Tag Archives: Facebook

“As Emerson said about Trump…….”

06 Monday Jan 2020

Posted by in Character and Competence, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on “As Emerson said about Trump…….”

Tags

, , , ,

Time management. It’s a term that seems niche, but the more I read and write about it, the broader the definition becomes. To get the subject of this post, I will restrict the definition to one of ‘maximising the use of time on the things that matter.’

And go straight into the weekend’s events in Iraq. I am not talking about the assassination of the Iranian general, though. I am talking about the social media storm which followed.

As soon as possible after the incident was reported, social media posts began ringing around saying ‘Trump did this’ and ‘Trump did that’. Emotions ran high, depending on which side of the political divide you sat. The Left said the man was a war-mongering despot committing us to World War 3, a helpful conclusion designed to keep us all calm, I am sure. The Right commended Trump for taking positive action – an unusual term for killing someone.

But here’s the thing. Most posts I read, read like the posters assumed that Trump woke up one day and decided to top this fella. Never mind that the Left forgot that their narrative (an oft-used media term) was that Trump is an idiot, so couldn’t even spell or pronounce the general’s name. And would probably have put the H in the wrong place in Baghdad. Like I just did.

I try not to waste time espousing opinions on things I know next to nothing about. It wastes time engaging in arguments which I can’t win because I am unarmed. Yet there is a whole world out there of people who engage in this regularly, thus wasting time which could be better spent in the Circle of Influence.

One thing I do know, based on watching The West Wing (and the documentaries which I then had to watch because they were so informative), is that decisions like this involve a whole bunch of experts. And time. Yes, the President makes the final decision, but not until he has been briefed by the military, intelligence experts and various diplomats. Such advice includes the why to do it and the how to do it. The Why, in this case, appears to be based on the General’s involvement in a lot of outside-the-combat-zone terrorist activity. The How, we know.

But there would have been a whole lot of ‘What If’s’ considered about the aftermath. And considering that the US has apparently been surveilling this man for some years, we can reasonably assume that there would have been a lot of information available that led to the decision.

All of which means that while the ‘proper’ media seems to be trying to address it sensibly (partisanship aside), the time spent by all too many of us on Social Media debating the issue based on a belief that he just had an idea one morning and made a phone call, has been ill-informed, un-authoritative and emotional. Which does not reflect the best use of anyone’s time.

Social Media has its uses. It has its limitations. But above all, it has an all-encompassing ability to divert us from what is truly important.

I use it to entertain and, occasionally, brag. I do not use it to display pictures of undrunk pints and uneaten dinners. (I lie – I did, once, show a picture of a partially incomplete meal from a San Francisco fish restaurant because it was the first meal that had ever beaten me.)

It is a great place to start a debate, but if you are going to do that, at least make sure that your opening comments are based on a reasonable level of understanding. Consider your post and ask, “Is this all as it seems?” If you can’t answer that, do the research. You’ll be better informed, which is a great use of time.

And you may save the time you would have spent sending a post that would have made you appear stupid.

Ralph Waldo Emerson once opined, “What you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say.” Which may be more about character but the message remains clear.

Be in no doubt. Posting ill-informed opinion says a lot about you.

We don’t ‘live’ in years – why do we goal-set in that unit?

11 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by in Character and Competence, Time Management, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on We don’t ‘live’ in years – why do we goal-set in that unit?

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

This is a Rant.

Most goal-setting advice tends to focus on the setting of 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year goal plans. Best Year Yet and YB12 go for a 1-year plan as their core idea while business-related goal-setting advice tends to go to the max. In general, all goal-setting programmes promote the setting of a long-term goal supported by medium- and short-term ‘goalettes’ that result in the longer-term goal being achieved bit by bit.

There is nothing wrong with any goals programme I have ever seen, in that regard.

What I DO find difficult is this: life has a tendency to bu66er up those plans. I think that there are two reasons for that.

Of late, I have committed to the provision of various services – speaking club, professional Institute, driver mentoring. Those services are over and above my proper job, which takes up three days a week. Those additional services take up half-days at a time of what’s left – and that’s just execution and exclusive of any preparation time.

To a large extent, ‘D: None of the above’ is the answer I would give to the question ‘Which of the following represents action taken in pursuit of your personal goals?’ The time I spend on planning and executing those activities impacts on any time I have available to focus on new ‘stuff’.

The obvious response will be that I should stop doing them and focus on my own objectives, but that is too easy an answer. The reason for my ‘future failure’ is plain, though: Those commitments represent my success with earlier goals and compliance with my values/unifying principles. In other words, my inability to be goals-focused now is a direct result of my success in the past. It’s my own damn fault!

