Ideas

Category: Interpersonal

  • The Hierarchy of Needs.

    In one of my earlier posts, I discussed the concept of “Flow” and how the key to achieving flow – and ultimately happiness – is being able to live a life filled with involvement and enthusiasm in all areas.

    In retrospect, is this reasonable given that one’s life circumstances aren’t necessarily such where “happiness” or “flow” is the primary focus?  For example, if my house recently burned down, my primary focus will be on finding immediate shelter – not on being “enthusiastic” or “engaged”.  My focus in this situation is survival.

    As you can imagine, there is an ordering of needs that needs to be understood.  Such an ordering – the Hierarchy of Needs – was devised by psychologist Abraham Maslow in his 1943 paper “A Theory of Motivation”.

    “Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is predetermined in order of importance.  It is often depicted as a pyramid consisting of five levels: the lowest level is associated with physiological needs, while the uppermost level is associated with self-actualization needs, particularly those related to identity and purpose.  Deficiency needs must be met first. Once these are met, seeking to satisfy growth needs drives personal growth. The higher needs in this hierarchy only come into focus when the lower needs in the pyramid are met. Once an individual has moved upwards to the next level, needs in the lower level will no longer be prioritized. If a lower set of needs is no longer being met, the individual will temporarily re-prioritize those needs by focusing attention on the unfulfilled needs, but will not permanently regress to the lower level.” – Wikipedia

    The hierarchy – represented in the form of a pyramid – has the following structure:

    – Self-actualization
    – Esteem
    – Love/Belonging
    – Safety
    – Physiological

    As just mentioned, in this hierarchy the higher needs come into focus only when the lower needs are met.  Thus, the house example presented earlier makes sense given the ordering shown here – i.e. I need to be safe before I can really focus on my long-term goals, etc.  The key is to ultimately address “core” needs such that one can realize her/his fullest potential through a “self-actualization” phase.

    This “hierarchy of needs” concept is applicable in other disciplines as well.

    For example, in the book “Universal Principles of Design“, the “Hierarchy of Needs” is one of the 210 design principles described.  The specific use of this hierarchy shows how a given design “…must serve the low-level needs (e.g. it must function), before the higher-level needs, such as creativity, can begin to be addressed”.

    This particular implementation of the hierarchy of needs looks as follows:

    – Creativity
    – Proficiency
    – Usability
    – Reliability
    – Functionality

    Having some experience with the design lifecycle, this makes complete sense.  An iPod that looks nice but breaks after the first two months clearly isn’t a good design.  The authors recommend using this hierarchy as a “report card” of sorts to determine where modifications should be made to existing designs to further improve them.

    Another discipline where this concept is useful is in the project management arena.  Having considerable experience in this space, I was puzzled with the absence of “interpersonal” elements in project management literature given that the team is ultimately the core of any successful project.  To this end, I formulated a hierarchy of needs that incorporates pure project management concepts along with core interpersonal elements.

    This hierarchy looks like the following:

    – Momentum
    – Problem-Solving
    – Constraints
    – Storytelling
    – Constraints
    – Foundation

    The key behind this structure is that it has a very close relationship to Maslow’s original hierarchy of needs.

    The “real” goal of any project is to have a team where each individual is striving to be the best.  If each team member can work within an environment or “operating structure” (the layers listed above) such that they are able to realize their full potential (i.e. she/he is involved and engaged) and reach a state of “flow” (self-actualization), the collective team will ultimately build enough positive momentum to virtually guarantee project success.

    Full details about each of these layers will be published in early July 2009.

    The thing to remember is that this hierarchy concept can be employed in many other disciplines – not just the three described here.  Think about how a “hierarchy of needs” can work within your particular discipline.  What is the “ultimate” objective / goal?  How can you use this hierarchy to measure not only your performance but others that also rely upon this structure?

  • Mental Adaptation.

    In the June 2009 issue of The Atlantic is an interesting article entitled “What Makes us Happy” by Joshua Wolf Shenk.  The article discusses a seventy-two year study by Harvard researchers, and it’s longtime director, George Vaillant, of the lives of 268 Harvard sophomores.  The study intended to find a scientific “solution” or “equation” to a life of happiness.

