Assurance to the Afflicted (this is a good one!)

In business (and in organizations generally) your mission is VERY important. Thereis a lot of talk these days about leadership. It is a very sexy subject and advice on the topic abounds. But, we could get a good definition of leadership from the oldest of organizations, the military. The military is a great place to learn leadership. And one way of viewing leadership is that it is, “Managing for the mission.”

This is an important characterization of leadership because it is ACTIONABLE. A lot of books, and gurus, will tell you that leadership is about character traits like charisma or extroversion. And that is just not true. Leadership is not about character traits. Leaders come in all shapes and sizes. Leadership is about action, it is about behaviors. So, to construe leadership as managing for the mission is very useful.

Obviously the first step is to define the mission. Defining the mission is the first step of all leadership. What are you trying to get done? We are all familiar with Mission Statements and most of them are quite hollow. Just like the definition of leadership, you want your mission statement to be operational.

So when Sam Walton said, “Always the lowest price,” his employees knew what to do. And when Larry Page and Sergey Brin say their mission is, “To organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful,” people know what's expected. Now, there are a number of reasons why Walmart and Google are the best in their categories. But do not sleep on the mission statement. These beautiful missions are a big part of these company's success.

A while back Peter Drucker was working with the emergency room of a hospital. Drucker is known for being a management thinker, and he was. But that does not just mean business. Towards the end of his life, Peter spent a lot of time working with not-for-profit companies like churches, universities, and hospitals.

This particular emergency room was struggling. Their performance was sub-par. With Drucker's help, they eventually came up with a beautiful mission. But it took a while. You see, when Drucker interviewed people, and asked them what they do, the most common answer was, “Health care.” In fact, most hospitals seem to say they are in the business of health care. But that is wrong. As we both know, hospitals do not take care of healthy people. Pretty much, by definition, they take care of sick people. A better phrase would be, “Sick Care.”

This is not just some cute game of semantics. It is very important. Like I have mentioned, your mission needs to be actionable, otherwise people get confused. And, as we know, confused people do not do much. For a hospital worker to say they are in health care is ridiculous. And it leads to a lot of inefficiencies.

What Drucker found was that about 80% of the patients who come to the ER cannot be helped by a doctor. Meaning, there is nothing wrong with them that a doctor's intervention could fix. It pretty much is a case of, “Take two of these and call me in the morning.” For eight out of ten people, time and rest (and maybe a pill) are the only solution. When I first heard that I had a hard time believing it. But then I surveyed people in my sphere and I'll be damned if it was not almost that exact ratio.

This does not mean we should turn people away from the emergency room. ER doctors do serve a very valuable purpose. Though it is probably not the purpose you would usually think. The main benefit, an emergency room doctor can provide his patients, is to give, “Assurance to the afflicted.” Meaning, the main benefit is psychological. Their mission is psychological. The emotion at work is fear/anxiety. (somebody should write a blog about emotions)

Physicians are not trained in psychology but, paradoxically, that is exactly the service these doctors provide. When somebody has something wrong with them, they basically want to hear a trained professional, in a white lab coat, tell them that they're not going to die. There's a lot of value to that service.

For the purposes of this post, I want to highlight the absolute beauty of this mission statement. It is completely actionable! Once these workers knew their job was to give assurance to the afflicted, they knew the exact steps they needed take. For example, they created a policy whereby everybody who comes in is now seen by a qualified person in less than a minute. That qualified person doesn't have to be a doctor. But it is someone affiliated with the hospital. Just knowing that people are aware of you, and your situation, is very reassuring. And though many people might argue the point, the truth is that 80% of the people who visit the emergency room are really looking for assurance.

With all that said, let me be very clear about one thing. Like many things, a beautiful mission statement is only obvious and simple in hindsight. The process of writing a mission statement can be very difficult and time consuming. The rub is that it will save you lots of time in the long run. That is the paradox. If you tell me you do not have enough time to create a mission statement, I would say you do not have enough time to not create a mission statement. Just sayin'.

Want LOTS of Hot Prospects?

This post is an overview of the book

Hot Prospects: The Proven Prospecting System to Ramp Up Your Sales Career

by Bill Good

Bill Good's bio: Mr. Good suggests that you ask any good financial planner or broker, “Do you know Bill Good?” He's confident they will say yes. That's because he has spent his professional career in financial services, and he created that industry's best prospecting system. With all the mergers that were occurring, Good knew he had to make his prospecting system more general. This would insure he could market it to all sales professionals. Mr. Good is the founder of Bill Good Marketing based in Draper, Utah. This book is actually an updated version of his 1997 book Prospecting Your Way to Sales Success. The '97 book is much more thorough which, in this case, means more difficult. I have implemented both books so, if you have any questions please let me know.

Key point: Good prospects are located, not created.

Bill Good confidently claims, “The major problem in sales is not really a problem with sales. It's a prospecting problem.” Good acknowledges, “Sales skills – the ability to create desire to have the benefits of your product – and closing skills – the ability to get people to make a decision about buying your product – are vital to success as a sales professional.” The benefit of Good's system is to, “Double your income or work half as much.” And Bill says, “You won't get a two-to-three-year double just because you have merely improved your selling skills.”

The main innovation that Mr. Good created was to divide the sales process into two steps. The first is prospecting and the second is selling. He says that the goal of the two steps are not the same, indeed they are opposite. While prospecting Good advises you to take a “No” quickly and easily and move on but in the selling phase you don't take “No” for an answer. While this might seem obvious it's not the predominate method being taught in sales.

The sales landscape has long been dominated by what Bill calls, “The Old Way.” This is the school that can be traced back to people like J. Douglas Edwards. In the old way you are counseled that, “All buyers are liars,” and, “Don't believe the prospect until he or she has said no three, six, twelve, or twenty-seven times,” and “Every no gets that you much closer to a yes.” The old way focuses on closing and overcoming objections, suggesting that there is a war between buyers and seller.

Good mentions that the old way, “Did serve its purpose at an earlier time in this nation's history. Undoubtedly it came of age in an era in which the old-time peddlers could not make more than one call a day or even in a week. And in the old days, if you didn't sell on that one call, you didn't eat.” But today we live in a country of 300 million people, any of whom could be contacted fairly easily. Overcoming objections and closing the prospect can be useful during the selling step, that is to say once you have found a prospect who truly needs what you're offering. However, such heavy-handed techniques are liking to backfire during the initial prospecting phase.

