Tag Archives: Stephen R Covey”

Be like Elsa. Even you boys.

07 Thursday Nov 2019

Posted by in Discipline, Time Management, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

An interesting email from professional speaker Michael Heppell, this afternoon, described how leaves fall from trees. It was all scientific and stuff, and repeating the detail would be cheating, but the content made me think – “How much clutter do I possess?”, which in turn made me decide to ask you the same thing.

How much clutter do you possess?

As I sit in my office (third bedroom, annexed in a familial putsch which resulted in the inability of vagrant children to return home more than one at a time – which they have done, in shifts), I can see a pen holder chock-a-block with pens, letter trays full of stuff, chargers for various devices and a myriad of relevant files.

And that’s just the stuff I have to keep – the remainder of years of decluttering. I have two bookcases full of (mainly) my Seven Habits ‘collection’ that includes three autographed books and most, if not all their audio products and course workbooks (thanks, E-Bay), which is actually a testament to the hundreds of other books I have returned to charity over the years.

You see, my office is a relatively full, but nevertheless tidy reflection of my attempt at adherence to organised, principle-centred living.

But the rest of the house is testament to my spouse’s inability/unwillingness/stubborn refusal to get rid of the memories. Or tat. It’s subjective.

But my computer is full of e-clutter that I have to dispose of. So that’s tomorrow’s house-clearing task.

Anyway – is your home or workspace the same?

Have you kept everything you’ve ever recorded, completed, built, bought, written and read?

There is a theory that when we hoard clutter – and if we are honest a lot of what we retain is clutter – then we don’t own it.

It owns us.

My computer, for example, contains a hoard of old, written Personal Mission Statements and Value Statements. I have had terrible difficulty disposing of these and (probably) will only move them all to a memory stick when they ‘go’, tomorrow.

But they are holding me back because I keep rewriting them, only to find they haven’t really changed in tone or content since 2013. And because they are all there, I keep switching between them. It’s a silly, wasteful pastime and a small example of how retention of the ‘old’ can have an impact on the ‘now’ while also preventing, or at least hampering, the ‘next’.

A lot of the things we keep are ‘incompletes’, as many coaches call them. Things we intended to do but never did, but retain just in case we get back to them – where the reality is that we fear losing them, or at least fear the loss of time we’d have to expend if we DID, suddenly, decide that those three pages of the book we intended to write had to be rewritten from memory.

Look. All that tat? It’s like a password for an account we haven’t accessed since 2010. We haven’t needed it for 9 years, so its loss won’t be that much of a challenge. So as far as all that clutter is concerned, be like Elsa.

Let.

It.

Go.

The Philosophy of Armitage-Shanks.

06 Wednesday Nov 2019

Posted by in General, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

In my ‘smallest room’, I like to keep a book handy for those longer visits where I can fill my mind while emptying other parts. As you may have surmised from the tone and content of my posts, I don’t like wasting time, and as my income and laziness have not yet stretched to having a door-mounted TV in there, reading is a great substitute.

Today, rather self-indulgently, I selected an old copy of The Seven Habits Workbook, something I buy from time to time to reinvigorate myself with some self-analysis. (I never seem to get to the bit on interpersonal communication, for some reason. Maybe that’s why I never listen.)

In the first pages, the book asks the reader to explore an event where their paradigms were changed because their first impressions were realigned when new information came to their notice.

My favourite example was the day I challenged some kids for throwing litter. Local shops suffered from youths ‘hanging around’ which resulted in repeated calls to police, which in that capacity I used to attend. Off duty one day, I was walking past a small group of teens when I heard a can hit the floor. I challenged the youths to pick it, probably quite brusquely, and they declined the offer. It was only as I stood there facing them down that I realised that the nearby litter bin was overflowing, and it was exceptionally windy.

They hadn’t dropped the can. Nature had.

I realised then, in my own AHA moment, what a paradigm is and how it affects our thinking. It is the way we see things, the lens through which we see and interpret what is happening. And like many lenses, it alters our vision. A lens can correct our vision, or warp it.

