To Belong or Not To Belong

The desire to belong was deemed by Abraham Maslow to be one of the key needs of a human being. However, one cannot help but wonder whether this is a mere instrument of social conformity. We cannot deny that humans have an innate propensity to operate in social groups. Whether we look at the historical evolution of societies--from the hunting group to the tribe to the civilization--or at the dynamics of crisis management where people band together to solve a common problem, the idea of interdependence is readily visible. But interdependence, the notion that to succeed we depend on others, is different from "belongingness."

Interdependence is a practical reality that we cannot survive by ourselves. Even Thoreau purchased many of the products of his self-subsistence from others. Whether the "others" are our clients, our employers, or suppliers, our landlords, etc. we need them... and they need us. This is true not because we are not built for self-sufficiency, but rather because society has specialized to the point where no one person does everything... and the standard of living has advanced to the point where we need specialization in order to obtain the comforts--be they meager or luxurious--to which we are accustomed.

But belonging is something different. It means that not only do you depend on others and others on you, you either have a need to or must be "part of" a social group in order to feel fulfilled emotionally. Setting aside the primary social unit of the family (though this can satisfy the belonging requirement), let's explore the secondary social groups such as friends, co-workers, and the like. Belonging in that context involves, in most cases, sacrificing aspects of one's individuality in order to fit in a group. Look around at the friends and acquaintances that you know and "have." Do you behave as you normally would, or do you hold back your views in order to "fit in"? Do you complement people who deserve reprobations? Do you compare yourself to others rather than being satisfied with yourself? Do you do things "your way," or do you go with the team's majority decision? Unless you are the "leader" of the pack, you probably acknowledge that some concessions occur. And ever if you are the leader, you probably can admit that you too hold back sometimes in order to maintain the group circling around you.

So, how can something like belonging be fulfilling, when you wear a mask in order to be accepted by a group? Perhaps the benefits of the group are more rewarding than if you were alone. You might get business referrals, income, a good time, friends to lean on, etc. And you might not have access to these things if you did not belong in a group. But the very notion that you expect "benefits" from this group in return for giving up some of this individuality should turn belonging from an emotional exercise to a rational one. Though a precise calculus of human behavior is impractical, you should always ask yourself what you are giving to a group and what you expect in return... before you become too emotionally attached. Some groups can demand a lot of time--often your most precious commodity--from you, and end up giving you nothing other than a feeling of belonging. Other groups, and these are rare, give you much without requiring much in return; these types of groups are rare, and seldom are parasitical members suffered for long. What you should seek is an arrangement where your "exports" and "imports" are balanced, and where the alternative of belonging to others groups is less preferable. As you evaluate the value of your exports/imports, look at exports from the view of their value to you... and at imports from the view of their value to those on the receiving end. One hour of coaching of another might equate to two hours of their coaching you, for example.

The solution, then, is not to "belong" in the purest sense... where you are driven emotionally to join some group or other. But rather belong in the sense of seeking mutual benefit, where the sacrifices you make of your individuality yield equal or better returns. And if you cannot find such a group, you don't need to belong just because Maslow or society says you must. Enjoy yourself until a better situation comes along.

On regretting and decision-making...

Perhaps it is a truism of the human condition, or perhaps it is just an idiosyncrasy of a few. Regret can be a frustrating emotion, one that typically causes a negative spiral of "if only" scenarios that can never be reintroduced into our past lives. We see the theme of regret manifest in fantasy novels that allow time travel. But we also see it spun in self-help literature by gurus who encourage people to "learn lessons" from past mistakes. In the latter context, the negative emotions of regret can be turned into positive action via practical analysis... or so they say. So, what should we do with regret? I believe that we should ignore it, if at all possible. Don't dwell on it in a romantic fashion, and don't try to learn from the past. It's not worth it. This might shock you... but let me explain why.

When we regret, we use the knowledge we have about events and outcomes today to shed a critical light on decisions we made in the past. We posit that, had we known how things would turn out, we would have made a different, better choice. And, by extension, we deem our prior choice as bad, indulging in a self-whipping exercise. There are two flaws in this approach, in addition to the fact that we can no longer change the past.