To fix this situation Bill offers what he calls The Good Way and its three basic assumptions. The first assumption is that your product or service is sold, not bought. Meaning, we're not talking about Frosted Flakes and things of that nature. The second assumption is that there are enough prospects in your market area who are interested and qualified today to make it worthwhile to look for them and ignore the rest. Meaning, if you sell movie scripts, Bill's system wouldn't work because you're only dealing with a handful of motion picture companies. The third assumption relies on the basic principle that not all buyers are liars. Meaning, it's best to operate by the Golden Rule and treat others how you want to be treated. If the person says they're not interested, believe them, say,”Thankyouverymuch,” and move on.

A minute ago I said that Good divided the sales process into two steps and, while that's true, it's only part of the story. Bill actually considers there to be three phases that all sales must go through before closing, they are: Lead Generation, Lead Development, and Sales. If you're paying attention you can tell that I didn't lie. Good has simply divided the prospecting step in two; generation and development. Bill understands that you can market to the people you know but that's not the focus of his book. His is a system of cold prospecting which can be done in-person or over the phone.

The first step is to contact someone and ask them a question to see if they're interested in what you're selling. When someone says yes you have generated a lead and they go in your pipeline. The lead developer is responsible for managing the pipeline and setting up appointments for the salesperson. If you're like most people you do all three task yourself. However, Good advises that you delegate the first two task and focus only on selling. To do this takes money. But, if you follow his system you should be able to generate enough income to hire help.

Good did time management studies and found that a salesperson is worth $1,000 an hour, in gross revenue, when they're selling. So, anything they do that distracts them for selling eats into that tremendous income. Eventually, if you want to make the big bucks, you will want hire a support team. Getting someone to generate and develop leads isn't that hard and it will allow you to stay in selling mode. However, that might not be possible right now so we'll assume you have to do it all yourself.

In the Good Way of prospecting Bill says we're just like the old gold prospectors that came to California in the middle of the 19^th century. Bill gives his definition of the term “prospecting” as: “the act of searching for something of value.” If the prospector wishes to find more gold, he has to sift through more and more dirt. Bill says, “Gold prospecting was and still is primarily the act of discarding what is not gold.” In much the same way, “In the Good Way of prospecting, the first thing you do is: disqualify nonbuyers.” Nonbuyers are the dirt and they are always more plentiful than buyers. As I'm sure you know, that's just the way it is.

To be a legitimate prospect a person must qualify for at least two of the following four attributes: interest, decision-making power, time, money. If they don't qualify they're out, just like the dirt. For this reason Bill says, “Good prospects are located, not created.”

Bill poses the following question, “What effect do you think you would have on people if, instead of attempting to keep talking to everyone you talk to, you tried to get rid of them?” As many a trainer will tell you, the prospect can smell neediness on your breath, and it makes them run for the hills. When you are the one looking to disqualify them, all of a sudden they feel less threatened and more comfortable with you.

When you initially contact someone and they say they're not interested, Good says you should believe them, thank them and move on to the next person. Bill writes, “Yes, I know it's possible to sell people who are initially not interested. But your time is much better spent letting those disinterested people go while you look for someone else who is interested.” If you don't rough people up, you can call back your list every couple months. This repetition will build familiarity and trust with your prospects and make initially resistant people more receptive.

As with many thing, when prospecting you want to know your objective. This means you want to know what kind of prospect you're looking for. In order to do that we must first define our prospects. Good talk of five types of prospects and he labels them A,B,C,D,E, in order of decreasing hotness..

First off you have A or the hot prospect. Hot prospects are defined as those willing to set an appointment with a salesperson. No appointment, no hot prospect. Bill counsels us that it is virtually impossible to create interest on the first call. Similarly hot prospects are few and far between, so it's better to shoot for someone a little further down on the temperature scale.

Next we have the B or the red cherry. “A red cherry is a prospect who is currently interested enough to receive literature from your firm, who has the funds now to purchase your product or service, and who is able to make a decision or is in the decision-making team. A red cherry is not currently interested enough to set an appointment. Many red cherries will, however, become hot prospects as long as you don't try to barge into their home or office before they are interested enough to start the sales process.” So we contact people, send information to those interested and follow-up. Hopefully you can see the need for lead develop.

A green cherry is classified, by Mr. Good, as C. A “greenie” has interest, decision-making power, and time but just not the money. According to Good the prospect needs to give you a date for when the funds will become available in order to be a true green cherry. But remember, Bill's coming from financial services so you might want to tweak that definition just a little bit. In my business, LegalShield, the invest is negligible, so I don't need to qualify people for the money. I'm looking for people that are interested in supplementing their income. So a greenie for me is someone who would like to have their own home-based business but is not sure when they'll have the time to pull the trigger. Hopefully that helps you define what a green cherry means in your business.

Then we have the D, what Bill calls the info lead. Good says, “An info lead is a prospect who requests information, but we know little else about this person.” Info leads are responding to ad or have dropped their card at your trade show booth or have registered at your website. Perhaps they have been referred to you or simply asked you to send them information during a cold call and wouldn’t allow you to further qualify them.

E is the pitch 'n miss. Good writes, “By pitch-and-miss I mostly mean a prospect likely spoken to several times and with whom you wanted to do business with.” This could be someone you have had multiply phone conversations with or someone who you did an in-person presentation for but who you weren't able to close. If you would like to do business with this person, get their permission to keep them on your mailing list and drip on them over time.

If the person doesn't fit a prospect category Good calls them a pit. “What do we do with pits? We return them to the list from which they came. I would not waste any time documenting their pitness. Just toss them back in the pond.” Bill says that salespeople spend the bulk of their prospecting time doing what he calls pit polishing. Good states, “It is virtually impossible to create interest on a single phone call or appointment. Pit polishing is the single biggest destroyer of salespeople that exists.” Strong words. Bill says to pick the cherries and toss out the pits. However, he does remind us that pits are seeds and sometimes they grow into cherry tress. So we leave them on the list and recycle the list as long as it's profitable.

If you've followed up to this point you understand these words from Mr. Good, “You are the rejector, not the rejectee.” We hear a lot about the importance of a PMA or positive mental attitude. Bill says, “Frankly, a positive attitude isn't really necessary to be a cherry picker. What you need is a 'don't care' attitude.” It's like you're on an assembly line and your job is to simply identify what each thing (prospect) is and put it in the proper box (category.)

“OK, Mr. Courtney,” you may ask, “who do we contact?” There's no single right answer to that question, only you can make that decision. There are, however, guidelines that can help. For in-person prospecting you obviously go to wherever people are, from a networking event to a mall and everywhere in between. In his system, Bill Good recommends contacting people with the phone. Of course, we live in the age of the Do Not Call registry so this isn't always so easy. It will be up to you to figure out how to navigate this terrain. One option is to canvas an area, perhaps door-to-door in a neighborhood, and generate leads that way. People that have responded to your initial offer give you permission to call them back and you should be in the clear to do so. Note: I am in no way giving legal advice, to check the current status of the Do Not Call list it's best to contact your attorney.

