A Personal Time Choice
Our personal experiences with time often force us to draw sets of conclusions which seem to contradict each other. They set up a paradox in which it is difficult to see how both conclusions can be true. Yet, on closer examination, the conclusions often are both correct. For example, no one has enough time, yet everyone has all there is.
Often, one of the statements in a paradox is based on conventional wisdom, while the other statement challenges that wisdom by pointing out a deeper truth. No one has enough time is the conventional observation, while Everyone has all there is points out a deeper truth. Understanding this paradox is an important first step in the challenge of learning to manage our time and ourselves.
Take a moment and consider the following paradoxes of time and explain the effect each one has on your life.
1. Time cannot be managed. We can only manage ourselves. Is time the problem, or are we?
2. Those who do not take the time to do something right must make the time to do it over. Should we do it right the first time?
3. Doing a job right is efficient. Doing the right job right is effective. If a task is the wrong one, it does not matter whether it is done right or wrong. If it is the right task, it matters a great deal.
4. The more hours that people work, the more time they assume they have to finish. The more hours people work, the more fatigued they become – so they slow down. Long hours feed on themselves, making everything take longer.
It has been established that controlling our lives means controlling our time, and that controlling our time means controlling the events in our lives. Why, then, do most of us have so much trouble accomplishing the things that mean the most to us in the long term? Why do we never seem to get around to those things that really matter? There are several possible answers. One is that we have unwittingly bought into two fallacies about time that prevent us from dealing effectively with the events in our lives.
The first fallacy is that we think we are going to have more time at some unspecified future date than we do now. Well, I will do that next week, or next month, or next year, or when the children are grown, or when I retire. Then I will have more time. The second fallacy is that we think we can somehow save time. The fact is, each of us have all the time there is. We all are given exactly 24 hours every day – 86,400 seconds each day. No more, no less, and none of us can save any of them to use at a later date.
Each of us has exactly as much time as the most successful people in the world. If we want to achieve the same high levels of success as these winners, we must treat our own time as a precious resource to invest for maximum return.
Time is valuable capital. If we squander it, we will not develop our abilities, take advantage of opportunities, or carry out our commitments. What is more, we certainly will not make the most of our life. An astonishing number of people, who carefully manage all of their other resources, are frustrated because time continues to slip through their fingers. What is really slipping away are their lives.
What each of us chooses to do with our time makes our life. When we make the commitment to choose what we do with our time, we take control of our life. Effective people do not just do things differently – they do different things! Their actions reflect a fundamental shift in thinking – that sometimes doing less result in more of the right things getting done. They deliberately manage their choices! As Stephen Covey has so eloquently said:
“Rather than focusing on things and time,
focus on preserving and enhancing relationships
and on accomplishing results.”
Pj Germain
http://chocolate.portal-source.com/
http://cholesterol.portal-source.com/
http://chronicfatigue.portal-resources.com/
Greatness vs. Goodness: A “Mind-Shift” for Visionary Leaders
Today’s visionary leaders who are making this shift in thinking, from “goodness” to “greatness” are inspiring themselves, their team and even their adversaries to greatness. These visionaries have the power to create a world that works for all of us, and they are who the world needs now.
Sadly many well-intentioned leaders, teachers and parents fail to grasp this distinction, and that failure costs them more than they know. Slowly they lose their power to effect real, lasting change in themselves, in others and in the world around them.
First grasping this distinction between goodness and greatness, and then making “the shift in one’s thoughts, words and actions elevates and expands one’s consciousness to a visionary level; thus giving one the power to effect lasting change.
ORIENTATION
So what’s the difference between goodness and greatness? First let’s make suggest some differences, and then we’ll look at an example.
Approach To Resolving Conflict With Others
- Goodness: The quality of compromising your highest inner guidance, especially when it conflicts with the prevailing moral standards or societal norms.
- Greatness: The quality of acting on your highest inner guidance, even when it conflicts with the prevailing moral standards or societal norms.
Approach To Resolving Conflict With Self
- Goodness: Compromising. The quality of compromising one’s higher values in the face of fear.
- Greatness: Standing. The quality of standing for one’s higher values in the face of fear.
Guidance Orientation
- Goodness: External. Value the esteem of others OVER esteem of self.
- Greatness: Internal. Value the esteem of self OVER esteem of others.
Inner Guidance Model
- Goodness: Position-based. Self = position = me.
- Greatness: Stand-based. Self = stand = i.
I-Orientation
- Goodness: Protect me (self as position) and risk i (self as stand) in reaction to fear.
- Greatness: Stand for i (self as stand) and risk me (self as position) in the face of any fear.