Yesterday, a politician was challenged for ‘something he said’. The reports outlined how he had insulted people who died in the Grenfell Tower disaster as ‘lacking common sense’. The funny thing was, he didn’t say that. People with an interest in challenging the politician – and the media, who can never let a fact get in the way of a good story – decided that ‘lacking common sense’ was what he meant.

You can see what he actually said, here – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CT2z-TtgElU

(You can also look up a previous post from 2016 about The Donald on this site.)

The aim of today’s post is not to tell you what to think. It is to remind you that we ‘think’ through a lens created by our history, our references and our values. And, importantly,  so do others.

Which means that when we are told something by someone else they, too, are telling us through their paradigm of the way they see things – which means that what they are saying may – emphasis may – be based on a misunderstanding, a misinterpretation, or even on mischief.

It’s not always easy to spot, and if you consider that adding our lens to their lens may warp things even further, perhaps the lesson here is to be really careful when starting to espouse your opinions on ‘what just happened’, too.

The other thing I felt about this incident was how our ‘enlightenment’ on matters which should be dealt with ‘sensitively’ (i.e. less than truthfully?) has resulted in a massive increase in tolerance.

“You should be more sensitive, you ignorant fascist bastard!” Irony.

Isn’t it amazing just how thoughtful you become after reading a book when sat with your trousers around your ankles?

And on that image, I’ll let you go. Another toilet metaphor. I could go all day……..

48 years. Same tune, different words. Still true.

05 Tuesday Nov 2019

Posted by in Time Management, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

As an enthusiastic student of The Seven Habits® , and having shaken the hand of the great man himself, one of my pastimes has been to explore Stephen R. Covey’s earlier works and compare them to those with which many leaders and businesspeople will be more familiar.

I’d gamble most of you would be aware of the first Habit, ‘Be Proactive’, which uses the ‘you are the programmer’ computer metaphor to describe how individuals have control over how they live their lives – to a greater extent than they may otherwise have thought – because they have the ability to choose their response to what happens to them.

In 1971, I suggest, ‘proactivity’ the term was yet to be invented by Stephen Covey. But the idea of humans having ‘choice’ was not, and although the terminology has changed and become part of the business lexicon (like ‘journey’, which is now grossly over-used, so stop it), the concept remains valid.

In his work ‘How to Succeed with People’ (Deseret Books, 1971), a 2½ page chapter referred to how there is a gap between our knowledge about things, and our ability to act on that knowledge. He calls the chapter “Three Processes – Knowing, Choosing and Doing”.

He suggests that many of us fail in our efforts to be better despite the fact that we know what we should do, because there is a disconnect between that knowledge and our ability, or perhaps our willingness, to act on that knowledge. Put simply, our failures lie in how we choose, or fail to choose, to act.

Here’s a direct lift.

“Choosing means to pause and stand back for perspective, to think deeply, and then decide our own actions and reactions. Choosing means to accept responsibility for ourselves and our attitudes, to refuse to blame others or circumstances.

Choosing, then, means to commit ourselves strongly to that which we decide to do. This committing process often involves a real internal struggle, ultimately between competing motives or between conflicting concepts of ourselves.”

He goes on to suggest that making the better choice can break the binding power of habit, and it is habit that tends to keep us where we already are, and away from where we want to be. Moreover, habit teaches us ‘you’ve failed before, you’ll fail again’. As Covey also put it – ‘Private Defeats precede Public Defeats. Choice can over come the pull of habit.

Choice, therefore, creates an important link between the engine of knowing and the gearbox of drive.

The best leaders have the ability to choose well. Their better choices overcome the largesse and stasis created by habit, and habit is the enemy of change for the better. (While a great servant, habit is a poor master. Occasionally.)

Stephen Covey said that principles endure. The principle of choice – whether you use the expression ‘Knowing, Choosing, Doing’ or ‘Be Proactive’ – endures.

It’s fun finding that out by reading older works. Makes me feel all scholarly.

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.

Who are YOU to Leave a Legacy? Read on…..

24 Saturday Feb 2018

Posted by in Character and Competence, Discipline, General, Rants, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Who are YOU to Leave a Legacy? Read on…..

Tags

, , , , , ,

After a 45-minute spin session on my clothes horse this afternoon, watching Dr Covey training large groups of the wise, I found a YouTube video of a gentlemen in heavy facial tattoos having a go at the book First Things First. (I’ll come to those tattoos and why I mentioned them later.) Of course, I was always going to defend the book, but the focus of this post is one criticism that the vlogger made.