Because it's Good's way I will stick with explaining a methodology using the phone. To get a list of people to call you have many options. The most rudimentary way is to simply call people in the yellow pages. Another option is a database called Reference USA. This is a database of millions of homes and businesses and it's available for free at many libraries.

Good says that you want to be campaign driven. He defines a campaign as, “A series of steps or actions, taken in a given market, that produces predictable results.” Within a campaign we have different variables, all of which you have control over. They are: the list, the campaign objective, the style, the primary benefit, the offer, the message, the sound, and the numbers.

The list, as mentioned, is the people you plan to call, the neighborhoods you plan to walk, etc. Good says this is the most important variable and should be given proper time and attention.

The campaign objective is the degree of hotness you require of your prospects. This can be anything from a hot prospect to someone who is just willing to talk with you.

The style is, “The medium or combination of media used to produce the response.” To start Good says it's smart to do a phone/mail/phone campaign. This is where you call someone, make them an offer, mail desired information, and then callback to follow-up.

The primary benefit is, “The main advantage someone will enjoy if they buy your product.” As mentioned before the primary benefit of the Bill Good Marketing System is to double your income or work half as much. To create your primary benefit you must first know the difference between a benefit and a feature. People buy benefits not features.

Very simply, a feature is what the product is and a benefit is what the product does. In the case of BGMS the feature is some tricked out computer program that helps you manage your contacts. The benefit is to double your income or work half as much. I'll give you another example. One feature of a turbo charger is that it's something that you can put on your car that utilizes forced induction to inject extra air into the combustion chamber of your engine. The benefit is that it provides your car with extra power and acceleration when you need it but gives great gas mileage when power is not necessary. How about a third example? You could buy a Brembo brake kit for your car and it might have four-piston calipers and cross-drilled rotors, and those features would probably mean squat to you. What you're really interested in is the benefit of being able to safely stop your car whenever you want.

The offer is, “Something you propose to give the client in exchange for some time.” Free samples, free reports and other sales collateral are very common.

The message is, “What you actually say in your calls, ads, and written messages.” Ad copywriting is beyond the scope of this report. For instruction on how to create great copy you'll need to read this and other books. However, I can tell you this, what you say in your calls and message should be scripted. One thing all the big money makers in sales know is the importance of a script. “It's the new kid on the block who feels compelled to be unique and creative with each presentation,” says Bill. Unfortunately for them, that uniqueness and creativity is costing them a lot of money.

The sound is just that, the way the words come out of your mouth. Bill ranks your sound as second only to the list in importance. Mastering a script is one way to sound good.

The numbers are the easiest thing to control. This is simply the number of dials you make or the number of doors you knock on. You've probably heard it said that sales is a numbers game and it is. You can't know if a campaign works if you're making just a few calls. Bill always starts his diagnosis of a running campaign by asking how many dials per hour are being made. If the answer if something ridiculously low like five, he knows the campaign might indeed work, the numbers just need improvement. Good counsels us to keep the numbers above forty dials an hour for first time cold calls. If this leads to an average of a cherry and a half an hour you'll want to hold onto that list and keep using it. Another great benefit of focusing on 40+ dials an hour is that you'll sound better. By focusing on achieving your numbers goal, each hour, you won't sound so needy and desperate which will improve the results you get.

So, you may ask, how long does it take to find out if a person is a prospect? Good says, this is the most important question and the answer is, “Less than a minute.” He says the second most important question is, “How long does it take to find out if a particular campaign itself is a cherry or a pit?” And, to that, he says, “A lot less time than you think.” Bill informs us, “Over its life, there is only one way to evaluate a campaign: profitability.” So be sure and track your numbers.

Strong Like Bull

Peter Drucker once quipped, "What everybody knows is often wrong." My admiration for Drucker knows no limits. However, I do acknowledge he often said things that pissed people off. Many of Peter's ideas were quite contrarian, but the son-of-a-gun was usually right. It wasn't his intention to be a thorn in the side, he only wished to be accurate. But a thorn he often was. Such is usually the case when a person dares to speak the truth. Sometimes the emperor is, indeed, naked. Regardless of how that truth might make others feel.

In the early 1940's Peter was invited to studied the General Motors Corporation. Drucker spent two years inside GM and this led to the writing of his book Concept of the Corporation. His conclusions were so disturbing, the book was essentially banned by Alfred Sloan. What Peter said definitely ruffled some feathers. Of course, time has proven Drucker's prescriptions to be correct. But cognitive dissonance can be a real doozy.

At any rate, the point I am trying to make is that Drucker was correct. What everybody knows is often wrong. Let me give you one example, that is off topic. I won't get into it in this post but everyone knows that bacon and saturated fat are bad for you. At least on this subject, everyone's wrong. But I'll save that for another post.

Right now I want to talk about a different misconception that holds a lot of people back. It is a mistake that certainly has held me back. The problem goes as follows. In America, we're largely schooled to correct our weaknesses. That is to say, we often work (with much pride) to improve on our shortcomings. As it turns out, that's a pretty bad idea. A much better recommendation is to IMPROVE ON YOUR STRENGTHS.

Nobody is perfect and we all have weaknesses. The problem is we're really bad at improving in these areas. Improvement is much more likely in our areas of strength. And, improvement not only leads to better performance, it also leads to increased levels of satisfaction and happiness.

Don't get me wrong, if you have debilitating weaknesses you might need to address them. For example, I used to be an extremely shy person. I mean shy like I couldn't return a “Hello” when I was greeted by a stranger. Due to my line of work, being shy caused me LOTS of problems. So, I had to improve, on this particular weakness, because it had proven to be highly destructive. I'm still a little bit shy but it no longer holds me back.

Another example might be someone who is extremely rude. Relationships are the key to happiness and success. And, I'm sure I don't need to tell you how important good manners are. If you're a rude and angry person, you're going to have a very tough time getting to where you want to go. Of course the irony is that the rude person seldom takes responsibility for his or her behavior. Instead they tend to blame others and label them “small-minded” or “judgmental.” Listen, if your weakness is that people think you're really rude, you're going to need to become less of a jerk.

The above aside, let's now assume that you don't have any pathological shortcomings. That is to say, your weaknesses are relatively minor. As I've already mentioned, we all have LOTS of weaknesses. As long as they aren't holding you back, you should forget about them. You heard me right, go ahead and be imperfect. Trying to succeed by improving, and building on a weakness, is an exercise in futility. You are MUCH more likely to become happier, and more effective, while leveraging your strengths.