EXAMPLE:
Jon and Steve have just been hired as executives of ACME Co. They quickly learn that in their new company being a good executive means following the dictates of the CEO. Both Jon and Steve are hard workers who diligently carry out the orders of the boss. Jon, however is a graduate of an elite institution that included extensive character training. He’s been taught what it means to be a good leader and a good follower.
Both soon hear a vague rumor that their new boss and others are likely cooking the books and stealing from the shareholders. Neither one knows for sure, but they start to sense that it might very well be true. Jon thinks about prying, but would rather not know. If he doesn’t know, how can he possibly get in trouble? And questioning could get him fired. So Jon continues to work as usual, never asking too many questions, and dutifully carrying out his responsibilities.
When the CEO gets busted four months later, loyal Jon adamantly defends the character of his boss, confidently telling everyone that he never knew of any improprieties. He was right, and felt justified. He had stayed within the limits of the law, and within the limits of reasonable business ethics. On top of that, he knew inside that he was a good person and a good executive.
Steve, on the other hand, upon hearing the rumors, inquired into the rumor. Upon obtaining some more facts, he thought there was a good chance that his boss might be doing something unethical and illegal. He thought about confronting his boss, and saw that it might very well lead to his getting fired, or at least being ostracized and passed over for promotion. He felt fear, a lot of fear. He took a stand and faced his fear the next morning, as he confronted his boss. In their meeting it would have been easy for Steve to turn away after his boss eloquently explained his actions, but Steve persisted. He kept facing his fear, and asking the questions that needed to be asked. He was fired the next week for “poor performance.”
A KEY POINT:
There’s a huge yet subtle difference between goodness and greatness. We’re going to dive deep into discovering the power, the skill and the subtleties of greatness inside this course.
VISIONARY ADVANTAGE:
On paper, Jon looks like a good executive. Over the years he has kept his jobs longer and has proven to be a “good,” loyal team player. Yet with every choice to compromise his conscience in order to avoid fear and take the easy path to “success,” he loses power. He loses his power to trust himself, he loses the ability to hear the warnings of conscience and while he may win friends, he loses their trust in his leadership.
But it goes deeper than this. It doesn’t matter how much Jon tries to be a good executive, or become “successful.” The less he faces his fear, the less he can see the kind of vision that calls himself and others to greatness.
Steve on the other hand, builds his power with every choice to face his fear. With every choice, his vision, self trust and grip of reality strengthens. He is quickly becoming the kind of leader any team trusts implicitly. Steve lives “greatness.”
VISIONARY DYNAMIC:
The more you stand and face your fear, the more powerful your vision grows.
VISIONARY CHALLENGE:
What can you face in your life today that you’ve been avoiding? What feelings would you have to face to confront this issue or person head on? What would be worth standing for?
Journal about this until you are inspired to take that stand. Then take it, and journal about your experience. The more you see yourself taking stands like this, the more you see what?
VISIONARY TRAINING:
Anyone can muster the courage to face a tough situation now and again. It’s another thing to have facing be a way of life. What would it be like to not just live courageously, but to always be facing, always standing?
How can you take a stand such that you feel called from deep within? Where can you go to get conditioning in facing and standing–not from a place of sheer guts–but from a deep inner feeling of being called to be “the one?”
Michael Skye, founder and CEO of VisionForce.com, works with a new breed of impassioned change agents around the world, who are giving their lives to stand for all of humanity. The Visionary Mind Shifts are available free at http://www.VisionForce.com/course
Position vs Stand: A “Mind Shift” for Visionary Leaders
Today’s visionary leaders who are making this shift in thinking, from a “position” to a “stand” are inspiring themselves, their team and even their adversaries to greatness. These visionaries have the power to create a world that works for all of us.
Most of the brightest leaders, entrepreneurs and change agents still fail to grasp this distinction. Many try to stand for a better world while operating from a righteous or egotistical position, and thus are quite powerless to effect lasting change. Real power comes from a stand, not a position.
First grasping this distinction and then making “the shift” elevates and expands one’s thinking or consciousness to a visionary level.
So what’s the difference between a position and a stand?
Generally, a position is a place to defend or attack from, an external fight against; whereas a stand is a foundation to build on or create from, an internal fight for.
On a psychological level, a position is a defensive reaction to protect oneself from negative judgment (it usually occurs after a compromise of one’s values).
A stand, on the other hand, is an action of honoring one’s values in the face of inner opposition (fear, doubt, etc.).