He suggested that the book was great for high-earners and those in powerful positions, but (to paraphrase) ‘the guy struggling to make ends meet is never going to be interested in leaving a legacy’.

How patronising. For a start, why shouldn’t the guy struggling to make ends meet want to leave behind something important when he’s gone ? From something as simple as a loved child, through to some magnificent contribution that changes the lives of millions, why is it that this vlogger thinks that the remit to leave a legacy is only within the power of the wealthy, the super-clever or the unbelievably talented?

A legacy isn’t necessarily a Microsoft, an Apple, a World Cup or other personal title. A legacy is positive contribution that lives in the memory of those left behind, whether it is a stadium-full of happy football fans or the spark of love remaining in the hearts of your children and grandchildren. It exists when a professional remembers a teacher that had faith in them when they doubted themselves. It exists within a charity worker who holds a child until it realises that people love it, and that life is worth pursuing. It exists within an author who writes a book that informs or entertains.

It exists within YOU. But it is only you who can bring it out into physical existence. You can leave a positive legacy, a bad legacy, or none at all. Those who feel they have nothing to offer live homelessly on our streets, abuse alcohol or drugs, or mope from day to day with no concept of meaning. And many die as a direct result of that sense of meaninglessness.

That’s why I promote The Three Resolutions and that is why I wrote the books. I believe that people who live in their accord – knowingly or not – live happy lives of competently executed purpose and service, resulting from a sense of self-discipline and great personal character. And in doing so they will all leave a legacy, similar to those described above. Even if they don’t realise they have done so – they have. I remember teachers, role models, trainers, writers and others that have had faith in me and whose example have made me what I am. (It’s me who hasn’t quite fully capitalised on their faith!) I bet you remember such people, too.

Leave a Legacy. PLAN to leave a legacy. It’s a lot more fun to plan one that leave one by accident.

Anyway, back to the tattooed vlogger.. I don’t like excessive tattoo-ery but those are my values in action. He has every right to have a tattooed visage if he wants one.

The reason I mention it is not to criticise, but to ask this.

If he doesn’t think leaving a legacy is important, why is he vlogging and why is he raising his individuality and sense of self-esteem by painting his face?

To leave a legacy, that’s why.

Bloomin’ hypocrite.

100-Day Challenge, Day 27. Talk -or read – yourself into success.

27 Thursday Jul 2017

Posted by in Character and Competence, Discipline

≈ Comments Off on 100-Day Challenge, Day 27. Talk -or read – yourself into success.

Tags

, , , ,

I have never really been all that enthusiastic about affirmations, those sentences one states (ideally out loud) to oneself that are intended to reinforce the cognitive integrity between what we say to ourselves and how we behave. Not that I don’t believe that what we say to us influences us, but the woowaah suggestion that doing so out loud makes any difference. Until this week.

Until last week, I had got into the habit of reading my PMS daily – it was on my to-do list and the brevity of time it took, allied to the simplicity of the particular to-do, meant it was an easy ‘tick-off’ in my planner. I didn’t shout out loud (partly because I was in an office full of personal development sceptics, aka ‘detectives’), but I did focus on the reading. And for the couple of weeks I did that I lost weight, produced, and lived according to said PMS.

This week, I did not. I allowed myself to believe that I had, by now, ‘got it’ and didn’t need to read it any more. This was the week I didn’t exercise, ate too much (and it doesn’t take ‘too much’ to stop weight loss, I assure you), and didn’t study for my forthcoming test as well as I could have.

In other words, my failure to read my PMS influenced – well, my failures.

So it is back in the planner and will be read daily this week. And I respect affirmations a little bit more than I used to. And to be frank, if they are good enough for Stephen Covey, then they are certainly good enough for me.

Now, dear sceptics – you may think this silly. Now ask Lewis Hamilton, Tiger Woods, many premiership footballers, and copious other successes who you’ve SEEN talking to themselves or meditating with closed eyes just before they perform, what they are doing. And if it is good enough for the successful – why isn’t it good enough for YOU?