Before I address the flaws, allow me to set forth a few basic assumptions about decision-making. If we make our decisions using these principles, then future regret can safely be ignored. First, we must decide what factors are forcing us to make any given decision; knowing the factors will help us evaluate the goals we want the decision to accomplish. Do we want to buy a car? Why? Is it the fear of the old one breaking down? Is it the desire to impress? Is it that a new car will get better gas mileage and reduce fuel costs? Second, we must decide when is the latest time we can make the decision... and what effect timing has on outcomes. As a general practice, it is best to delay finalizing or implementing the decision until the last-possible minute. Why? Because with time, the situation may change to either introduce new variables that you have not considered... or might moot the emotional aspect driving the decision in the first place. Third, we must weigh the different future scenarios resulting from both our decision to act as well as from our decision to not act (i.e., maintain the status quo). Scenarios can be many, and unexpected events can affect us in different ways depending on the future state that results from effectuating the decision. Evaluate as many of the likely scenarios as possible, and then decide if you would make the decision in spite of the scenario coming true. If any of the action scenarios are positive and if the positive scenario is likely, you must decide whether to take the risk. Granted, a thorough decision-making approach may be onerous to employ in every situation.

As long as you make a decision using some rational criteria (like the one above) rather than an emotional, impulsive reaction--and at least one of the likely scenarios was positive--you will see that regret has no place in your life. The first flaw of such regret is that we never have the benefit of foreknowledge and, hence, can never make a fully-informed decision. Take a decision with which you are faced today. The only "knowledge" you have that guides your decision comprises: the facts you know today; an expectation about future events that is either optimistic, pessimistic, or realistic (and we never know which of these "colors" tainted the expectation until the future happens); a view of our own abilities that is either optimistic, pessimistic, or realistic; and promises or indications from others, which are expectations (at best) or speculation (at worst). This "imperfect knowledge" will be your basis for the decision... this, and nothing more. You cannot obtain the hindsight of the future today. Therefore, as long as you make the decision with which you feel comfortable today, that is the best you can ever do. Regret about the past will not help you make decisions that you will not regret in the future; believing that it does is merely an illusion.

The second flaw is that "learning from mistakes or successes of the past" does not tell you what to "do"... it merely tells you what you "did." Sometimes you did nothing wrong or nothing right, and events outside your control are what created the negative or positive outcome. Moreover, you do not know with certainty the outcome had you done something different... though you think you might. As such, learning from the past creates a false sense of comfort, and might even lead to the wrong conclusion. If you took a risk and succeeded, it does not mean that you should always take the same kinds of risks; they may not succeed. Or if you took a risk and failed, it does not mean that you should never take risks... perhaps the next risk might work out in your favor. You might argue that this notion is ludicrous. After all, if we kick the ball with less force the first time and it travels a short distance, and next time we kick the ball harder and we see that it goes farther, it would be crazy to conclude that we should not draw a correlation between the force of the kick and the distance the ball travels. Thus, we would properly conclude that if we want the ball to travel a long distance, we should kick the ball harder. This is true. However, there is a critical difference between learnings about predictable, physical phenomena--which work according to predictable or almost-guaranteed laws of physics--and learnings about dynamic human behavior that is not only unpredictable, but is also dependent on myriad unpredictable variables and states. If the learning you wish to glean from the past is about a physical law, then definitely learn from the past. However, regret usually does not arise from these failures. Even if we regretted losing a game of soccer because we chose to hit the ball too hard and it hit the bar, what we regret is *not* the lack of knowledge that a harder kick makes the ball travel faster. What we regret is "choosing" to kick the ball harder. And that choice can help us learn nothing about future choices. For all we know, hitting the ball softer would have made the ball stop short of the net, or would have enabled the goalie to catch it, or... And there is nothing to say that next time you should kick the ball softer... because it might very well be that kicking the ball hard is *exactly* what you must do on the next occasion you have in front of the net. Hence, your future decision should be approached independently from your past ones.

Finally, we can seldom control strong emotions such as regret. If possible, try to ignore it. If not, try to write down your feeling, and then force yourself to ignore it. Try to understand and believe that you could not have made a better decision... that was the best decision you could have made given your knowledge. And, whatever you do, don't try to learn from the past.

What next?

Now that you've shed many of the self-help rituals that were not helping you anyway, you may feel bereft of tools... alone with no hope. Let me ask you something, "If you want to nail two pieces of wood together, would you want to have a toolset full of Nerf (sponge) tools that just look like they will work, or would you rather have a rock with which to drive the nail through the wood?" Sure, a hammer may be nice... but you can do with a rock if a hammer is not available. In either case, sponge tools are of no use.

So, what is left? Several things:

1. you... with all the warts you see yourself as having;
2. the skills you have;
3. the people you know (even if you only know one person); and
4. your ability to act

Don't get me started on "goal-writing," "action plans," and "checklists." I have a few things to say about those too... but I won't right now. No. What I will say now is to take a simple, small, spontaneous action using the principles I've mentioned before. Let me illustrate with a few examples.