AN EXAMPLE:
Tim is an entrepreneur who has a dispute with Sam, General Manager of another company. Tim thinks he should receive a credit, because Sam’s company did not deliver the kind of service they had promised.
Picking up the phone to make a phone call to the GM was a scary proposition for Tim. Sam had already denied his first request for a discount, and reacted as if Tim was being cheap and unfair.
Tim wanted to stand for what he thought was right, and he didn’t want the conversation to turn ugly, but he was scared… and so he prepared for the confrontation, as most anyone would do by solidifying his position.
Tim solidified his position by forming his conclusions, judgments and solutions.
Conclusion: Sam’s service was not delivered as expected; therefore Tim does not owe the amount in the contract.
Judgment: It was unfair of Sam to not talk this through amicably with Tim. Sam is unethical, unfair and greedy.
Solution: Sam should credit Tim’s company $1,000. Anything less is unfair.
Armed with his position, Tim picked up the phone and called Sam. Although Tim was trying to sound nice and businesslike, Sam instantly picked up the defensive/aggressive tone in his voice.
Sam’s mind immediately formed its own position. He thought of all he’d done for Tim over the years. How could he be so ungrateful and cheap? You can bend over backward for a guy only so much. No more discounts or credits.
“Well you can call my lawyer then, Sam, because I’m not paying another dime until you credit me $1,000.”
“If that’s the way you want it, Tim. You’ll be hearing from my lawyer.” Click. Sam had hung up the phone.
“At least I didn’t let that guy overcharge us again,” Tim explained to his secretary. A guy’s got to take a stand once in a while. Otherwise people will walk all over you.
Thousands of dollars in lawyer bills later, Sam and Tim finally settled out of court for a $500 credit. To this day, their friendship is dead, they are both resentful, and their positions are stronger than ever.
Every time they reflect honestly on how they resolved the conflict, they feel guilt… and then their mind turns back to its position, and they feel a little more comfortable.
A KEY POINT:
We live in a Position world. It’s how we think, how we operate, how we resolve conflict. And it works miserably. Our next evolution as human beings is to learn to live from a stand.
VISIONARY ADVANTAGE:
A visionary operates in such a way that she inspires herself, her team and even her adversaries to greatness. She calls people to rise above their positions and align on shared values.
She can see through nearly any conflict, and has the confidence of a brazen, unstoppable entrepreneur. Hers is not a foolish arrogance or the brute force of will, but vision. The kind of vision that is uncommon to most of us.
She lives from a stand, and is called forward by the resulting vision to keep standing. She inspires not only herself, but the world around her to greatness.
VISIONARY DYNAMIC:
The more you come from a stand, the more even your adversaries are inspired by you. Rather than react to your position with their own position, they are inspired to stand as well.
VISIONARY CHALLENGE:
What is your position about a certain conflict in your life? Who is right and wrong, and why?
How is your position causing the continued building of your adversary’s position?
What might happen if you transformed your position into a stand?
Michael Skye, founder and CEO of VisionForce.com, works with a new breed of impassioned change agents around the world, who are giving their lives to stand for all of humanity. The Visionary Mind Shifts are available free at http://www.VisionForce.com/course
Positionary vs. Visionary: A “Mind Shift” for Leaders and Change Agents
Today’s visionary leaders who are making this shift in thinking, from “positionary” to “visionary” are inspiring themselves, their team and even their adversaries to greatness. These visionaries have the power to create a world that works for all of us, and they are whom the world needs now.
Sadly many well-intentioned leaders and change agents fail to grasp this distinction, and that failure costs them more than they know. Slowly they lose their power to effect real, lasting change in themselves, in others and in the world around them.
First grasping this distinction between being a positionary and being a visionary, and then making “the shift” in one’s thoughts, words and actions elevates and expands one’s consciousness to a visionary level; thus giving one the power to effect lasting change.
ORIENTATION
Most people who take a stand only do it once they’ve built a pretty solid position to hide behind. They make the other side out to be evil, and then it’s easier to stand. These are the old school revolutionaries. Their hearts may often be in the right place, but they have little power to inspire lasting change. The new revolutionaries know that the real power lies in being a visionary. Learn the difference here.
Revolutionary – One who takes a stand in the face of the powers that be or the status quo.
Positionary – A revolutionary who tries to make a difference from a position.
Visionary – A revolutionary who sees the kind of vision that calls one’s self, one’s team and one’s adversaries to greatness.
AN EXAMPLE:
Jodi is passionate about the environment. She works for a green energy business, drives a gas-electric hybrid and recently joined a local environmental activist organization.
She attends her first meeting, passionate about the local debate about the controversy between big money commercial real estate developers and green activists who want to save the aquifer that they propose to build on.