Values-based Time Management Means Achieving the BEST Goals.

19 Sunday Feb 2017

Posted by in Character and Competence, Discipline, Time Management

≈ Comments Off on Values-based Time Management Means Achieving the BEST Goals.

Tags

, , , ,

“If a goal isn’t connected to a deep ‘why,’ it may be good but it usually isn’t best.” Stephen Covey

I hereby truly and solemnly declare and affirm that I want to run a marathon.

That is a true statement. Deep down I want to be able to say that I ran a marathon, that I did it in less than 4 hours, and here’s my medal on display in the cabinet with my bronze swimming certificate.*

Yes, as far as running a marathon is concerned, I really want to run one. But I am not prepared to make the effort.

The reason I am not prepared to is because such a goal is often a dream that is planted by the achievements of others, by a desire to demonstrate a high level of physical fitness when such a level is not necessary for achievement of any of my other goals, and ultimately by ego – I want to brag about it.

Let me emphasise – they would be MY motives, and if you want to do a marathon for truly personal, deeply emotional reasons you go ahead and do it, and good luck. I am not here to tread on your dreams.

The point I am making is that achieving someone else’s goals, or seeking achievement for reasons of ego, probably won’t result in the deep happiness that comes from achievement pursued for truly personal, deeply impassioned motives. On the other hand, if achieving those goals is a means to a better end and not ends in themselves, the passion for those longer-term outcomes will help you achieve the smaller steps on the road to that greater success, the success you really seek. And let’s face it, you’ll be fitter and better able to enjoy that success (provided you haven’t crocked yourself in the process). And the greater success will be the one that serves your values system.

Seeing the goal as something which serves your values is the essence of values-based time management. Selecting a goal that doesn’t dovetail your values system is futile – you won’t do it, or you will detest every moment spent in striving for it, and UN-happiness is not a normal pursuit, is it? (Masochists excepted.)

I suspect that a 10k running ability is ample for most of us who don’t enjoy sport for sport’s sake. If you can run 6 miles in an hour and have a sensible diet you’ll be fit enough for most professions. If you want to get fit enough to achieve your other goals, decide on a sensible level of fitness, pursue that, and spend the rest of the time on the actual objective.

Spend as much of your time as you can on getting the result you seek, and a sensible-but-lesser proportion of time on the ‘side-issues’ that serve that objective. Plan your time so that you maximise the likelihood of achieving the (your) Main Thing, without spending too much time on achieving side-goals that will serve the greater objective but aren’t goals in themselves.

It’s a fine balancing act and using a suitable, personal planning system will help. In that, you put your Mission and Goals to the fore, and plan to spend as much of your time not on ‘shoulds’ or ‘coulds’, but on MUSTS. The other two can be fitted in around them.

And be careful that those ‘shoulds’ and ‘coulds’ don’t become excuses for procrastination! (Next week’s subject.)

*I don’t have one of those, either. I am not a fish and if I am going two miles on water, I know people with boats.

 

For more on Values-Based Time Management, go here, or go to the Books page on this site

51Kan416noL__AA324_PIkin4,BottomRight,-60,22_AA346_SH20_OU02_

People don’t like being told what to think. Think for yourself.

13 Sunday Nov 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on People don’t like being told what to think. Think for yourself.

Tags

, , , , ,

“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space lies our freedom and power to choose our response. In those choices lie our growth and our happiness.” Stephen R Covey

Despite the uninformed dismissiveness of friends and foe I have, for the past 20-odd years, been an advocate of the 7 Habits ‘philosophy’ – not a good word but it’s short. People who deride the awfully-named ‘self-help’ genre and therefore who have never taken a moment to understand it, suggest that the field, and the 7 Habits book in particular, have the intention of restricting my (their) thinking. Of course, some fields like Scientology and cults do just that, but the essential difference between what my friends think and the actuality is this: the 7 Habits do not in any way tell you what to think. What it does is tell you is that you can think, and provides a framework you can apply to thinking. But what you think is entirely up to you.