    After following these individuals for quarter century, the study had identified seven major factors that predict healthy aging, both physically and psychologically.  These factors are education, a stable marriage, not smoking, not abusing alcohol, some exercise and maintaining a healthy weight.  The seventh, and perhaps the most important of them all involve “mature adaptations“.

    Given some of the challenges that I have faced over the past several years, this concept immediately resonated with me.  Let me explain why.

    About two years ago I read a book called “How Full is your Bucket?” where the premise of the book revolves around the metaphor of a “bucket” and “dipper”.  Continuous positive contributions result in a”full” bucket while continuous negative energy (or the absence of positive emotion) eventually results in an “empty” bucket.  The book goes on to provide several key strategies to ensure the “bucket” is always full.

    One of the anecdotes in the text involves American POWs in the Korean War.  Even though physical conditions were adequate, many POWs were mentally “broken” through self-criticism and lack of positive support.  When I first read this, I found the concept difficult to comprehend.  It’s only until recently where I can understand how a lack of positive energy can spell the difference between success and failure – regardless of situation.

    At a certain level, one’s ability to get beyond the current circumstance and to mentally “fabricate” positive thought is a core factor to long-term success.  In essence, how able is one to appropriately respond and adapt to challenges along the way?  This “adaptation” concept is expanded upon in The Atlantic article:

    “This central question is not how much or how little trouble these men met, but rather precisely how – and to what effect – they responded to that trouble.  His main interpretive lens has been the psychoanalytic metaphor of “adaptations”, or unconscious responses to pain, conflict, or uncertainty.  Formalized by Anna Freud on the basis of her father’s work, adaptations (also called “defense mechanisms”) are unconscious thoughts and behaviors that you could say either shape or distort – depending on whether you approve or disapprove – a person’s reality.  Defenses can spell our redemption or ruin.“

    In essence, one’s ability to successfully “adapt” is a key factor in one’s overall quality of life.

    Vaillant goes on to rank these defenses in four categories (from worst to best):

    1. “Psychotic” – e.g. paranoia, hallucination
    2. “Immature” – e.g. passive aggression, projection, fantasy
    3. “Neurotic” – e.g. intellectualization, dissociation and repression
    4. “Mature” – e.g. altruism, humor, anticipation, suppression, sublimation

    While “neurotic” defenses are common in “normal” people, the goal is to continuously strive towards the “mature” defense behaviors.  Interestingly enough, these “mature” behaviors are in themselves “generators” of positive energy.  While it is admirable to try to employ all of these sub-behaviors, it may be beneficial to focus on one or two initially.

    For example, sublimation is good one to start with.  The underlying concept behind sublimation is “energy flow”.  Your mind creates energy (positive and negative) and this energy needs to be directed away from destructive acts and into something that is creatively acceptable.  In fact, this blog is a good example of sublimation – channeling what could be negative energy into something that is constructive and creatively effective.

    The lesson in all of this is awareness.  While the six factors described earlier are relatively “easy” to attain for most, I believe focusing intently on the “defense mechanisms” or “adaptations” is at the core to ensuring a positive and healthy life experience regardless of the trouble encountered along the way.  In the POW example described earlier, the key to survival was the single belief that things would eventually be better – the other factors didn’t really matter.

    As important as these “adaptations” are, in an interview in the March 2008 newsletter to the Grant Study subjects, Vaillant was asked, “What have you learned from the Grant Study men?”  Vaillant’s response: “That the only thing that matters in life are your relationships to other people.”

  • The Mental Prison.

    One of the interesting aspects of my personality is that my mind is able to think of different aspects to a given situation or problem with the intent to find the best “solution” or path.  If I am not aware of an immediate solution, I will naturally gravitate towards material to find alternative solutions and additional “dimensions” to that particular challenge.

    While this technique works well in the professional arena, it can introduce numerous challenges in an interpersonal one.  Thinking about a particular challenge or problem in this way can turn one’s life into a “mental prison” from which she/he may find it impossible to escape.