So, what are your strengths? Actually, that's a really tough question to answer. Drucker was a management consultant for something like 60 years. He worked with some of the greatest leaders this world has ever known. And Peter said that people were more often wrong about their strengths than they were right. Drucker prescribed one activity to help discover your strengths and weaknesses. He called it the Feedback Analysis. I won't go into too much right now because I'm actually going to stray from Drucker in this post. But, as a quick overview, Feedback Analysis is the discipline to write down your expectations, whenever you make a decision or create new plans. Then, 9-12 months later you look back at the expectations you wrote down and see how they compare with reality. Done repeatedly, Peter says Feedback Analysis will make your strengths and weaknesses very clear to you.

As I've said a million times, I am a big fan of Drucker. And I do recommend the feedback analysis. Very few people take the time to write down expectations, and feedback reality against those expectations. It's a big part of the reason people repeat the same mistakes over-and-over. So please do utilize feedback analysis. But right now, there's another resource I want to call to your attention.

If you read this blog, with any frequency, there's a good chance you've seen me make reference to a gentleman by the name of Martin Seligman (in fact I mentioned him two weeks ago in the post titled True Grit). If you've never once seen this blog before, you still may know who Seligman is. He's a really big deal. Marty is a professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania. He is the world's preeminent expert on flourishing. Something I wrote about in this post: PERMA-net-GLEE

As it turns out, Seligman has created an OUTSTANDING resource that is available to you and I. If you go to Marty's website you can take a free test that will tell you your strengths. I've taken the test multiple times and I can't recommend it highly enough.

I now try to remain focused on my areas of strength. And I forgive myself for my areas of weakness. Incidentally, the whole “self-esteem” movement had it wrong. Self-esteem doesn't really help, even though “everybody knows it does.” What really seems to be important is not self-esteem but self-compassion. Again, this is something I will save for another post.

For now all I will say is that Seligman's strengths information, and test, allowed me to be myself. It allowed me to forgive myself for my weaknesses (self-compassion). It allowed me to accept that no one is perfect. It helped me realize that perfection shouldn't even the real goal. Ok, enough with the chat, here's a link to Seligman's site: University of Pennsylvania

Please go there and register. It's free. Once you're registered, and logged in, the strengths test you want to take, is called, “VIA Survey of Character Strengths: Measures 24 Character Strengths.” It's under the section titled "Engagement Questionnaires." I promise you, this is time well spent.

Lastly, to be thorough, and complete, let me tell you of another option. Another option is that you can utilize the strengths test available through the Gallup organization. This post has gone long enough, so I won't explain the Gallup stuff. But you will see it in a future post. So stay tuned.

The Lizard Brain

Emotions. What are they? They're important, that's what they are! Have you heard heard of a gentleman by the name of Seth Godin? Godin possesses an excellent business mind and is the creator of a blog I only wish I had. You can find him here: Seth Godin's blog

One subject Seth often talks about is The Lizard Brain. The lizard brain is the primitive part of the brain called the amygdala. Only certain animals have an amygdala and it's where our emotions come from. It's located at the base of the skull, at the top of the brain stem. The reason I mention the geographical location is so you know the amygdala's proximity to the logical part of our brain. The logical part of the brain is located in the frontal lobes. As the name suggested, the frontal lobes are located at the front of the brain, just behind the forehead.

Now, I didn't give you brain topography to bore you. If we know where the brain structures are located, we have an easier time understanding why emotion trumps logic in so many instances. Being at the base of the brain, the amygdala (emotions) tends to control the body much more than the frontal lobes (logic). So, that's why, when we're in a highly emotional state, it's hard to think clearly.

But I began with the question, what are emotions. I won't get into some long discussion about what emotions are. But I think it is useful to be aware of where emotions come from. You already know that emotions come from the amygdala, but we need to take the next logical state. You see, the amygdala is a brain structure, so it produces thoughts. Yes, our emotions come from our thoughts. Sometimes it may not seem that way, because we tend to feel our emotions viscerally. However, one thing I can assure you is that our emotions come from our thoughts. This is something we can learn from cognitive psychology and people like Aaron Beck, Albert Ellis, and Noam Chomsky.

The thing of it is, like many things, our emotional thoughts are products of habit. The way the amygdala responds, to any given stimulus, tends to be a matter of habit. Habits are automatic and they don't really require reflection. For this reason emotions seems to be automatic and we're not always aware that they are, indeed, a byproduct of our thoughts. So, the emotional brain is running an automatic script, just below conscious awareness. The good news is, we can tune into the emotional thoughts and fix them when necessary.

You see, the lizard brain basically has one job, and that's to keep us alive. Most life and death situations are very urgent and don't allow for much reflection. If a bull is charging at you, you don't have the time to contemplate friction and wind velocities. You just need to get the hell out of the way! So, the lizard brain is geared for immediate action and it isn't too concerned with accuracy. It's ok for the lizard brain to be wrong, as long as it keeps you alive. This is the concept of false positives. And it led to the coining of the phrase, “Evolution favors anxious genes.”

If the lizard brain detects danger, and makes you react, but there was no danger, no big deal. Better to have a false positive and react than to miss a signal and not react. Do you follow me? By missing a signal, and not reacting, it's much more likely that you will be harmed, perhaps killed. Conversely, being hyper-vigilant increases your odds of survival. There's only one problem here, humans no longer live in the wild.

You need to understand that the human brain was designed for a time when humans lived in the wild. This was a time when a person's life could be put in danger on a daily basis. So being hyper-vigilant was a adaptive strategy. But today, we live in very different times. Most Americans can go their entire lives without a serious threat to their existence. We no longer live among bears and mastodons or whatever. We live in track homes, with deadbolt locks on the doors. What's more, we have 911, ambulances, and emergency rooms, to help us, if we should get into trouble. God bless America! But the hard-wiring of the emotional brain doesn't know this. The amygdala is literally wired to be hyper-vigilant.

Knowing all this, I've developed a method of coping with my emotions. When I feel anxious, I assume I'm being overly sensitive. That is to say, hyper-vigilant. And, my assumption is usually correct. I say this because lots of people aren't aware that evolution favors anxious genes. Too many people put WAY too much trust in their emotions. Obviously we're talking about anxiety here but the lesson applies to other emotions as well.

I believe it is this hyper-vigilant lizard brain that causes all sorts of unfounded fears. The list is practically endless. You've probably heard the worries, which some people have, that the fluorine, in our tap water, is poisoning us. It's total bologna but people believe it because of the overly sensitive amygdala. (Incidentally, you may have seen the recent episode of Parks and Recreation when they spoofed this very topic. "H2 Flow" Funny bit.)