I write this week’s blog following the election of The Donald to the Presidency of the USA. Last night, following (arguably) anti-democratic and violent protests by people deriding ‘hate politics’ – the irony escapes them – I watched a YouTube vignette you can see here (pardon the ad). In it, the speaker tells the politicians that the reason DT was elected was because the people had realised that the ‘liberal elite’ (read socialists-with-a-small-s and their supporters) had been telling us what we can think, and what we can say, for so long that the electorate said “enough!”. He suggested that attacks on those who held and proffered thoughts other than the politically-correct had given rise to a backlash. People were being viciously and loudly attacked for having the temerity to hold and verbalise a different opinion for so long, that they spoke out in the ballot box. They voted, “STOP TELLING ME WHAT TO THINK!”

I agree. I suspect that the (quote Fox News, for a laugh) the ‘mainstream liberal media’ had spent so much time attacking DT that ‘the people’ decided to stop being told what to think, and to ‘think’ and therefore ‘do’ the opposite, perhaps out of spite for the media. I don’t know if this is so, but as the guy who sometimes likes the underdog to win, this constant ‘look what he did!’ approach just pushes me to think the opposite. I suspect the US electorate felt the same.

Which takes me to the quote and tone of this post.

Contrary to the political elite’s apparent view, I DO have the choice on what to think. Habit 1 is about being proactive and realising there IS a choice, and I can use a lot of things to make that choice.

And if I am left alone to think it WITHOUT being attacked for thinking things, eventually I can use my self-awareness, independent will, creative imagination and conscience to decide what is right and what is wrong, for myself.

I don’t need to be lectured, I need to be informed and encouraged. I don’t need to be attacked, I need evidence. I don’t need to be shouted down, I need to be heard. And above all, to hear you I need to know that YOU understand what you are saying and that it is objective, that it is not just a dogmatic ideology (well-meant or not), one which you have not objectively tested but to which you slavishly adhere.

That’s the odd reason why, even though I don’t like Jeremy Corbyn’s politics, I can respect him because he truly believes them, while I cannot respect Diane Abbott because she espouses socialism and quality education for all while sending her own kids to private school.

I will question the ‘thinking ability’ of anyone who is slavishly adherent to a ‘side’ in politics. And I will listen to anyone who is willing to change their mind. For example, I ‘hated’ UK gay-rights activist Peter Tatchell for a long time – not because he was gay but because of his confrontational tactics. But I saw him last week defending the right of Irish bakers NOT to be forced by the Irish courts to contravene their values in wanting to not bake a pro-gay marriage cake. That demonstrated thinking. Quality thinking. I can now respect, even admire him.

Use the gap – use your brain. Don’t be told what to think. Think properly, so that you can be sure that what you think is right.

Don’t just be interested – be QUALIFIED.

19 Sunday Jun 2016

Posted by in Character and Competence, Discipline

≈ Comments Off on Don’t just be interested – be QUALIFIED.

Tags

, , , , , ,

“Renewal is the principle – and the process – that empowers us to move on in an upward spiral of growth and change, of continuous improvement.” Stephen R Covey

I am now involved in the provision of a new Third Resolution ‘service’, having qualified (a loose term) as an Institute of Advanced Motorists Local Observer. This means I get to tell other people, with a level of authority, what I think of their driving. That is something I missed from my days as a uniformed copper. Although unlike then, those people will have paid to be told and they won’t argue (much) about my being right.

Yesterday, I attended a training session and was slightly taken aback to learn that for every 100 people who start training as advanced drivers, as many as 60% plus elect NOT to take the test at the end of the programme. Just as we say ‘You’ll pass the test!’, they decide that they don’t want to be tested. They’re good enough, the ‘authority’ tells them so, and they demur.

This is not like school, where you take an exam at the end of a school year, ready or not. These are people who have been prepared for, and told they can pass.

And I am astounded. I have spent my entire life testing myself against higher standards. I have sought out education and gained qualifications. Occasionally I have failed, only to revisit that failure and again take on that challenge, only to succeed. That doesn’t mean I am ecstatic when I approach an exam or assessment. I am nervous about the result. But I welcome the challenge because if I come through, I have proved to myself I am better than I was before.

So when I read that ‘our children are being stressed out through tests’ I think to myself, “Why are we telling our children to fear assessment? What numpty decided that being properly prepared for the challenges that will face us can only be overcome when they face us, and that we should not test ourselves in anticipation of that test.