1. If you are trying to learn Spanish and want to feel confident about speaking with someone, just pick up the phone, call a Mexican restaurant, and ask them--in Spanish--where they are located and when they close for the day. Thank them and hang up. That's it. No big speech, no mass audience, no eloquent soliloquy.
2. If you are disappointed about your level of education and wish you could just know more about "topic X" or had studied at a better school, then just go to MIT's OpenCourseware project (http://ocw.mit.edu/), pick a video lecture from the many they offer for free, sit back, and view it. You need not read, or research, or do anything else for now. Just sit back and view it.
3. If you wish you had courage to ask someone on a date--someone with whom you haven't ever spoken--but you're afraid of being rejected, then today smile at her/him, ask how their day is going... and that's it. Nothing more for now.
4. If you want to present confidently at a meeting, just start talking... regardless of how you feel. Don't try to be confident or anything... just say whatever you have to say. At the end, don't ask for feedback, don't wonder how you did, don't give it another thought. Just move on to the next thing, as if confidence is not an issue.

The above actions may seem silly. No one serious would dare engage in such childish activities. If you think so, I'm sorry to hear that. You're missing the point. The point is to take a small action and realize that, "It's possible." I'm not going to say that by doing the small action you unleash the creative power of the universe; you're not. What you're doing is taking a small step on the journey to reaching the goal. You're taking a small risk, and you realize that it's possible.

Now that you've done this, you could also conceivably come to the realization that realizing the end goal is not really what you wanted in the first place. It's better to conclude that at the beginning than after you've invested a lot of time and money. In the business world, we call this "piloting." Before a company invests a lot of money pushing a product nation-wide, it invests a fraction and markets the product to a few cities... to see how the product fares. If it does well, more funds are released and the company expands to a broader geography. If the product fails, or if the company realizes that the outcome is not what it thought it would have, then the product is canceled and the money invested in some other activity. No emotion: just try something, see the outcome, and then take the next step.

After you take the first small action, your emotion may change or it may not. That's not important. The point is you began achieving your outcome in spite of your emotion. If you still have a desire to continue, then do it... little by little.

If what you're looking for is an "overnight" courage or self esteem or some other emotion, what you can accomplish "overnight" is to convince yourself that the emotion is irrelevant. What you are really yearning for is some material outcome. The emotion may follow or not... but an emotion buys you nothing.

More tools to come. That said, I believe the above tool is the most important: spontaneous action without regard to the emotion you currently feel.

Shed the rituals that don't work

Finding the answer is as much about finding the kernel or nugget of truth as it is about removing the pulp surrounding it... pulp that is not the kernel. We have many rituals and activities that don't add value and don't produce the results we think they should. Continuing these rituals is, in itself, a source of disappointment and desperation. Both disappointment and desperation are emotions, which I've recommended you ignore. If you have successfully done so, great... then see the shedding of these rituals (if they don't add value for you) as freeing your time to do the things that do have the effect you want.

1. Affirmations... will you see blue as red after repeatedly telling yourself it's red?
Often the knee-jerk reaction of most self-help literature, affirmations are nothing more than telling yourself that you're different than you naturally feel you are, or that you feel differently than you do. "I'm a winner" instead of "I'm a loser," or "People like me" instead of "Nobody likes me." By repeating these every hour, day, week, etc. the idea is that you will--sooner or later--replace your innate thoughts and self-perspectives with the new reshaped ones. If this works for you, then use it. If it doesn't, I recommend trying it for a day and seeing the effect. I have not found them as sustainable and useful past a day or so... for several reasons. First, if you need to keep telling yourself something you don't believe, will you believe it more simply because you repeat it to yourself? If you see three lights, will you magically see four simply because you tell yourself there are four? I thought so. Second, any approach that requires a burdensome routine of reading positive flash cards or gazing in the mirror and telling yourself you're smart becomes more of an obsessive-compulsive exercise that a true mind-changer. Third, if you're looking for a meaningful change of your inner world view, you need a rational process.

2. Positive self-talk
Positive self-talk is a broader notion, of which affirmations are part. Positive self-talk is about rewording "problem" to "opportunity," "failed" to "yet to succeed," and so on. Though I agree that it's helpful to think about "what can I do with what I have" rather than "why I can't do something," positive self-talk has gone astray in left field. It has now become an attempt to reprogram your mind. Ironically, it adds more baggage and constraints... exactly what you don't need. If you see something as a problem, then see it as a problem... and proceed in spite of the problem. If you think you failed, then think you failed... and then figure out what to do next. Don't lie to yourself; it's best to accept to yourself what you're feeling. Your subconscious thinks what it wants, regardless of the words you utter.