    A natural response to this dilemma is “How can one escape?”  Ironically enough, I think finding the answer should first start with an understanding of the problem.  That would naturally lead us to understanding the concepts of overthinking or overanalyzing.  I actually think we should start with the basic concept of thought.

    You may be familiar with the phrase “I think, therefore I am” by René Descartes.  This phrase basically says that if you have any doubt that you exist, the simple fact that you are doubting this possibility means that you do indeed exist because there is an “I” who is doing the thinking.

    So, at the “root” of all thought is yourself.  Your thoughts then start branching out from that single node.  One thought leads into another and then another, with interconnections building between the various nodes.  This, of course, is natural and is how normal learning occurs; you start with a fundamental concept and then you connect it with others to increase your skills.

    If you think about a given topic long enough, a direct connection from the root node (“I”) will start to develop directly to that thought.  The more you think about “it”, the stronger that connection becomes and eventually that thought becomes associated with “you”.  The question then becomes “Are these connections referencing positive thoughts or negative ones?”  That determination is a quick way to identify who you are at that point in time.

    Time is also a key element in this equation.  How long you think about a particular subject directly reinforces the linkage between “you” and that thought – the greater the duration and/or frequency, the stronger the linkage.

    The depth of the thought is another key component.  “Depth” in this context refers to the degree of “links” from the base thought to the “target”.  The greater the depth, the greater the reinforcement.  Again, this measure of “thought depth” can be positive or negative.

    For example, let’s say that you receive critical feedback at work for something that you thought would be accepted as “positive”.  The fact that these events are normally direct opposites (i.e. doing the right thing does not always lead to a positive outcome) can result in some degree of additional thought (due to dissonance).  The degree of the thought can vary depending upon the person and the situation at hand.  One path could result in a very shallow depth of thought:

    1: Myself > 2: Feedback received > 3: Initial dissonance > 4: Reflection > 5: Accept disconnect > 6: Advance normally.

    Another path with a greater depth of thought could result in significantly more “reflection”, a resistance to the original dissonance, and a “web” of thoughts that ultimately center back on the root thought node (“I”).  It’s not surprising that thoughts with greater depth of thought can ultimately “entangle” the person having these thoughts.

    These concepts ultimately represent what I call the “mental prison”.  When the thoughts are associated positive elements, the prison becomes a place of enjoyment – when the thoughts are negative, it’s desirable to find an immediate exit.

    Having a basic understanding of the mechanics behind overthinking or overanalyzing is the first step to cease doing so.  Gain an understanding of what you are thinking about, and identify whether the topics are positive or negative.  Start introducing positive thoughts immediately.  If the amount of time you’ve spent thinking about a given topic is significant, “start the clock” on a different thought stream and begin reinforcing that pathway.  If the thought pathway is “deep”, become conscious of the pathway and “self-correct” back to the root thought – yourself.  Reinforce the positive to combat and eliminate the negative.

  • PsG3 Regen: “The Living Rulebook”

    A perfect example of the “interconnectedness of things” (i.e. the fundamental principle behind this blog) is the concept of a “living rulebook”.

    In an earlier post, I spent some time understanding the rules behind the game “Twilight Struggle”.  As I went through this exercise, I started to think about how the concept of a “rulebook” could apply to my own life.  Could I have my own “rulebook”?

    REGEN introduces the “living rulebook” concept which is a set of “rules” that will help guide my life in a better direction – i.e. one that is more aligned with my core values and beliefs.

    Here are the initial set of rules that I need to pay close attention to: (in no particular order)

    – Be thankful with what you have.
    – Be conscious and aware.
    – Be comfortable with your decisions and eliminate justification.
    – Eliminate / reduce dissonance.
    – Know that you are smart enough to continuously reinvent yourself.
    – Don’t be afraid of change and the unknown.
    – If you feel it’s the right thing to do, then do it.
    – You could be gone tomorrow – be happy now.
    – Keeping moving forward at all costs.
    – If you aren’t adding value, then find a way to do so.
    – Be present and be known.
    – If you don’t want to do something, don’t.
    – Feel and be open to “pain” to allow for greater growth.
    – Problems that seem significant now usually aren’t over the long-term.
    – Life doesn’t have to become more difficult – it can be easier and more fulfilling.
    – Depression lasts only as long as you allow it.
    – Solve the problem.
    – Don’t be afraid of failure.
    – Start something that you are afraid of starting.
    – Take calculated risks often.
    – Ask permission later.
    – You may not be good at something now, but you will be if you keep trying.
    – Program your mind in a positive direction.