Fortunately – and here’s the paradox – not one of us would want to be diagnosed by an unqualified doctor, have our accounts done by someone who can’t prove they are qualified (or at least have a Maths GCSE), or use a Uber driver who hasn’t passed his driving test. We absolutely insist that those who provide our services are qualified – trained and assessed – to do so. And yet some twits have decided that asking a teenager to take an exam in a peaceful, quiet room is stressful.

Life is a test. It tests our ability to cope, it tests our ability to overcome, it tests our ability to live a life of meaning. It wants us to be better, to find something about which we can be passionate.

Getting trained and independently assessed in those areas about which we are passionate and which serve our sense of meaning is a discipline (First Resolution), provides competence and builds our character (Second Resolution), and inevitably encourages us to start providing excellence in service when we manifest our training through employment or hobbies (Third Resolution).

And if your training and assessment is connected to your vision/mission/purpose – what the hell is there to get stressed about?

This week I encourage all readers to identify a mission- or passion-related qualification and go and sign up for the course that will demonstrate to others that you aren’t just interested – you are qualified.

For more on The Three Resolutions, go HERE to Amazon to get the Kindle version of the book, or HERE for a Paperback edition.

51SrzOWl+nL__SX312_BO1,204,203,200_

I may be wrong … but I’m willing to be. If you’ll let me.

31 Sunday Jan 2016

Posted by in Character and Competence, General

≈ Comments Off on I may be wrong … but I’m willing to be. If you’ll let me.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

“Don’t argue for other people’s weaknesses; don’t argue for your own. When you make a mistake admit it, correct it, and learn from it – immediately.” Stephen R Covey

Wise words, words completely ignored by politicians. In their defence, they have been taught not to admit their mistakes (and you have to admit before learning from and correcting it, the progression is sound). The Press lambast any politician who makes a mistake to a point which, if done to just about anyone else, could legitimately result in a prosecution for using insulting words and behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. Seriously. A momentary spoken gaffe, a failure to remember some obscure, unimportant, untimely or even irrelevant fact – boom, out come the headlines from experts in Googling and 20/20 hindsight who didn’t know either, until they looked it up. Or knew it because they have an interest and expect everyone to give a monkey’s.

I recall a US statesman (I think it was Dick Cheney) being derided for use of an expression along the lines of ‘There are things we know we know, and there are things we don’t know we know. There are things we don’t know we don’t know, and there are things we know we don’t know.’

Which is exactly how the accepted progression from unconscious incompetence, through conscious incompetence and conscious competence, to unconscious competence flows. (Look it up at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_competence) It is how people learn. But evidently the press didn’t know this and headlined the message that Cheney was stupid. Ironically, those who DID know about the Four Stages realised how stupid the press made themselves look.

And the press is not accountable, is it? The Press holds everyone to account, but ask that it does the same in its own regard and the old ‘freedom of the press’ tagline screams at us from their pages. Remember Leveson? Remember the Press stating “we’ll have a Charter”? Where’s that all gone?

I’m also amused when a newspaper tells me I’m outraged about something which, not having read the paper yet, I don’t know about. And then when I read it, I’m still not outraged.

Let me give you a clue – when a report includes lots of emotionally charged adjectives and adverbs, they’re trying to wind you up, or they’re trying to make a story out of something that isn’t. When someone is writing what is admitted to be an ‘Opinion Piece’, it is just that – an Opinion. It may be well meant, it may be authoritative (rarely), but it is not Fact. When a report says, ‘critics are attacking’, it means the enemy is having a go – surprise!! It’s not FACT. Except to the degree ‘critics are attacking something’ is a fact of life.

And when a lawyer says, ‘My client’s instructions are….’, the lawyer doesn’t believe them, either. (Just thought I’d add that one in.)

I am always prepared to be wrong. But if someone makes an argument that uses hateful speech, personal attacks on people they’ve never met, or which is so obviously ideologically tinted, I’m none the wiser. I can’t see the facts for the flannel. ©

I only wish society would allow me the chance to be wrong with dignity.

 

For more on character, discipline and service, consider buying The Three Resolutions, available from Amazon HERE

51SrzOWl+nL__SX312_BO1,204,203,200_