Let me give you another example. A little over a month ago we all had Halloween and many of us went Trick-or-Treating. I'm certain you've heard the one about razor blades in Halloween apples, right? A related tale talks of candy that has been tampered with, and poisoned. Well, here's a news flash, it ain't true! Sociology professor Joel Best studied every shred of evidence he could get his hands on. And there wasn't an ounce of data which confirmed that Halloween tricks had ever been tampered with.

There was, indeed, a child who had died after ingesting heroin on Halloween evening. But upon further review it was discovered that the child had simply gotten into his uncle's hidden stash. Professor Best looked hard, but couldn't find any evidence that Halloween candy had ever been tampered with. So why does the urban legend persist? I'm telling you it's because of the lizard brain. Anxieties mission is to keep you alive, not to get things correct. From the amygdala's perspective false positives are not a problem. But, from a social perspective, they're a big problem. If you think the government is trying to poison you, or your neighbors are putting razor blades in candy, then you're just paranoid. And paranoia IS a problem in society as large as ours.

So I encourage you. Next time you're feeling nervous allow yourself to consider the very real possibility that your amygdala is simply being unnecessarily sensitive. I'm willing to bet the assumption will prove to be correct. And, you'll feel much better :)

True Grit

One of the hottest researchers on the planet, right now, is a lady by the name of Angela Duckworth. If you don't know who Ms. Duckworth is don't fret, I'll give you the update. Angela is a professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania. Penn as it's called. Along with people like Martin Seligman and Aaron Beck, Penn is one of the top psychology schools in the world.

The character trait, or attribute, that Duckworth is known for is something called, “Grit.” Why is it called grit? Because that's what she named it! Why did she name it grit? She took the name from the movie True Grit. Duckworth defines grit as, “Passion and perseverance for long-term goals.” And what psychologists are finding is that grit is more important than talent when it comes to high achievement.

A lot of people think that talent trumps all. They think that the key to success and achievement is your native talents. The quintessential example being Tiger Woods. Many people thought Woods was the world's best golfer because of an inane talent which he possesses. But, if you know Tiger's story, you know this isn't true. The fact is, there was nobody who spent more time at the driving range. Woods practiced longer and harder than anyone else. He had grit. Psychologist Christine Carter points out, “Tiger Woods had been working on his golf game for 15 years when he became the youngest-ever winner of the US Amateur Championship.” Perhaps you've seen some of the photos of Woods as a youngster.

The person who seems to be Duckworth's favorite example of grit is the actor Will Smith. Angela is fond of the following quote from Mr. Smith, “The only thing that I see that is distinctly different about me is I’m not afraid to die on a treadmill. I will not be outworked, period. You might have more talent than me, you might be smarter than me, you might be sexier than me, you might be all of those things — you got it on me in nine categories. But if we get on the treadmill together, there’s two things: You’re getting off first, or I’m going to die. It’s really that simple…”

In physics we know that Distance = Rate x Time. To this, Duckworth saw a correlation and thought that distance was an apt metaphor for achievement. So, Angela has come up with a sister equation of her own. It is, Achievement = Skill x Effort. And Duckworth's mentor, Martin Seligman, says that if you truly understand Duckworth's equation, you'll see that ALL the leverage is in the effort. Because, not only does effort multiply any given skill, it simultaneously increases our skill level. That is to say, we get better through practice, which is certainly a form of effort.

This is all, very much, related to the concept of “Deliberate Practice.” A concept developed by Anders Ericsson at Florida State University. Ericsson discovered something he called the 10-Year Rule, which has subsequently become known as the 10,000 hour rule (Malcolm Gladwell talks about it in his book Outliers). Ericsson found that elite performers, in any field, have spent, on average, about 10 years developing their craft. More specifically, it was 10 years of deliberate practice that had taken them to the top.

Now, 10 years, or 10,000 hours sure seems like a long time, and it is. But there's no way around it. Nevertheless, you don't need to stress-out. What Professor Ericsson is talking about is Elite performance. You know, like Mozart, or Martha Graham. People that are the best in the world. And, in order to arrive at that destination, a person does need to persevere like crazy. Indeed, they need grit.

But you might not be interested in being the best in the world. You might be happy to "settle" for an above-average level of skill. Very well. The road map remains the same. The key is still deliberate practice. Perhaps "only" three year of practice instead of ten. But the thing is this. Deliberate practice is quite difficult. It isn't simply going through the motions.It's work. It's hard work. Because focused and disciplined practice is require, achieving your big goals requires grit more than anything else.

Yes, grit is very important. So naturally, the next question should probably be, how can we become more gritty? The short answer is, we don't know. But it's a problem that Duckworth is working on. As of now, the best idea Angela has heard, for building grit, is something called the Growth Mindset. The Growth Mindset was developed by Carol Dweck and it's something I wrote about in this post: Mindset

Going back to Duckworth's formula of Achievement = Skill x Effort, we know that it's largely about the effort. Duckworth says we can replace the word "effort" with “time on task.” Meaning, achievement is largely about how much time you're willing to devote to a task. And it isn't just the time we spend, but it's the amount of time we spend in deliberate practice. Because it's so difficult, most people can only get through a few hours of deliberate practice per day. Then we need to rest and recover. Which is why it's better to think of the 10-Year Rule rather than the 10,000 Hour Rule. This most certainly is not an invitation to become a work-a-holic and cram in those 10K hours. You need time to rest. So really, it's about consistent effort over time. As plain and mundane as that may sound, it's the real key to high achievement.

If you read my report on Carol Dweck's book you know that you can either "get-better" or "be-good." The idea of all this work (Duckworth + Ericsson + Dweck) should leave you with one prescription. Put as much time-on-task as possible with your focus on getting-better NOT on being-good. Then rest and do it all over again. If that sounds like too much work, you're always welcome to settle for mediocrity.

America's Genius

Man-oh-Man is there a lot of tension these days in the political arena! The fights taking place in Washington D.C., and throughout the country, are something to behold. They really get people fired up, and understandably so. When it's all said and done, politics is about values. And, in that way, it's very much like marketing. As marketers, what we do is we deal in values. So strongly are products a reflection of our values that we often integrate brands into our very personalities. We need look no further than an old bumper sticker I once saw. It said, “I would rather push my Chevy than drive your Ford.” Realistically, the difference between a Chevy and a Ford isn't all that great. But Ford people are Ford people, and Chevy people are Chevy people. And that's just the way it is.

The distinction between Republicans and Democrats isn't all that different. And I wanted to write a post to remind people that, in the battle between the R's and D's, there is no right or wrong. It's all just an argument about the relative values of the different sides. There's no need to get so heated as to hate the other side. Different people are entitled to different sets of values. That's a big part of what makes American so great, isn't it? It's the melting pot, right?