She’s sure that she can get others in the community to see the threat that the developers pose to the environment, and can get them to support the cause. She’s also hopeful that the developers themselves might rethink their plans to build atop the aquifer.
At her first meeting, she proposes that the other activists join her in going to visit the developers in person and talk to them about shared values and creating a win-win solution… and everyone laughs. “Silly girl,” someone says, “These are capitalists! All they value is greed and destroying the environment. Those are their only values!”
Everyone joins in the laughter; some even roll their eyes at her idealistic naivety. Jodi fakes a smile, not sure what to think. But she knows she wants these people to like her. She feels conflicted. She really thinks that something could be resolved by communicating with the other side.
She makes some phone calls to the “Capitalist Pigs” and even goes to their offices in person. She wants to be the one to make a difference. But as soon as the developers learn what organization she’s with, they turn cold. They are short with her, and don’t seem to take her seriously.
This experience is tough for Jodi. Maybe those guys are just cold-hearted snakes. A few years past and before you know it, Jodi is talking like everyone else. She’s angry. She’s cynical. The other side just won’t change. And the system works against people like her.
A young woman, who took a stand and began to see a vision for real progress, has begun the typical devolution into a Positionary. She sees the new bright-eyed activists joining the organization, and laughs at their naivety. “They just don’t get it,” she thinks. She’s sad. She’s cynical… but at least she’s on the “right” side. At least she cares.
Then one day, a young activist stands up in the middle of a meeting, and proposes they change their approach. There is laughter and eye rolling. But this doesn’t stop the young woman. She is passionate, committed. She turns and looks at the people who are laughing and calls out to them. She’s shaking, she’s vulnerable, she’s so deeply committed to the cause… that everyone can’t help but listen.
“I can’t begin to know what it’s like to give your life to this cause, and to meet with so much disappointment and rejection. You guys are my heroes though. You’re still fighting. For years and years, you’ve been the only ones willing to take a stand for this beautiful city. You haven’t quit. You’re still here.
“Maybe the other side really can’t be talked to. Maybe they’ll laugh at us once again, mock us, and go right on with their plans. But I joined this organization, because I wanted to be surrounded by heroes, people who are unwilling to sit idly by and let things keep going downhill. We can’t afford to grow cynical. We can’t afford to believe that the other side will never change.”
This nameless young woman goes on. There’s something about her raw courage and authenticity that quiets the room, and has even the most cynical of the group beginning to hope again. Suddenly Jodi’s eyes are tearing up. She remembers a day when she still believed. What has happened to her?
A KEY POINT:
Positionaries are powerless to call themselves, their team or their adversaries to greatness. Visionaries, on the other hand, see the kind of vision that call themselves, their team and even their adversaries to greatness.
Yet even our heroes are usually models of being positionaries, rather than visionaries. If even our heroes can’t keep standing for everyone, how can we?
The positionary path is more comfortable, yet is a sure path to slow death. It’s a path paved by compromise. And compromise kills the human spirit.
VISIONARY ADVANTAGE:
Visionaries, whether “successful” in their cause or not, have the advantage of knowing deep inside that they are facing, standing and walking forward. The fulfillment they feel can’t be replaced by righteous judgments. Their power is authentic. They live true to their values and their vision. They can call the world around them to greatness.
VISIONARY CHALLENGE:
What have you become cynical about? Your marriage? The public school system? Politics? Life itself? What conclusions and judgments have you formed about the “other side” or people in general? These conclusions and judgments are part of your position. See how they let you off the hook from being “the one?”
What feelings would you have to risk or face in order to believe once again? What would be worth standing for? The more you see yourself standing for that, the more you see what?
Michael Skye, founder and CEO of VisionForce.com, works with a new breed of impassioned change agents around the world, who are giving their lives to stand for all of humanity. The Visionary Mind Shifts are available free at http://www.VisionForce.com/course.
Small Business Organizational Management
When we talk about organizational management we are talking about how the leadership is organized to allow the company to function effectively and efficiently. You have heard it before: “I’m the President of the company because this business was my idea.” “I’m the vice-President because I was the President’s best man at his wedding”, etc, etc.
Believe it or not, many small businesses start out this way, but they find it difficult to grow successfully. Don’t misunderstand, larger businesses also promote from within. It’s called nepotism and I have seen it in many small businesses and it exists in corporate America as well.
Business leaders should base the structure of their organization on qualifications and functionality of the position as it relates to the business.