How annoying is that?

But another thing about setting 1-year (etc.) goals is the fact that goal achievement is a rolling programme, not something ‘done’ by year end while no new goals are set, no new roles and responsibilities are discovered, and nothing happens to stop you.

Life gets in the way, and a completed goal almost automatically results in the creation of a new one that crosses that ‘1-year’ deadline date, which in turn establishes a new start-date for that goal while the others still rely on their own start-date. We don’t goal-achieve Jan 1st to Dec 31st and then start again. School years, the financial year, the Resolutions year, our new job, sports and social seasons – they start their ‘year’ all over the place, so the rationale for specific goals set in the currency of ‘years’ is flawed.

To paraphrase Orwell : Deadline dates Good – units of time Bad.

The answer? I suppose it is to stop thinking in terms of the year as a unit of time within which to achieve things. If we consider Parkinson’s Law (which states “Work expands to fit the time available for its completion”), then it is self-defeating to spend a year doing something which could be done in 4 months if we just worked better.

Abandon ‘year-long goal setting’ and  work more effectively. But be aware that in accordance with the philosophy in my book The Three Resolutions , any completed goal – particularly a professional goal – will result in new, welcome and occasionally unwelcome impositions on your time.

You can find you’ve stepped in s**t, but you can leave it on your shoe and blame me – or clean it up. Your choice.

26 Sunday Jun 2016

Posted by in General

≈ Comments Off on You can find you’ve stepped in s**t, but you can leave it on your shoe and blame me – or clean it up. Your choice.

Tags

, ,

“The past does not equal the future. Unless you live there. ” Anthony Robbins.

It seems inevitable that I have to address the amusing result of the EU Referendum this week, from a coaching perspective. I say amusing not because of the result itself, but because of the inevitable Facebook furore that followed.

For those in a hole in the middle of Siberia, the British electorate decided by a narrow majority that we should leave the European Union. The politics, the efficacy of the ‘simple majority’ rule and its consequences when a narrow majority swings it, and so on, are arguments for others. But from a coaching perspective, “things look different here”. (Jeff Lynne, Mission of the Sacred Heart. ‘A New World Record’, side 1 track 4.)

A decision was made, one with which some disagree.

I can understand the dismay felt by some of those on the ‘losing’ side. But what I found more dismaying was the response of some. The FIRST Facebook post I saw called me and 16million plus other people ‘cretins’. The poster has met me so perhaps in my regard he was well informed, but I’m guessing he’s not met more than a relative few of the other 15,999,999 plus. So that’s a bit of a sweeping statement, particularly when so many are far more intelligent than either of us.

Next, a professional coach of my acquaintance circulated a post saying people were ‘bewildered, angry, etc. etc.’ about the vote.

I suggested to him without being too specific about his profession (politely, and he changed headline of the post), that the job of a coach is to help people address the gap between what happens to them, and what they do about it. To choose productivity and positivity in their response to ‘not winning’ instead of exhibiting ‘bewilderment, fear and anger’; all of which very negative and are rarely beneficial emotional responses to any event.

And finally, in response to the umpteen, presumably anti-democracy petitioners demanding a second referendum, I posted that I’d sign their petition if they signed mine about declaring Didier Drogba offside in the match against Manchester United during the latter part of the 2009-10 season, thereby changing the result to a draw, thus docking Chelsea 2 points and giving United one more, in turn rightfully making United champions instead of Chelsea.

Ultimately, history happens. Unlike the future, the past is set in concrete. You can try to change it, you can pretend it didn’t happen – or you can learn from it and do something productive about it which, of the three responses, is the only one that will work. It does not involve blanket insult-bombing. It does involve making a plan that is in keeping with your values, and sticking to its execution.

So stop promoting doom and gloom, and stop insulting me (and others) purely on the basis that they don’t agree with you. When you do that you authorise me to do the same. In this case, as usual, I won’t. I respect your right to disagree but not to insult me or my friends, even if you are one of those friends.

Are you blind – ideologically? You reveal all on social media.

02 Saturday Apr 2016

Posted by in Character and Competence

≈ Comments Off on Are you blind – ideologically? You reveal all on social media.

Tags

, , ,

“Until we take how we see ourselves (and how we see others) into account, we will be unable to understand how others see and feel about themselves and their world. Unaware, we will project our intentions onto their behaviour and call ourselves ‘objective’. Stephen R Covey

Facebook is getting out of control. I think it started as a wonderful means of reuniting people, and I have been fortunate enough to benefit from that when I met up with some old friends from my ‘war years’ who, like me, had elected to see our past through rose tinted glasses. Without Facebook that may never had happened, nor would I have travelled abroad for it to happen.