In fact, Peter Drucker once wrote an essay titled, “The American Genius is Political.” Remember, Drucker was born in Austria and voluntarily emigrated to the United States. He was the consummate student of America. And, the US Constitution was one of his all-time favorite documents. Peter's prose is usually so elegant that I figured I would simply quote a passage verbatim.

“The genius of the American people is political. The one truly saintly figure this country has produced, the one name that symbolizes the “fulfilled life” to most Americans, the one man whose very life was dedicated toward directing human activity onto a higher goal, was a politician: Abraham Lincoln.

“The phrase which since early days expresses the essence of their own society to Americans is the political promise: the “equal chance of every American boy to become President.” One only has to translate the slogan – for instance, into a promise of “equal opportunity for every boy to become Prime Minister” – to see by contrast that it is uniquely American, and this is not because the promise of equal opportunities in itself would be absurd, but because the political sphere is the meaningful sphere of social values only in this country.

“The American nation itself has been formed out of a multitude of diverse national traditions not by imposing on the newcomer a uniform religion, uniform customs, a new culture – not even by imposing on him the American language. It has been formed by imposing on him a common political creed. What makes the immigrant into an American is an affirmation of abstract political principles, the oath of citizenship in which he promises to uphold “the republican form of government.”

“Above all, the meaning of this country – what it stands for for Americans themselves as well as for the world – is a political meaning. It is a form of government, a social order, and an economic system that are equally in people's minds when they praise America and when they condemn her. And when Americans sing of their own country, they sing of her – in the words of our most popular anthem – as “the sweet land of liberty,” which would hardly occur as a definition of one's country and as an avowal of one's identification with it even to the most ardent of European liberals.

“We have to go all the way back to Rome of Augustus with its concept of “Latinitas” to find a society that so completely understands itself in political terms as does the United States. Yet Latinitas was wishful thinking and never became reality, whereas the political meaning of the United States furnished its essence: its ideal personality, its promises, its power of integration and assimilation. That the American genius is political is therefore the major key to the understanding of America, of its history, and of its meaning.”

Powerful stuff! Have you seen the movie Lincoln? I really enjoyed it. Daniel Lewis did an excellent portrayal of Honest Abe. As you probably know, the movie is based on the book Team of Rivals by Doris Goodwin. In the book, Goodwin writes the following, “In the only country founded on the principle that men should and could govern themselves, where self-government dominated every level of human association from the smallest village to the nation's capital, it was natural that politics should be a consuming, almost universal concern.”

Some people choose to tune politics out and others choose to get involved. If you choose to get involved, and participate, I'd like to point out one simple observation. The other side isn't evil, and they aren't destroying America. Indeed, it's these political wranglings that had made America what she is; the greatest country on Earth.

Yes, politics is a lot like marketing in that it deals in values. And because values are so deeply held, they often stir up strong emotions. So, if you choose to get involved in the political debate take a page from the marketer's playbook. Marketers are often studying influence and here's one thing I'm rather certain of; you can't influence someone after calling them dumb or evil. Would you like to bring some people over to your side of the political divide? How about trying to understand them, rather than change them? After all, perhaps the best way to be persuasive is by not trying to persuade. Like most high-level stuff, that's a paradox, isn't it?

When the student is ready...

“When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.” Have you ever heard that saying before? What do you think? Is it true? I definitely believe that it is true. A lot of people credit Buddha with the saying but, apparently, that isn't the case. The statement appears to have come from The Theosophical Society. But that's neither here nor there.

The point of this post is to give you a couple personal examples. As you probably imagine, I love books and I love reading. I believe it's wise to remain a student for life. That wasn't always the case. For years I thought I had it all figured out and it caused a lot of problems in my life. One day I realized that I needed to learn new stuff. I needed to go back to my student days.

Before long I was spending lots of time in places like the library and Barnes & Noble. In my line of work, we sell a product that is, essentially, an insurance product. I needed to train people on what we're doing, and I was struggling to find a good explanation. The student in me was in full bloom. I kept wrestling with questions about the essence of our product line. I was beginning to realize that it was all about the power of the group. It was all about buying power.

Individually, we have no where near the buying power that we do collectively. I was beginning to realize that insurance is simply group-purchasing. It's a form of Other People's Money or OPM. When we people pool their money together, they are able to purchase services that they couldn't have afforded on their own. And that's when the teacher appeared.

It was a hot July day in Huntington Beach, California and I had just walked into the Barnes & Noble on Beach Boulevard. I could smell the velvet aroma of brewing coffee, and could hear the buzz of capitalism, as registers opened and closed. Even more satisfying was the relieving hum of the store's air-conditioner. Thankful for the respite, I the walked towards the business section to post-up at my usual diggs.

You see, I love puzzles, they're one of the few things that can keep me off the beach. One way to look at it is that book stores are full of teachers. As I walked toward the shelves one book, in particular, seemed to be staring at me. As I got closer the cover began to come into focus. The only book that had my attention was this one: OPM

Now, I had been at that store a million times and I had never seen that book. It was kind of freaky. I think this is one dimension of fate or destiny. In life, what we pay attention to largely determines how things turn out.

A very similar experience happened at yet another Barnes & Noble. I had been doing some sales and marketing training and I was having a great time with it. But one puzzle constantly surrounded me. You see, a lot of people think that sales and marketing are basically the same thing, or at least very similar. But Peter Drucker disagrees. He says they are, in fact, opposites. Now, that is a rather challenging idea. Indeed, it's a puzzle.

Drucker was ever the contrarian and I was fascinated by the counter-intuitive nature of his statement. It made me wonder, what is selling? What is marketing? And, are the two similar, or are they indeed opposites? I happen to remember that this was during the winter time. The reason I remember the season is because I had strolled into the Barnes & Noble, in Costa Mesa, California, bundled up in a heavy jacket.

At this particular B&N, there at Metro Pointe, the books are mostly located on the second floor. I walked past the magazine rack and went up the escalator. I made a U-turn and breathed deep, to take in the finer notes of espresso, as I passed the cafe. As I got to the book rack my eyes began a rapid scanning that would make most gamers proud. But it only took a few moments until I was transfixed on the following book: What is Marketing?

Needless to say, I immediately purchased the book and consumed almost all of it in one sitting. Today, I have a pretty good understanding of OPM and marketing. But that's not the point. I guess, in some ways, what I'm ultimately trying to dispel is the myth of the secret. When trying to sell (or is it market?) a book, authors often use the word “secret” in either the title or the subtitle. To many people the word secret is nothing less than catnip. But I don't believe there are any secrets, there's just stuff you aren't paying attention to. Don't get me wrong, people do keep secrets. But these are secrets about specific actions, usually inappropriate behavior.