    This “rulebook” also establishes five high-level directional messages:

    1. Keep Moving Forward
    2. Live in the Now
    3. Make Conscious Decisions
    4. Be Open
    5. Be Strong
    6. Think Positively

    In day-to-day life, it’s sometimes easy to forget about the things that are most important to guide one’s life.  This “living rulebook” is one technique that I think will help me maintain perspective and enable better decision-making in the short and long-term.

  • PsG3 Regen: “Advancement Subsystems”

    By defining PLANESCAPE as a “system”, it seems natural to think of it’s underlying components as “subsystems”.

    Subsystems are a way to “logically encapsulate” core themes essential for growth.  By aligning subsystems with my core value system, I think the Planescape “superstructure” can remain somewhat constant while still allowing for change / growth.

    Regen introduces the following four (advancement) subsystems:

    1. Mental
    2. Creation
    3. Bionic
    4. Core

    The “mental” subsystem exists to further accelerate development and expansion of the mind.  This aligns with my fifth and sixth values – “Learning” and “Challenge”.  The concept of brain plasticity is one of the main drivers behind this subsystem

    The “creation” subsystem complements the mental subsystem in that it focuses exclusively on the creative (right) side of the brain.  This aligns with my eighth value “Creativity”.  While this encapsulates all of my traditional creative pursuits – industrial design, illustration, photography, etc. – it is actually much more than this.  It’s ultimately about idea generation.

    The “bionic” subsystem focuses on improving the physical component (i.e. my physical self).  Bionic aligns with my third value – “Health and Wellness”.  Bionic is a new mindset and strategy that will take me into the next dimension of physical performance.

    The “core” subsystem serves as the “foundation” to the other subsystems – it’s the engine that runs everything else.  Because of this, it ultimately aligns with the entire core value set.  All aspects of interpersonal relationships – building and strengthening – are at the heart of this subsystem.

    The introduction of the “subsystem” will ultimately streamline planning efforts and will enable me to focus on the underlying activities.  This will, in turn, allow for more rapid growth and development in all areas.

  • PLANESCAPE Generation 3: “Regeneration”

    As mentioned briefly in the BIONIC post, I have been working fairly consistently on defining the next generation of PLANESCAPE, which I call “Regen”.  Over the next several posts, I will share the details behind this new approach as well as its multiple “advancement subsystems”.  I believe this new framework will allow even more intellectual and interpersonal growth over the coming years, so I am excited to share this here!

    Q: What is Regeneration (or “Regen”)?

    “Regen” is the third major release of the Planescape advancement framework.  It is an evolution based upon personal and professional experiences over the past 3-4 years, extensive research and intense self-analysis.

    Q: What was the catalyst for Regen?

    It is difficult to pinpoint “one” main driver.

    At some point in 2008 I came to the realization I was not taking care of myself.  Unfortunately, by the time I realized this, my overall self-confidence and self-esteem were at an all-time low.  Recognizing this, I took steps to read more about the challenges I was facing and what I could do to better understand who I was, how to manage my thoughts, and advance to the next level of “life”.

    I also came to a realization that I didn’t have a clear sense of my values.  In fact, up until this point, I really had not taken the time to identify values that were ultimately important to me.

    Finally, I think came to the conclusion that things in my life were not “working” and I needed to make significant changes to make things better.

    Q: How does Regen differ from previous Planescape “releases”?

    When I first came up with the idea for Planescape, there was no real concept of an advancement “framework”.  Or if there was, the framework was quite simple – it consisted of dividing my life into short-term “phases”.  Each phase served as an entity for identifying and tracking goals for a 3-6 month time period.  It was a way for me to document my history and to learn from that history.  I call this “Version 1.0”.