But we have now ‘allowed’ Facebook to be not just a medium through which we can have a rant about things that annoy us like poor standards and over-commercialisation on television (my favourite) and the low societal standards by which we find ourselves surrounded. It has become a way to get involved in politics.

Not in a good way. What this particular issue shows us is that we are not all ‘balanced and objective’ about political issues. It identifies just how ideologically blinded we tend to allow ourselves to become.

I respect everyone’s right to hold a political viewpoint. I have one, after all. But when you read posts saying that XXXX MP is a (*&^%) because he is a member of, or not a member of a particular party, then you have to ask whether the opinion is ideological – because pound to a pinch of (you know) the poster has never met XXXX MP, is not a member of their cabinet/shadow cabinet, has not been party to the discussions about which s/he made that post, and is therefore spouting malicious bile. And I use as my evidence the fact that they use abusive language rather than considered commentary. When they do that, they tell everyone that (a) they are a member of a particular ‘side’ and (b) they are blind to alternative thinking.

You can disagree with someone agreeably. You can (and the ideological just can’t get their heads around this) agree with SOME things and disagree with others. Shock! Horror! Yes, folks – you have the ability to think, and to recognise that someone can be right some of the time and wrong some of the time, without being a *&^%.

Just like YOU, in fact.

I recall some abuse being circulated by socialist thinkers about Iain Duncan-Smith, relating to welfare cuts. Some choice words were used. But when he resigned in protest about his party going too far? Not one word. I wasn’t expecting praise, but the balanced and objective would have said something positive. But the ideological? ‘Pretend it never happened’, or, ‘Political self-interest, I expect.’ Probably based on their intimate relationship with him, I suppose.

And another thing. Sharing posts can be a valuable way of (and I hate this expression) ‘raising awareness’. My only request is that when you do so, you actually know for a FACT that what you are sharing is TRUE. Otherwise you are perpetuating propaganda, something circulated by an interested party whose post may be a load of old tripe. And they’ll thank you for doing so.

Facebook – a great tool unless you use it blindly. Open your eyes. Not just to the possibilities that other people are wrong. But to the possibility that you might be wrong, too.

And when you ARE wrong, at least have the manners to apologise.

Watch where someone else is taking you.

19 Sunday Jul 2015

Posted by in Character and Competence

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, ,

“I am not apt to follow blindly the lead of other men”. Charles Darwin

But a lot of people are.

A dear friend of mine just shared a post on Facebook. It showed a photograph of a blonde child in a pair of swimming shorts, probably a boy (but maybe not). The text below read “PLEASE HELP!!! This little boy is missing and is assumed abducted. Please take a few moments out of your busy day and SHARE THIS, AND ASK YOUR FRIENDS TO DO THE SAME. This family’s life has been shattered, and it just takes a moment out of your day to help! Let’s utilise the power of social media and get his face out there so more and more people can be on the lookout for him. If you see this child, please call the police immediately!” That’s all it said.

With positive intent, my friend shared this post. My issue with this share are:

If it’s a genuine abduction, why isn’t it in the news?

Wouldn’t it have helped to say where the child was abducted?

Was it abducted just after the pic was taken or has it got dressed since?

Does the child have a NAME??

And on the assumption that it’s all a crock, what happens when/if someone sees a child matching this photo walking along with his father, and calls the police reporting the kidnapper’s presence?

It is clear to me that FaceBook is a marvellously exploitative medium which is also a great way to keep in touch. I’m not sure what ‘sharing’ a post actually means in the bigger scheme of things, but the sheer volume of shared rubbish suggests that it benefits someone financially, or in more negative ways. I receive umpteen ‘let me show my students how quickly this pic goes viral’ posts – if it works, why do we need another one? How about the same picture but with different names saying ‘please share I beat cancer’? What about the famous ‘USS Missouri/Lighthouse’ story from the 1989 copy of The 7 Habits (page 33) turned into a radio broadcast and circulated as ‘just happened in Israeli waters’? (Still funny, though.)

Two things strike me. First of all, otherwise sensible people are not questioning the source and veracity of what they see on the internet. And they are also blindly following the crowd when they share this stuff without knowing where it truly came from. They might have received it from a trusted friend, but where did their friend get it? There’s a reason it’s called ‘viral’.