I've always wanted to write a book titled, “Secrets of why people are always selling secrets.” With secrets in the title, twice, how could it not be a best-seller? (or is it best-marketer?)

Teachers are all around us. Of course, part of the problem is that a lot of them are so much hooey. Deciphering which are the real teachers takes time and practice. But I'm certain, if you remain a student and hone your radar, the right teachers will manifest themselves.

The secret is...

...there are no secrets. This is a paradox that just needs to be said. And it kind of makes me giggle. Because a lot of people seem to be looking for secrets. Listen, if someone says they possess secrets, they're trying to sell you something. And, I can say that because I'm pretty sure, if you're reading this blog, you aren't looking for secrets.

I was torn as to whether or not I should write this blog post. Because I am all too aware of the advice, “If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.” And so I wonder if I'll ever sell secrets. Maybe someday. I mean, I most definitely am a salesman. I love selling and I'm well aware of its importance. I just wonder if we have to use such cheap shortcuts.

It seems like you can hardly pick up a book, at the bookstore, that doesn't have the word “secret” on the cover. And, lest you think I'm totally naive I'd like to quote a well-known author who said, “What most people don’t realize is that the authors of books have complete 100 percent control over what’s between the covers, but no control whatsoever over what goes on the cover. The cover is the company’s marketing piece.” By company he was, of course, referring to the publishing company. So, I understand the game. It just frustrates me. It just strikes me as a little too manipulative.

Don't get me wrong, I know there ARE tons of secrets in this world. But they are secrets about behaviors not principles. When somebody does something wrong, or something they're not proud of, of course they would want to keep it a secret. And, as the whole Edward Snowden thing unravels, we're reminded of the intelligence community's deserve for secrecy. But, again, what they're keeping secret are actions. Like spying on the chancellor of Germany and things of that nature. Everyone knows it happens, but the CIA doesn't want to admit it. It just puts egg on the face and takes away their favorite device, plausible deniabilty.

My complete quote should go something more like this, “The secret is, there are no secrets. There's just stuff you don't know.” I once heard a pithy joke that said something to the effect of, “If you want to hide something, put it in a library.” Silly but kind of true, wouldn't you say?

All of this secret crap really came to a head in 2006 with Rhonda Byrne. Listen, I watched The Secret, and I liked it. It did remind me to utilize the power of visualization. Visualization is a good thing, but it certainly isn't a secret. Instead of “The Secret” it could have been called “The Principle of Focused Effort.” But we both know it wouldn't have sold with that title. I think the worse part about it is when she called it The Law of Attraction.

If you are a big fan of Ms. Byrne's work, I hope I haven't offended you. I'm just calling it the way it is. I understand the marketing angle. By suggesting she has a “secret,” that is a “law,” she is giving a guarantee of sorts. Isn't that right? The "Theory of Attraction" doesn't said as certain, does it? To say that it's a law is an attempt to say the idea is immutable. That it's written in stone. That it's guaranteed. The problem is, if it doesn't work for you, you must be the defective one. I mean, if it's a law, your failure can't be the fault of the law, it's a law. What hogwash! Success is way too fickle to be guaranteed. If it were truly a law then more people would do it.

I realize this post might come off as whiny or negative or whatever. And that is most certainly NOT the point. My intention is to be helpful. If you spend too much time (heaven forbid your whole life) looking for secrets, you're going to be disappointed. I think it's better to commit to being a lifelong learner. Then, you'll come to know the real secret, when you haven't been able to find one. As TS Eliot famously said, "We shall not cease from exploration. And the end of all our exploring. Will be to arrive where we started. And know the place for the first time."

Happy New Year. Let's make it a good one!

Book Review: The Divided Mind

This is an overview of the book The Divided Mind by John Sarno

Sarno's bio: Dr. Sarno is a graduate of the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons. Currently Sarno is Professor of Clinical Rehabilitation Medicine at the New York University School of Medicine.

Key point: The vast majority of chronic pain disorders are psychosomatic in nature. Stated differently, most afflictions that cause persistent physical pain are caused by the mind. They are mind/body disorders.

Webster's dictionary defines psychosomatic as, “Of, relating to, involving, or concerned with bodily symptoms caused by mental or emotional disturbance.”

Now, that key point is quite the claim! And a lot of people have a problem with it. But this post, and this book, are for the big boys and girls out there. Sarno's main area of study is on a condition he calls tension myositis syndrome or TMS. Included in the category of TMS are chronic back, neck, and limb pain which are not relieved by standard medical treatments. Sarno includes other ailments such as GI problems, dermatological disorders, and repetitive strain injuries under the label of TMS.

While Dr. Sarno works at a very prestigious institution, his work is considered outside the mainstream. Sarno states clearly, and up front, that he does not have hard data. But what he does have is years of clinical studies and mountains of case work to support his thesis. The mind is very complex and we are barely scratching its surface through scientific analysis. A lot of people disregard with Sarno’s conclusions because the conclusions cannot be directly quantified. But, difficulty measuring things inside the brain is a product of the inadequacy of our instrumentation. It is not a disproving of the phenomenon.

Sarno claims that knowledge about what is happening inside the mind/brain is all that is necessary to cure TMS. In particular, Sarno says that TMS is the result of unconscious rage. The book clearly states that Sarno is building off the work of Sigmund Freud. Freud is arguably the most famous psychologist of all time, I'm sure you have heard of him. The phrase “Freudian slip” is used in everyday language.

To make sense of all this TMS stuff, we need a little discuss of the architecture of the brain. Though far from perfect, Freud did lay an amazing foundation for psychology. Freud said that the mind is made up of three components the: Id, Ego, and Superego. Somehow modern language has made the Ego a bad thing. But for Freud, the Ego was the part of the brain that keeps the Id in check. Keeping the Id in check is very important if we hope to exist, even thrive, living in societal structures.

You see, the Id is the child-like part of the brain. It is selfish and dependent. The Id creates the primitive desire to have what it wants when it wants it. The Ego evolved, according to Freud, to keep those desires in check. The reality for humans is that we are, and must be, social creatures. No society of people dominated by the Id would last very long. The Ego keeps the Id subdued.

Briefly, the Superego is concerned with the loftier concepts of being a good person, altruism and the like. The Superego does not play much of a role in Sarno’s book. So I will not spend any time on it.