3. Wishful thinking... "attracting things"
I'm not talking about prayer. Prayer is a religious experience, and I do not mean this to be a religious blog. Prayer is best addressed by your pastor, spiritual advisor, and the like. I'm talking about the Law of Attraction and the progeny that have sprouted as a result of its supposed popularity. The first time I read about the notion of "attracting the things you think about" it sounded pretty good... until I thought about some negative emotions and couldn't shake them. The notion of "attracting things" resonates with people because most of us are not in control of our emotions, we often have negative emotions, we interpret certain things that happen as negative... and, presto, the Attraction gurus were right! Though the gimmick is supposed to help you attract good things, it's reinforced by the negative experiences more so that the positive. After all, I just can't believe that someone stood twiddling their thumbs and a pot of gold just drops out of thin air in front of them because they "attracted" it somehow. If you find it works for you, then ignore what I said. If it doesn't work for you, then get rid of the pressure and fear this superstitious, wishful-thinking concept creates. This is the same notion of "positive thinking" and visualization just wrapped up in a quasi-spiritual tortilla just to make the whole package seem more different and powerful. It's the same level of psycho-babble we see from these sugary self-help gurus that visualized their pockets being lined up with cash from you buying their books.

4. Fearing "self-fulfilling prophecies"
The so-called "self-fulfilling prophecy" principle underlies the Law of Attraction and several other theories. Its proponents often quote Henry Ford, "If you think you can or you think you can't, you're right." I interpret Ford's statement differently: your state of mind affects your actions. It's a fact... not an admonition. The solution, however, is to change your action... not your state of mind; the latter will follow or not... it's not important. The important thing is to have the result you seek. The concept of self-fulfilling prophecy suffers from the same shortcoming as Attraction: it creates psychological pressure and perpetuates negative feelings. It is reinforced by the negative, rather than the positive, aspect of our emotions. So, I'd advise you ignore this concept. Think what you want to think; say what you want to say; be free. That will do more for your ability to accomplish your result than any artificial restraint.

5. Envisioning
People talk about "visualization" as one way of getting what you want. "Visualize yourself as being successful," and so on. All of these techniques (visualization, positive self-talk, affirmations, and the like) may be effective if one is in a state of mind to accept their reality... if there is no incongruity between what you think and what you want to envision, etc. In that case, envisioning is not envisioning at all... it's simply planning, with a marketing spin. Seeing yourself as walking confidently into a meeting may give you a temporary confidence boost... but it is not sustainable. If, on the other hand, you're already confident, then envisioning that you walk confidently into the room is nothing more than planning what you will do; you don't need it in order to feel confident. Otherwise, it's like seeing a movie: you see fantasy lands and glide among the stars, but you know it's not real. More insidiously, "envisioning" gives people a false sense of hope and a temporary band-aid. It's like a diet for losing weight; the weight will come back over time.

6. Re-writing your past
This is not as prevalent now, but some still recommend it. This technique involves taking the experiences that had created self-doubt, low self esteem, etc. and rewriting the experience such that it didn't happen that way. Assume, for example, that you were caught stealing when you were a teenager, and were sent to juvenile hall. This, in turn, diminished your risk-taking appetite as an adult... and you are now a passive, boring person. "Rewriting your past" involves then telling yourself repeatedly that you didn't steal and didn't get sent to jail; this will, supposedly, eliminate the source of your passivity. After all, the past is nothing more than a memory... an engram encoded in your brain. You can redefine your past. This is lying to yourself. You stole, you got sent to jail, and the lesson is, "Don't steal from others." If your definition of "risk taking" is stealing--as opposed to investing or getting a better-paying job--then you should be passive; society does not need risk-taking thieves who have self esteem. I'm using an extreme example, but I hope you understand the two points: (1) Don't lie to yourself by denying your past; and (2) Seek to understand the rational lesson you learned from the past... and then you can discard the emotion behind it if you can. Though it might be tempting to redefine your past, most of us don't operate like a computer; you know, in the back of your mind, what really happened. You need to be able to trust yourself in order to achieve meaningful and sustainable change.

The basics of personal change

Perhaps there is a methodical, step-wise process for progressing through personal change. From my observations, however, any methodology dealing with human cognitive processes is, at best, theoretical. At worst, most methodologies fail because they require superior human discipline... the kind of discipline that few of us possess for sustainable periods of time.

However, rather than being satisfied with the notion that there is no hope for you--and one can sometimes feel at peace when giving up in a struggle--what you need to realize is that you have not yet found a methodology that works for you. In reality, our thoughts combine, our activities dart back and forth among rungs on a pyramid, and we switch context quickly based on what seems important at the moment. Our personal growth and change patterns, much like our thinking, is network-like in nature; it is not sequential, as most theories require. This is who we are; imposing a strict discipline if this is not your style is like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

Keeping this in mind, let's work through a few basics of personal change. By basics I do not mean "step 1;" as I said before, I don't believe personal change follows a "neat" step-wise process. By basics I simply mean certain notions that are important to remember in your quest for personal growth; you may see these themes time and time again on the journey.

