told her to call me if she needed a hand over the weekend. Oh--did I mention we are presenting these "conclusions" to the organization on Monday? Yeah. That would be in 27 hours. She is still cranking out the "conclusions" and I am watching the Patriots game.
Don't get me wrong. I've been working with her over the weekend, tracking down stats, putting graphs and charts together in support of her erroneous conclusions. But the way I see it, there is no point in embarrassing ourselves in a meeting with a client. There is nothing I can say now or in the future to get her to see reason...or basic business ethics (see post from a couple of days ago!). All I can do at this point, from a professional standpoint, is make sure HER fingerprints are all over this document rather than mine, go to the presentation and smile pretty, and then get the F out of Dodge as soon as I finalize my other client work.
I am stunned at how people make it to the top by basically forcing others to support their erroneous conclusions. Where are all the people who refuse to be mouthpieces for incompetence? Maybe we're all unemployed, writing blogs, while watching football...?
Friday, January 21, 2005
On Ethics and Morals
Some friends and I have been having ongoing discussions about ethical decision-making, about whether it is something you do in business only or whether it ought to permeate your life. It seems to me that most people don't consider that they ought to have an ethical framework for making personal decisions because they assume that their feelings for a loved one will guide them appropriately. I happen to disagree.
How many fantastic senators, CEOs and pastors do we know who treat the general public very well and yet who can't seem to get their personal lives together? I posit that the cause of such a dichotomy is the mistaken belief that specific and consciously-followed ethical frameworks are not necessary in one's personal life; that personal decisions will take care of themselves simply because we love or care about someone.
IMHO, that belief is precisely what leads to broken relationships and unhappy families. Imagine a world where we all treat our loved ones as we, by law or by professional oath, treat our coworkers and clients. Can you imagine the incredible impact it would have on your marriage or your relationship with your kids or parents?
I just read a fantastic article by a man named Randy Pennington who has authored a book on leading with integrity. He wrote a couple of things that were so simple and yet so true. He says that “3-D vision—denial, distortion and delusion—blinds us to the need for change. We deny the truth, distort reality and delude ourselves into thinking we are better than we are…the cure is simple: continuously search for and acknowledge truth and reality.” He goes on to relate an “Ethics Litmus Test” created by Harry Emerson Fosdick. I will recreate it here because I think, in its simplicity, will guide every decision you make, and SS Haggis is nothing if not here for your personal edification. ;)
I just loved its simplicity because it takes all of the excuses for why we lie or hide or refuse to do right by those who love us and just breaks it down to idiot-proof levels:
1. Does the course of action you plan to follow seem logical, responsible and legal?
2. Would the results be beneficial for all if everyone were to make the same decision?
3. Where will your plan of action lead? How will it affect others?
4. Will you think well of yourself when you look back at what you’ve done?
5. How would the person you most admire handle this situation? What would your hero do?
6. What would your family and friends think of your decision? Decisions made in the hope that no one finds out are usually wrong.
So simple, and yet, for many of us, so in need of repeating.
How many fantastic senators, CEOs and pastors do we know who treat the general public very well and yet who can't seem to get their personal lives together? I posit that the cause of such a dichotomy is the mistaken belief that specific and consciously-followed ethical frameworks are not necessary in one's personal life; that personal decisions will take care of themselves simply because we love or care about someone.
IMHO, that belief is precisely what leads to broken relationships and unhappy families. Imagine a world where we all treat our loved ones as we, by law or by professional oath, treat our coworkers and clients. Can you imagine the incredible impact it would have on your marriage or your relationship with your kids or parents?
I just read a fantastic article by a man named Randy Pennington who has authored a book on leading with integrity. He wrote a couple of things that were so simple and yet so true. He says that “3-D vision—denial, distortion and delusion—blinds us to the need for change. We deny the truth, distort reality and delude ourselves into thinking we are better than we are…the cure is simple: continuously search for and acknowledge truth and reality.” He goes on to relate an “Ethics Litmus Test” created by Harry Emerson Fosdick. I will recreate it here because I think, in its simplicity, will guide every decision you make, and SS Haggis is nothing if not here for your personal edification. ;)
I just loved its simplicity because it takes all of the excuses for why we lie or hide or refuse to do right by those who love us and just breaks it down to idiot-proof levels:
1. Does the course of action you plan to follow seem logical, responsible and legal?
2. Would the results be beneficial for all if everyone were to make the same decision?
3. Where will your plan of action lead? How will it affect others?
4. Will you think well of yourself when you look back at what you’ve done?
5. How would the person you most admire handle this situation? What would your hero do?
6. What would your family and friends think of your decision? Decisions made in the hope that no one finds out are usually wrong.
So simple, and yet, for many of us, so in need of repeating.
Thursday, January 20, 2005
Inauguration Day Poll is Bad News for Dems
On the face of it, Dems are rejoicing at the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll that shows President Bush's approval ratings on the issues have fallen and/or languish below the 50% mark. The reality of that poll, if you interpret it correctly, demonstrates how stupid those rejoicing Dems might be.