Freud contended that humans suppress many undesirable thoughts, inclinations, and emotions. The Id is the domain of such thoughts. Sarno comments that the unconscious mind believes it would be too painful for the conscious mind to reflect on such deep, dark territory. So, in an attempt at self-preservation, the mind deflects attention by creating the various forms of TMS. Sarno says it is the Ego which is responsible for the psychosomatic illnesses that have become so prevalent in our society. If we are focused on our back pain, we have little attention left to consider deep, repressed, emotional turmoil. In particular, Sarno points to the role of unconscious rage and anger.

When a patient addresses their physical disorder, with medication and/or surgery, the pain may go away. But an interesting effect, called the symptom imperative, usually kicks in. The symptom imperative occurs when a person addresses a psychosomatic illness with mechanical (as opposed to psychological) techniques. The results of such an intervention is that the mind will simply create another ailment in the body. So, maybe a person has back surgery to deal with a herniated disk. But before long, that person develops Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, or something else.

This is an interesting idea and it might allow you to test Sarno’s theory. If you had chronic pain and treated it with pills or surgery did another, possibly unrelated, symptom pop up? The people I have spoken with say yes!

Many people have a hard time accepting that their problem is psychosomatic. Because to do so means you must accept that you, or at least your thinking, are the cause of the problem. That thoughts and feelings in the brain can elicit a physical reaction is without doubt. Get scared and your heart will probably race or you may feel sick to your stomach. Those are psychosomatic reactions. When we get embarrassed our cheeks turn red. Again, this is a mind-body interaction. And, it is not a conscious decision. It is automatic.

Another reason people are hesitant to keep an open mind, with Sarno, is because it can be hard to accept the premise, that simply acknowledging a phenomenon's existence, is sufficient to fix it. And, that is precisely what Sarno is suggesting.

Sarno says that all it takes, to heal your chronic pain, is to internalize the knowledge he is putting forth. This is where things get really interesting, deep, and complicated. If you were to believe the argument, as it has been constructed, then consider the following. If chronic pain is the mind’s way of keeping you from consciously experiencing and addressing repressed thoughts and feelings, then wouldn't it make sense for the mind to keep you in doubt about a book such as Sarno’s, which endeavors to reveal what the mind is subconsciously doing? Tricky stuff, isn't it? But, I think we all know the person who most needs to hear a message, often strongly resists that very message.

So the solution, according to Sarno, is quite simple. Knowing what our subconscious is up to is sufficient to gain relief from our psychosomatic disorders. All of our negative emotions can cause TMS. A lot of people recognize that their back hurts more when they're stressed out. But, Sarno points to anger as the emotion most responsible for psychosomatic illnesses. If Sarno is correct then we should be able to make a prediction. Here is the prediction. If you know somebody who has fibromyalgia, carpal tunnel, sciatica, or anything like that, chances are that person has a temper or other emotional turmoil. Think about it. Is Sarno correct?

Let me end by being very clear about one thing. The diagnosis, of TMS, is NOT blaming the victim. The patient, in no way, chose to develop the symptoms. As I said earlier (with the scared reaction) the brain generates automatic, unconscious reactions to things. It is definitely not the patient's fault. But, there are things the patient can do to get relief.

What If I'm Wrong?

Have you ever heard the saying, "Invert, always invert."?

To, “Always invert,” is magnificent advice that comes to us from the German mathematician Carl Gustav Jacob Jacobi. The statement was largely popularized by Charlie Munger. If you don't know who Jacobi is, you're not alone. If you don't know who Munger is, he's best friends, and business partners, with Warren Buffett.

This is such an important concept. So often we quickly make up our minds and then hold firm. Everyone has a shortage of time and few of us can sit around and debate things for very long. It really becomes a matter of priorities and necessity.

But life is so wonderfully complex that following common sense can sometimes get us in trouble. This is why Jacobi's advice is a great thing to have in the forefront of our minds. Whenever someone makes a statement, or a claim, I always try to ask myself, “What if the opposite were true.” The person making the claim might be exactly correct. But this little exercise helps me develop perspective.

We've probably all heard it said that great attorneys can argue both sides of a case. And for good reason. It's an excellent example of, “Invert, always invert.” When you can effectively make the other side's argument you are in a much better position to make your own case. When you understand the other person's perspective, you run less of a chance of stumbling on blind spots. I'm a big fan of common sense. The problem is that common sense often contains MANY blind spots.

Lots of us have been influenced by the work of the late Stephen Covey. When dealing with a communication breakdown Covey would often introduce a device he called the Indian Talking Stick. By Indian, Covey was talking about native Americans, and he says they taught the technique to the Founding Fathers of America. Covey called the talking stick, “The most powerful communication idea and technique I have ever found. Ever.”

Let's use a married couple as an example. When a husband and wife have reached a point where they have a hard time communicating, a facilitator might use Covey's stick. It goes like this. The wife is first given the stick. She then beats the husband, with the stick, until he opens up and starts talking with her. Just kidding.

Actually, it goes like this. The person with the stick is the only one permitted to talk. Let's again say it's the wife. In order for the stick to be transferred to the husband, he must first repeat back the meaning of his wife's words, until she is satisfied that he understands her. The process continues with the husband holding on to the stick until he is comfortable that his wife hears him. It's a great device to use. And it contains a paradox of sorts. Covey says most people think the talking stick will take too much time. When, in reality, it will save you tons of time. The paradox here would be, “Slow down to speed up.”

If you understand the nature of paradoxes, you'll understand why it's great advice to always invert. The fact of the matter is, two ideas can be seemingly contradictory and yet both be true! I wrote about paradoxes in this post: This is Fundamental to Your Life

One way to stave off a communication breakdown is to always consider that you may be wrong. (GASP!) I know, that might sound crazy, but it's a good idea. And one way to gain perspective on your thoughts is to invert, always invert. You can do this everywhere. If you like reading books, let me give you couple of examples.

Everybody has probably heard of the popular book Who Moved My Cheese? by Spencer Johnson. But have you ever heard of the book Nobody Moved You Cheese by Ross Shafer? Why not read both books and then try to draw your own conclusions?

A few years ago Tom Friedman wrote a very influential book titled The World is Flat. The book's central premise is quite interesting. But before we jump to the conclusion that Friedman is correct, we might want to read the book Who's Your City by Richard Florida.

I am a big fan of a gentleman named Jim Collins. Jim has written some important books, none the least of which is called Good To Great. A lot of people are on the Collins bandwagon. And very few people have even heard of a book called The Halo Effect, written by Phil Rosenzweig, which directly contradicts Collins' work.

Realistically not too many people are going to read all those books. And that's fine. The point is to reiterate that we should invert, always invert. Shakespeare famously said, "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking making it so." I think that's Shakespeare's perspective on the importance of perspective. And, I believe, the device, "Invert, always invert," is a magnificent way to develop perspective.