1. There is no single path for growth... you must build your own from building blocks
I believe that the journey of personal growth is traveled on a road you must build yourself; there is no pre-built highway. There are, however, large chunks of concrete that you can assemble. The inventory of building blocks can be as small or as large as you wish it... but the objective is to carefully select those blocks that are sturdy and practical. It might be easy to think that if you follow the step-by-step program laid out in a book or a tape series you will reach your destination. You may, but oftentimes you won't stay there very long... because the program is not custom-tailored to your needs. Building your own path probably takes no more effort than copying someone else's. However, the outcome will be more sustainable if you do the former.

2. Believe no one at face value... TRY each idea that sounds plausible and discard what doesn't work... Experiment
     We have become a nation of followers, a society of star-gawking sheep who stand in awe of other people's ideas and create personality cults around everyone from Hollywood celebrities to politicians to business leaders and so on. We believe what the media tells us or, if not, we refute everything someone says simply because they are labeled a Republican, a Democrat, a religious man, a non-religious man, a socialist, a capitalist, an expert... you get the picture.
     Everyone has a vested interest (however little) in having people believe what he or she is saying. This is not necessarily bad, as long as: (a) you recognize that there is an alternative motive at work; and (b) you critically evaluate the idea for itself before accepting or tossing it. Your boss wants to persuade you of her views, because this increases your productivity and her results. Your professor wants your belief so he can sow intellectual seeds and become the father of a generation of thinkers. Your parents want your agreement so they can feel good about raising someone who shares their views. Your friends want your acquiescence because it reinforces their own world view. And so on. In fact, you also want other people to agree with you, for various reasons: it gives you an ego boost, it provides external validation about your world view, and so on. The important thing is to realize that there is an alternative motive to every message or idea you hear out there. The presence of ulterior motive(s) is not intrinsically bad; it's just how people operate.
     Knowing this, the goal is to experiment with ideas and see what works for you. Experimenting is easier when an idea doesn't take too long to implement. This is one reason why I am leery of programs that require weeks or months: they are difficult to implement or prove. We often have a sense of misplaced duty, of wanting to follow others because of the good things they've done for us, the accomplishments they've had, or for other reasons. We shy away from trying certain actions because others would speak poorly of us, or would disapprove, or would sneer at us in disdain. Placating someone is the wrong reason to do or not do something; it is a waste of time. You owe it to yourself to find the truth... to learn how things really work for you... and to be who you want to be.
     As you experiment, keep in mind that an idea that succeeded in one situation may not succeed in another... and an idea that failed one time may not fail a second time. The sometimes-frustrating aspect of human behavior is that we are often unpredictable... and so are others. That's one reason why you should have several tools in your toolbox, and try each one until you find the right one that fits the situation.

3. Separate emotion from action
We are part of a society whose self-help bookshelves are filled with materials on improving your self esteem, your confidence, your motivation, and so on. The very notion that your self esteem (or other parts of your personality) needs help indicates that something must be wrong with you. Building on the principle of "everyone has an ulterior motive," see the message for what it is: an attempt to exploit your weaknesses for profit. Each of us is weak in various areas: some are afraid, some are lonely, some are too optimistic, some are too pessimistic, some are aggressive, some are passive, some are too extroverted to be taken seriously, others are too introverted, and so on. The quest for the "perfect personality" does nothing but line the pockets of certain individuals and creates pain and suffering for the rest who never attain that paragon of "perfect human." There is value in wanting to change... but don't do it because you see a book and think to yourself, "I wish I were that way."
     As part of the solution, you need to separate the emotion from the actions you will take. You should no longer focus on having "self esteem," or "being confident" or "being an extrovert." Those are emotions that, frankly, are not in your control; if you could summon positive emotions at will, you wouldn't feel the way you do. Straining to control something that is not controllable creates psychological pressure... the very pressure that ends up sabotaging you. Instead, ignore your emotions; accept them if you have to... just don't put much stock in emotions. Instead, focus your energies on actions, as described below. Your emotions may follow suit, or they may not; it doesn't really matter. Emotions are fickle; don't give them another thought. What about emotions of sadness, disappointment, regret, bitterness, or such? Much like you can't control positive emotions, you can't control negative ones. So, either feel them until they pass (few emotions last forever), go to a psychiatrist to get medication, try to do something to forget about whatever is causing that negative emotion, and so on. Negative emotions are not trivial, nor can they be diminished with words. Over time, the point is to ignore concentrating on your emotions.
     Action is where your should focus your energies. When you feel that you don't have confidence, what you're actually secretly wishing is that you're able to do a certain kind of activity or have some sort of result. So, whenever you feel a personality shortcoming, identify what outcome you're wishing you had. It would help to write this down... but it's not required; you knowing it is enough. Once you do, the next step is to decide if you really want that outcome, or if you just think you do. If you're unsure, assume you want it... just to be safe. Then your challenge is to accomplish that outcome. We'll discuss some tools for this later.