Nothing about that poll, which shows fewer than half of Americans feeling optimistic about the coming four years, 52% saying that the Iraq war has not been worth the human and financial cost, and 49% disapproving of the President's handling of foreign policy, ought to make Dems happy. Why? Because Bush continues to score high on the following issues, such as:
"Having strong leadership qualities needed to be President"
"Having high personal standards that set proper moral tones for the country"
"Having the ability to handle a crisis"
What do these numbers say, then? They say that Dems just got bitch-slapped by a skittish and fearful American public. As we said immediately after the election: most of the issues facing our country and the world are fairly complex and somewhat frightening. The majority of Americans, right or wrong, just want to elect someone who can take care of those issues for them in a competent and strong manner. They care about issues, but not enough to elect someone they don't feel will "handle the business" in a take-charge kind of way. This poll shows that even when people disapprove of the President on almost every issue, they still approve of his "leadership" and "ability to handle a crisis."
In a post right after the election I posited a theory about the New York Times Bestseller list as a bellwether of voter behavior. Let's take a peek at some of them:
YOUR BEST LIFE NOW, by Joel Osteen
HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU, by Greg Behrendt and Liz Tuccillo
THE PURPOSE-DRIVEN LIFE, by Rick Warren
THE SOUTH BEACH DIET, by Arthur Agatston
START LATE, FINISH RICH: A NO-FAIL PLAN FOR ACHIEVING FINANCIAL FREEDOM AT ANY AGE, by David Bach
THE ULTIMATE WEIGHT SOLUTION, by Phil McGraw
THE DA VINCI CODE, by Dan Brown
THE FIVE PEOPLE YOU MEET IN HEAVEN, by Mitch Albom
CHAINFIRE, by Terry Goodkind
STATE OF FEAR, by Michael Crichton
BY ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT, by W. E. B. Griffin
Anyone see the trend? Anyone? How about "tell me what to do to be happy/rich/thin" and "help me find meaning out of chaos without feeding me straight-up religion"? People are obviously searching for A) Direction and B) Meaning in their lives. What did we Dems give them? A Vietnam Retrospective.
Lesson for Dems? Stop splitting hairs about who is the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, stop trying to triangulate on "Republican" issues, stop haranguing each other on who is Democratic enough to lead us. Just find a leader who is comfortable saying (or at least be seen to be saying), "I am in charge, and if you (unions, women, teachers, name your special interest group) don't like it, you know where the door is." We need a candidate who will say to the American people, "These issues are complicated and sometimes scary, but don't you worry about it. I've got it handled," while offering some philosophical underpinning for who the Democratic Party is.
We need an "elevator pitch," that 15 second soundbite that sums up who, what, when, where and why in a way that convinces someone you deserve a second look and that allows them to easily, quickly, and without apology, tell their friends why they are a Democrat. That is what Bush Inc. did in this election, that is the image that GWB has projected--whether real or imagined, and that is precisely why he is taking the oath of office today rather than John Kerry.
Heaven help us.
Nothing about that poll, which shows fewer than half of Americans feeling optimistic about the coming four years, 52% saying that the Iraq war has not been worth the human and financial cost, and 49% disapproving of the President's handling of foreign policy, ought to make Dems happy. Why? Because Bush continues to score high on the following issues, such as:
"Having strong leadership qualities needed to be President"
"Having high personal standards that set proper moral tones for the country"
"Having the ability to handle a crisis"
What do these numbers say, then? They say that Dems just got bitch-slapped by a skittish and fearful American public. As we said immediately after the election: most of the issues facing our country and the world are fairly complex and somewhat frightening. The majority of Americans, right or wrong, just want to elect someone who can take care of those issues for them in a competent and strong manner. They care about issues, but not enough to elect someone they don't feel will "handle the business" in a take-charge kind of way. This poll shows that even when people disapprove of the President on almost every issue, they still approve of his "leadership" and "ability to handle a crisis."
In a post right after the election I posited a theory about the New York Times Bestseller list as a bellwether of voter behavior. Let's take a peek at some of them:
YOUR BEST LIFE NOW, by Joel Osteen
HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU, by Greg Behrendt and Liz Tuccillo
THE PURPOSE-DRIVEN LIFE, by Rick Warren
THE SOUTH BEACH DIET, by Arthur Agatston
START LATE, FINISH RICH: A NO-FAIL PLAN FOR ACHIEVING FINANCIAL FREEDOM AT ANY AGE, by David Bach
THE ULTIMATE WEIGHT SOLUTION, by Phil McGraw
THE DA VINCI CODE, by Dan Brown
THE FIVE PEOPLE YOU MEET IN HEAVEN, by Mitch Albom
CHAINFIRE, by Terry Goodkind
STATE OF FEAR, by Michael Crichton
BY ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT, by W. E. B. Griffin
Anyone see the trend? Anyone? How about "tell me what to do to be happy/rich/thin" and "help me find meaning out of chaos without feeding me straight-up religion"? People are obviously searching for A) Direction and B) Meaning in their lives. What did we Dems give them? A Vietnam Retrospective.
Lesson for Dems? Stop splitting hairs about who is the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, stop trying to triangulate on "Republican" issues, stop haranguing each other on who is Democratic enough to lead us. Just find a leader who is comfortable saying (or at least be seen to be saying), "I am in charge, and if you (unions, women, teachers, name your special interest group) don't like it, you know where the door is." We need a candidate who will say to the American people, "These issues are complicated and sometimes scary, but don't you worry about it. I've got it handled," while offering some philosophical underpinning for who the Democratic Party is.
We need an "elevator pitch," that 15 second soundbite that sums up who, what, when, where and why in a way that convinces someone you deserve a second look and that allows them to easily, quickly, and without apology, tell their friends why they are a Democrat. That is what Bush Inc. did in this election, that is the image that GWB has projected--whether real or imagined, and that is precisely why he is taking the oath of office today rather than John Kerry.
Heaven help us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)