There are many ways to determine how a company should be organized, but we take a unique approach in creating an organization by analyzing the ‘functional’ aspect of running the business. It’s like what computer programmers use when mapping the needs of a computer network.
Start out with a blank sheet of paper and determine a starting point, calling it “A”. Place it at one end of the paper. Next, determine an ending point and call it “Z”. Place “Z” at the other end of the paper. In business “A” equals raw materials, and “Z” equals taking the revenue collected for “A” to the bank.
In other words, ‘what does it take to make money?’ We are trying to complete the alphabet by determining the next letter that will get us to “Z” from “A”.
Some businesses may not be large enough to get to “Z” and some businesses will require more functionality and require two or three alphabets. What we want to accomplish is a review of business functions that will generate cash and identify those functions in a path format.
Once we have determined the function, we can look at who we will need to facilitate that particular function, the amount of time in a day the function requires for resolution, and the functional value to our business.
When we have viewed a business this way, we may actually see redundancies and functions that need attention.
For example, let’s say that for us to generate cash we need to get sales reps into the field. We know, though, that sales reps can be more productive if they are not cold calling. So, we might consider telemarketing.
We think about telemarketing from our offices, and we determine that by mapping the sales cycle, we need three telemarketers and each should produce a particular number of warm leads.
By mapping the sales function, we can determine the number of telephone calls required to generate one warm lead. Mapping functions also creates job descriptions and criteria for each position.
So, if we hire a telemarketer, we know that we want this person to make 100 telephone calls in eight hours, of those 100 telephone calls we want to generate 5 warm leads per day. Our sales reps will then be asked to close at least two warm leads a day.
We can take this information and determine other criteria for each employee and the business itself. Now we are looking at 500 telephone calls per week per telemarketer, which should produce 10 new sales a week. Multiply that number by the sales price, remove labor burden and other expenses, and you’ve got yourself a sales model. This is not, however, what you should be doing with your sales. It is just an example.
Your business is unique, and I’m trying to get you to think about the functions your business requires being successful.
By this example, we can also determine that maybe we need one sales manager, three telemarketers, and two sales representatives. The team will be effective based on the information provided to them by management through meetings and sales goals reports.
This team will also be effective based on the information the team provides to management, such as the competitive nature of the industry in the field, success stories, and customer needs.
I call this “pushback”. Some larger businesses frown on this procedure but I believe it to be the best market research available.
We need to analyze each of those steps to determine what it takes, to produce the materials and sell the product. We should not look at our business and determine that we need another sales representative because our current sales representatives are generating enough sales revenues that we can simply afford another sales representative.
Instead, we need to analyze how the current sales representatives are going about their day, how effective they are, and how effective they could be if they had the right direction, goals, and objectives.
This takes us into analyzing the structure above the sales representatives and their managers. Here we analyze the same areas as we did the sales representatives. What are the direction, goals, and objectives? Should the direction, goals, and objectives be restructured?
When we look at sales, we must also review marketing efforts to see if marketing is ahead of sales in determining expectations or assumptions that marketing efforts should produce a particular result of sales.
If we analyze marketing we also must review operations and production as it may produce an inordinate amount of product based on marketing assumptions.
One of the most common errors I find in small businesses is that they tend to hire relatives instead of qualified people or experts to facilitate a specific function of the business. This really is not in the best interest of a growing business.
If you have hired relatives in the past, you may understand my concern. Large businesses do it, too, and it really doesn’t help them, either. When we review our business from a functional perspective, we find it difficult to make changes when we have to let a brother-in-law go, for example.
But management decisions must be good for the business if the business is to last into the next generation.
Organizational management is a tricky aspect of business in that it must remain flexible enough to change whenever necessary.
Organizational management does not necessarily apply to the people in the company and what they do in the course of a day, but it does apply to how the different departments function around each other and within each other as a team.
Organizational management is the function of all these departments as a team where one department doesn’t out do the other, for example, the production department producing too many finished goods, based on marketing’s assumptions.
Failure to manage your departments’ functions can get a business into financial trouble; you may have to decrease prices or spend money on rebates to sell the excess inventory. You may have to lay off employees if the revenue stream has been negatively affected.
Organizational management takes in to consideration the human resources of a business as well as the functional requirements of a business. It also incorporates aspects of sales and marketing and operations and production. If you can manage the operational portion of your business, the human resources portion should be easy.
But, remember, the operational portion of your business must be derived from a functional review of what it takes to go from A to Z.
Luis Luarca is the President of Allectus LLC, a management consulting company helping small to mid size businesses and is the author of “Business Management for Business Owners; How to Manage Your Small or Mid Sized Business”. http://www.allectus.com