4. Decide whether you want to change... and why
Change through action does not come easily. It's even harder when you really don't want to change, but only think you do. If you're content with your current state, that is great... more power to you! You need not change because someone told you to, or because you think it will impress someone. The only meaningful motivation for change should be because you want to. You may feel that you don't deserve a better situation. If so, that's okay; that means you don't need to change. Until you come to the realization that you want to change, you don't need to do so. Continue doing what you're doing.

Changing ourselves - the beginning...

Few things bother me more than ideas that purport to hold some great or noble truth, yet they ring hollow when applied to real life. There is a sense of bitterness and loss when a concept you've held to be true turns out to be disappointingly superficial and effect-less. Few domains suffer more from this malady than the ever-growing "self-help" genre of literature. I believe in the need for personal development and growth. What I despise, however, is authors and n-step program makers feeding the masses with ideas that waste time and lead to limited (if any) results... especially to results that are short-lived. What I despise even more is the fact that self-help gurus knowingly sell band-aids masked as persistent remedies... knowing that people will likely come back for the next "fix." Personal growth and psychological well-being should be toyed-with. People need practical tools to empower themselves in a sustainable fashion, not some "wishful thinking" syrup that lasts just a few days after the book, tape, or DVD is finished.

I also believe in putting one's passionate feelings--even if they may be sometimes be fueled by frustration--to positive use. So, I will begin sharing my own views on the topics of self esteem, inferiority, competition, self efficacy, behavioral change, and the like... and I will do so in this blog. I believe the ideas you will read are practical, and can lead to more realistic results than any rose-colored, sugary, "wishful thinking" philosophy many of today's self-proclaimed gurus would like you to adopt. Oftentimes the ideas will take you only so far... and then you need to develop new thoughts on your own; this is not meant to be a comprehensive thesis on human cognitive development. Instead, it's one person's way of giving back to society learnings and experiences developed over the years.

I do this first as a contribution to society. I can no longer stand idly by while people find false hope while searching for real answers. Second, I do it as a means of evolving a practical methodology to self development and change.

I urge you to comment, especially if we don't quite "see eye to eye." I also encourage you to share this blog with others; help others see that practical and sustainable self-development is possible. Don't worry about whether you agree or disagree... you imprint on the world through a voiced thought is what matters most.

Lastly, I do not see myself as holding the only key to personal growth and development. Different methods work for different people, depending on what stage each is at. We will progressively explore many ideas in subsequent blog entries, and you should take from them just those things that you find helpful.

Effort versus output, and the implications on performance management

Writing good code is not easy. Anyone worth his software engineering salt can recall the two (or more) hours spent on a problem whose solution was one line of code. Where does this leave managers who need to assess performance and rate engineers on their contributions to the organization? It all depends on your management philosophy.

In an effort-driven model, those engineers who work hard, stay late, come in on the weekend, and deliver good code (regardless of lines of code or volume of modules) tend to be seen as top performers. The key flaw with this approach is the frequent inattention paid to the question: "How long should it have taken them to deliver this software given the constraints under which they were working?" Weak managers are often fond of giving the benefit of the doubt to people they see "working hard." If, however, these individuals' effort is high due to their lack of skill, lack of organization, decreased analytical ability, or other factors that indicate "lower performance," then the assessment does a disservice to the highly-talented engineer who accomplishes two people's work in a regular week. Mind you, I'm one of those who believes in "all hands on deck" when times are rough... but have little sympathy for undisciplined time wasters.

Going to the other extreme, a pure results-driven model is also flawed. Comparing the performance of two individuals based on the number of modules they created in a given time period ignores the difficulties each faced or the inherent complexities of the modules in question... which can lead you to reward unequitably. Furthermore, a results-driven model often disregards attitude, which is an important part of organizational talent management. If someone's attitude is "I will put in only 8 hours no matter what," you should ask yourself whether you can rely on this person when facing the tough battles that will invariably come your way. In some cases it is better to have someone with less talent and a great "win at all costs" attitude than someone who is an expert but lacks the stamina for trench warfare.