    Version 1.5 introduced the “Plane” concept.  At this point, I realized that the phases seemed to exhibit a natural “evolution” all on their own.  I wanted some way to capture this evolution while at the same time identify a long-term vision and align these phases within that vision.

    Version 2.0 saw the introduction of numerous “foundational” elements.  It was at this time where I realized that having short and long-term goals was not enough to be successful.  In this version, I introduced “containers” for a formal self-esteem framework, standards and values, principles and “modules” for dealing with crises and even death.  This version also started to explictly define “areas of concentration” – i.e. what were the key things that interested me and that I wanted to pursue?

    Version 3.0 (“Regen”) takes many of the ideas first explored in Version 2.0 and takes everything to the next level of refinement.  The main elements contained in this version include advancement “subsystems”, a “living rulebook” and value / strength / principle “inventories”.

  • The Power of Cognitive Dissonance.

    One of the design principles conveyed in “The Universal Principles of Design” is cognitive dissonance.  I first stumbled upon this concept when reading “Mistakes Were Made – Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts” and find it extremely interesting.

    What is cognitive dissonance anyway?

    “Cognitive dissonance is the state of mental discomfort that occurs when a person’s attitudes, thoughts, or beliefs (i.e., cognitions) conflict.  If two cognitions agree with one another, there is consonance, and a state of comfort exists.  If two cognitions disagree with one another, there is dissonance, and a state of discomfort exists.” (from the Universal text)

    One of the interesting examples conveyed in the text is the success behind the AOL “free hours” marketing campaign.  Do you remember when just about everyone in the world received one of these free CD-ROMs?  All you had to do was take the time to sign-up using the automated process, and you were granted free access for a limited time period.  It is possible that you may have become a subscriber – albeit temporarily.

    What’s interesting is once the free period draws to a close, people are less likely to cancel the service because of the time investment setting up their account.  They are more inclined to have positive feelings with the service to reduce the cognitive dissonance they experience when the trial ends.  This results in paid subscriptions.

    While the time investment is a critical factor here, of equal (or greater) importance is the incentive.  The incentive is the free trial period.

    According to the authors, “When incentives for an unpleasant task are small, they reduce dissonance by changing the dissonant cognition – “i.e. it is okay to perform this task because I like it”.  When incentives for an unpleasant task are large, people reduce dissonance by adding a consonant cognition – e.g. “it is okay to perform this task because I am paid well”.”

    In the case of AOL, the company wanted customers to feel positively about the service – thus, providing a small incentive.

    From an advertising and marketing perspective, it is clear that cognitive dissonance is a very powerful weapon.  If you start with dissonant cognitions and then provide immediate paths to alleviate the dissonance, you will have greater success in influencing the potential customer.

    The influence of cognitive dissonance goes beyond advertising and marketing – it can also be found in crime investigations.

    When it comes to identifying a suspect, detectives are likely (not always) to come to their own conclusions about what happened, and then fit the evidence to support that conclusion.  They will also ignore any evidence that contradicts it.  In extreme cases, officers have crossed the line from legal to illegal actions to reduce dissonance and end up convicting innocent people.  Jurors can fall into a similar “trap”.  In fact, their beliefs become stronger the sooner they reach their own conclusion about what happened.

    What’s the lesson here?

    For one, being aware of cognitive dissonance is the first step towards a path of better decision making. If you find yourself heading down a path of “self-justification”, your mind is trying to correct your feelings of cognitive dissonance in any way that it can.  You can pause to understand these feelings and choose to take a more constructive approach.  You can also try to identify your feelings of dissonance and try to separate them.  You may discover that it is possible to experience “both” feelings by simply understanding each independent of the other.

  • The Cafeteria.

    Many years ago, a teacher shared a powerful concept with the class that has real-world meaning even today.

    The story goes like this: In a high-school cafeteria, you will almost always see teachers or assistants responsible for “monitoring” student activity (behavior, actions, etc.).  Students are well aware of this, and at a subconscious level they assume they “need” this level of supervision because (apparently) they are not mature enough to “monitor” themselves.  In turn, behavioral problems are almost certain to occur in this environment.