As a fraud investigator it bemused me when so many intelligent people became victims of crime because of their blind belief that the internet is in some way regulated and that everything on it is ‘true’.

Amusingly, these same people like the current trend (bandwagon) for ‘mindfulness’, being ‘there’ in the ‘now’. Well, if your ‘now’ is wholly warped by a false reliance on everything you read on the internet, be mindful that you’re probably being conned.

Be aware – ask questions. You might learn something.

Why are you distressing your friends?

09 Tuesday Jun 2015

Posted by in Rants

≈ Comments Off on Why are you distressing your friends?

Tags

, , , ,

I’ve recently found that well-motivated people do like to spread the word through social media about issues that they find disturbing. This is all too frequently done through the inclusion of a video of whatever it is that causes this emotional upheaval. Societally the convention is that this is considered a ‘good thing’ because (they say) it ‘raises awareness’. The awareness it has raised in me is annoyance. Why so?

Well, consider it like this. If something makes me angry, upsets me, or even worse distresses me – why on earth do I want to visually inflict it on my friends and cause them anger, upset or distress?

The news channels, the newspapers, the charities and so on already provide this information copiously. There is rarely a day goes by without some bead news being visually communicated to me, often by a charity justifiably seeking funds. In their defence they do so with more measured video snippets because they believe that distress should not be inflicted by accident. If something IS likely to distress, they warn us.

(Have you noticed the repeated charity adverts saying the ‘situation is getting worse’? If that’s so, the money already sent isn’t working, so why send more? OK, that’s a bit tongue in cheek, but Michael Sheen is starting to get on my pip. See also an interesting article on why Ethiopia continues to breed an ever-larger population while still having no food and water.)

Anyway, social media users – if you like me enough to consider me your friend, here’s a suggestion.

If you really feel strongly about an issue, provide a link instead of a video, and let me decide if I want to see it. Provide it so that it doesn’t automatically upload the video e.g. put a gap between the . and the com. Don’t force upsetting scenes on me. Start a conversation about it with me, and see if I engage. If I am interested, let’s talk – if not, let’s move on. Or just use a poster raising the issue, one that doesn’t anger, upset or distress people, but just raises that awareness.

PLUS – and here’s just a thought – please don’t try to involve me unless you intend to do more than just spread the word. If you want to actually DO something, DO IT! Otherwise you’re just pointing and saying, “Oooh, look what they did!”

And that’s the Daily Mail’s responsibility.

In the end, it’s simply a case of your Circle of Concern v my Circle of Influence. If one or neither of us is willing and/or able to do something about the issue other than just shout, let’s waste no further time on it.

 

Social Media – am I REALLY that interesting?

16 Sunday Nov 2014

Posted by in Character and Competence, Discipline

≈ Comments Off on Social Media – am I REALLY that interesting?

Tags

, , ,

Facebook and Twitter are amazing tools. They allow you to communicate to the world what you are thinking the moment you think it, and you can get equally immediate feedback.

That last comment was both the result of being impressed with that speed, and dismayed by it. Why? The speed is obvious, but the dismay is because that immediate feedback means that someone, somewhere is on Facebook instead of doing something useful – just like me/you. It’s a paradox.

But what really irks me, and this may go to discipline/denial or even character, is this.

Last week I received several friend posts telling me that the writer was having a meal. Once or twice they would tell me where, but more often than not it was just the menu. ‘Steak, mashed potatoes, peas and meringue for dessert! Win!” That was it.

My response, to make a point, was, “Just had dinner. I won’t bother you with details like so many people. It was something I do most days so I don’t think of it as significant.”

And the point was, not everything you do is worthy of telling the internet. Write something meaningful, write something funny, spread a valuable word or start a campaign. But I’ll assume you had dinner or (here’s another one!) went to bed. People do, you know. Like me. But for some reason I don’t feel the pressing need to tell everyone.

Perhaps applying yourself to writing something thought-provoking might serve you as much as it serves others. Imagine the personal insights you might gain by applying yourself and your mind in that way. Imagine the self-discovery and the benefit that might flow from it.

Imagine what you could write THEN.

Weekly Challenge

Think harder about your Tweets and Facebook entries, and make them Mission related at least twice this week, where you publicise your thoughts on something truly important to you or to those you serve.

Blog Part

No weight loss this week – sobering lesson about excusing ‘just another 100 calories’ because I’ve been running. Bit more self-control needed this coming week. I ran 5.72 miles without pause, which is on target and very satisfying. And I am now researching how to pay income tax and national insurance when I start earning money. Not as easy as you’d expect legalised theft to be.