Since neither model is perfect, what is a manager to do? My approach is to use a personally-developed model, lovingly-coined the Subjective Assessment Technique. I will just refer to it as the SAT from now on. After struggling with purely quantitative measures that yielded the wrong results, I have come to believe that the SAT is the most pragmatic method. Its main drawback is the perception that the final assessment is based on the whims of the assessor, thereby leading to inequities among the employee population. As will be demonstrated, this perception is inaccurate. That said, the method does cause some unpredictability from year to year... though marginal. The key tenets of SAT are as follows.

First, become comfortable with the idea that your performance assessment is subjective... no matter what approach you take. As the "boss," the company has empowered you with, among other things, managing performance of people vital to its success. If your subjective assessment is wrong and a top perfomer either leaves or decreases in productivity, it's something you're just going to have to live with.

Second, assess the individual's objective results independent of effort. How do these measure up to not only what you expected the individual to achieve but also to what her peers accomplished? Expectations are funny animals. On the one hand, they clarify for us what we should do and set a baseline to surpass... and on the other they can limit some people from unleashing their full abilities. That said, contributions to the bottom line and long-term success of the company are what matter in business. Measure results in terms of both business outcomes as well as engineering output. Failure to take business relevance into account can lead you to grow talent in a business-irrelevant direction.

Third, assess the individual's commitment. Is this someone on whom you can depend to deliver even in troubled times, or someone who delivers well when all of the stars align? Will he stand by you when the cannons start blasting, or will he put in his shift and then retire to his quarters when the clock strikes five? The commitment exhibited by someone can be transient, affected by such external factors as family needs, outside interests, priorities in life, etc. My approach is to give individuals the freedom to decide their level of commitment rather than force it upon them. We are people first and employees second. Each person must live his life in accordance to his own value system... and make the priority decisions needed to achieve his personal goals. Forcing someone to work 60-hour weeks (other than during short stints) not only creates personal tension, but also makes you the driver of someone else's life... which I would personally discourage. There is no moral or ethical basis for your forcing commitment... so don't do it. That said, you should recognize and reward when someone willingly exhibits higher commitment consistently. Those for whom work is a priority should receive the rewards of this choice, just as those for whom a non-work activity is a priority receive its rewards. A last note on this topic is to focus on gauging commitment during the current performance period. Exceptions should be made for temporary exigent circumstances, so get to know your team members and what's going on in their lives.

Fourth, seek informal feedback from people who work with each team member being assessed. While this is similar to 360-degree feedback in principle, I've found that formal feedback tends to be an inaccurate assessment of true performance. How many people will praise someone who competes with them for ratings, or how many will speak constructively of a team member on whom they depend for support on their projects? The best feedback is informal, such as conversations about project progress and such. While you may have personal views of someone's performance already, orient your feedback-gathering efforts on a "balanced view": positive as well as constructive or negative aspects.

Fifth, spend some time job-shadowing each team member to understand what issues she is facing and how she resolves them. Spending anywhere from a day to a week doing this is warranted, especially if you are on the fence about someone's performance. Job-shadowing peers who perform similar roles is also a good idea, especially if you don't personally know what it takes to fulfill the responsibilities of the person's job title.

Sixth, compare individual results and commitment to peer performance. Given that everyone is different and works on different projects, it may sound counter-intuitive or impractical to do this. It's easier and more relevant than it seems, actually. Regardless of temperament or task, you can abstract people's behavior into invariant themes, such as drive to deliver results, planning/organization, analytical ability, learning aptitude, quality coding discipline, problem solving... the list continues. Determine what behavioral themes--sometimes called leadership traits or competencies--are important to your organization, and what the optimal strength configuration is for your team. As Aldous Huxley astutely pointed out, "Even Epsilons are useful. We couldn't do without Epsilons." His observation, though made in a grimmer context, underscores the fact that even people without "higher-level" skills are useful if they have other strengths necessary for society. Every software organization needs good planners, good drivers, good coders, good testers, etc. in order to thrive. It is both difficult and impractical to find good planners who code well... or to seek other "ubermench" combinations. It is, however, easy to compare among planners or coders or troubleshooters and see who shines. Whether or not a troubleshooter is intellectually superior to a planner is irrelevant. The important point is that you need both. Pick the star performers in each of the roles you need, if you want to thrive. However, if someone is a great musician, can do little else, and you don't need musicians on your team, his performance may not be a good fit with your organization's needs.