    If you remove the monitors from the cafeteria (or playground, etc.), the students’ maturity level automatically rises and they start to “police” themselves and those around them.  The number of behavior-related problems is less.

    I believe this story has applicability to the workplace.

    How much trust you place in reports and co-workers can make a world of difference in the working relationship and the end deliverable / result.  If you start off by placing little trust in the relationship and subsequently give them little responsibility (or freedom to self-direct), they in turn will rely more heavily upon your direction and their overall performance will be limited.

    In contrast, by placing complete trust in the individual and his/her abilities, the working relationship will grow considerably in a very short period of time.  The individual will have greater confidence from the experience and this confidence will build upon itself, resulting in a self-fulfilling prophecy of “success” for all involved.

    Of course, there are exceptions to both the classroom and the workplace.  Some students are simply not mature enough to “police” themselves, and some workers do not have the knowledge or experience to operate independently.

    However, as a general guideline I believe it’s beneficial to keep this general principle in mind not only in the workplace, but in personal relationships as well.

  • My personal leadership philosophy

    My personal leadership philosophy focuses on empowerment and setting people up for success.

    Empowerment means that a person has specific responsibility over a particular area or effort / project, and that everyone has a clear understanding of her/his role.  This latter piece plays a significant role in setting them up for success.

    In contrast, leveraging people to simply “help out” with a particular task is ill-suited for true long-term growth.  I encourage people to not just “help out”, but to “take ownership” over a specific deliverable and ensure that all aspects of that deliverable are analyzed and managed accordingly.

    (The key precursor to doing this is to analyze the problem at a high-level and partition accordingly.  Utilizing a “divide and conquer” strategy is key.)

    Another aspect to this leadership philosophy is to leverage an individuals strengths AND interests.  For example, if an associate excels at requirements analysis but loathes the activity, it’s not going to be in either party’s interest to put that person in that particular role.  You might be empowering them, but you are not setting them up for success.

    From a managerial perspective, I focus more heavily on “foundational” elements before empowering associates to take on new tasks / assignments.  One of these foundational elements focuses on values.  What an associate values will play a significant role in helping them choose one direction over another.

    For example, if an associate values “harmonious relationships” over “advancement”, it’s likely that the associate will be happier in a group with a good team dynamic than vs. being promoted within a team  lacking such a dynamic.

    Once a person’s value assessment is complete (there should be 10 core values), a formal “talent builder” and “skills assessment” should be next on the agenda.  This will help the associate refine their current tasks to align with their interests, and it can also help guide the associate towards a new role if there is existing misalignment.

    It’s only after these two steps where both short-term and long-term plans can be formulated.  Once this is performed, then the leadership principles discussed earlier can be applied.

  • Why values are a key component for success.

    Earlier this year, I came to a realization that I didn’t have a clear sense of where I was heading – both on a professional and perhaps personal level. After much research and thought, I realized that I did not have a solid understanding of my values, and because of this, my ability to make clear decisions about my future was limited.

    While I do not recall the exact source, I found the following excerpt to be very enlightening:

    “Research shows that high performance and high productivity are frequently linked to people who work in concert with their values. Some people find that the older they become the harder it is to work or to live when they are out of harmony with their values. Choosing organizations and positions in sync with your values assures both productivity and happiness. Being out of sync can result in sickness, depression, anger, and a sense of disappointment or discontentedness.”

    Knowing your values makes it easier to formulate career and development choices. It also facilitates decision-making outside the workplace.

    Because there are numerous values from which to choose (here’s a good starting list: http://www.gurusoftware.com/GuruNet/Personal/Topics/Values.htm), it’s important that one take considerable time to narrow down this list into a reasonable “top ten” (or five). One suggestion is that you list all available values and then continuously refine the list by removing ones you don’t feel are “core” to your being.

    Once you have the list at a reasonable number, you can then ask yourself – if I could only choose one value, would this be it? By using this type of comparison scheme, you can finalize your “core” values.

    If you take the time to pay attention to your values and what’s ultimately important to you, you will find that success is inevitable and you will gain greater enjoyment on the journey.