Seven, take into account potential performance. This is, perhaps, a very tricky proposition, especially since potential performance falls into the realm of psychic prediction. In many cases, however, you can leverage past growth levels to determine if someone has the potential to add substantially-higher value to the company in the foreseeable future. You also need to assess the probability of someone actually willing to fulfill his potential. As the character of Will Hunting shows, it takes much personal change before some geniuses live up to their potential... and it is highly unlikely you have the resources or the personal time to invest in someone as Professor Lambeau and Sean did. Net net, if someone's future performance is likely to jump and actual performance is on par with peers who have plateaued, it may be warranted to assess performance higher in order to retain and groom the talent. This is the person you will want to tap for more challenging assignments in order to begin actualizing their potential ability. On the other hand, if the individual fails to demonstrate practically-higher future potential, assume that his actual results are the best he can deliver.

In the end, your goal is to deliver strong results today and to retain talented individuals who will help you deliver strong results tomorrow. Actively manage your talent pool from year to year during fourth quarter to ensure you continue to have a vibrant team. Also, consider moving people around to different projects after they've spend two or three years developing depth in a certain competency. This gives them the opportunity to grow horizontally and expand their horizons, as well as gives their apprentices the chance to breathe new life into a mature team.

There are times when you will need to either fire someone or manage them into other parts of the organization where their talents are more in line with the needs of the company. Both are difficult to do psychologically until you develop the attitude that you need to deliver strong results. You cannot do so if your people are mediocre. If someone takes undeserving advantage of the company by not delivering, you lose if you allow him shelter. If, however, some is skilled but just not a good fit for your team, your performance demands, etc. it is warranted to give her a second chance to succeed if the company can afford it. Wear a CEO's hat and decide if the individual can add value commensurate with his compensation. If so, then keep him. If not, don't hesitate to make the tough choice.

On resource optimization...

How many people does it take to develop a specific software module in a mid- or large-size organization? On the face of it, it seems to be a simple question. You size the project in terms of man-hours, divide by 8, divide by the number of working days you have to complete a project, and voila: you have your people count... right? Not really... as there are quite a few additional considerations to take into account.

1. How many changes do you expect on your project? In sizable organizations, project scope fluctuates... and saying no to every change control does not foster a positive relationship with your business partners. Since the amount of change is driven by both the individual(s) who initiate your requirements as well as by the inherent nature of the domain, use historical examples to determine what capacity buffer you should plan for during your project. Ramp up these resources at key points in the lifecycle, such as toward the end of your requirements-analysis phase. This allows the majority of your team to focus on mainstream design, while others can evaluate new requirements and incorporate them into the project.
2. How skilled is your technical team? In many companies who use outsourcing today, skill in a specific system or domain can vary each year, as the outsourcer rotates people among portfolios. Even if technical skillset is solid (and don't be surprised if this is a "big if"), your developers must understand the system architecture, environmental tools, and the like. Otherwise, plan for a good amount of ramp-up at the beginning of each project phase and assume productivity will be lower per capita. Consequently, add a "new team member" contingency to your project... which will translate into either additional staff, longer timeline, overtime, or a mixture.
3. Flu season? People have been known to get sick once or twice during a project. This risk increases if you're executing during periods of known flu seasons or other types of periodic illness. If your dates can't slip, allow for some contingency due to illness.
4. Have you done this type of project before? Projects come in all shapes and sizes. If you've done this type of development before, consult your historical records for variances between your projected and actual effort... and build yet another contingency in your project. If this is your first time with this type of animal, either consult colleagues who tamed this beast before or allow for some healthy contingency.
5. On how many other groups do you depend? Large-system development in sizable organizations typically involves other groups... both internal and external to the company. Each group's changes either be "business as usual" or can represent a significant effort for said group. Increased effort increases their (and your) risk, especially if not all managers run a tight ship like you do. Hence, increase your contingency for every integration point outside of your direct control. Unfortunately, this contingency will impact your schedule more than anything else... so make sure you have the people necessary to troubleshoot, bug-fix and implement workarounds when the time comes.

The purpose of planning for the right amount of people is to enable successful delivery of the project with quality and within agreed-upon timelines... without needing to beg for mercy (in the form of additional time or cost) from business owners. There will always be risks that you either cannot predict or are so infrequent as to not be likely. For example, if the business champion for your project suddenly wins the lottery and a new champion will take her place, the impact to timeline this creates definitely warrants a project checkpoint and an independent go/no-go decision. Unless you're already into heavy coding and you've already forgotten the business partner's name, you need to have a candid conversation with your business champion.

Setting the stage...

Why do some writers employ pseudonyms? On one hand, it gives one the anonymity necessary to publish views without fear of heckling from friends and close associates. It allows freedom to experiment with ideas without later being tied to statements no longer part of one's worldview. On the other hand, should one have a profound influence through one's writing, the world may never truly know the author. Though I've often considered the question of anonyms, I never envisioned myself using one someday. Alas, the tactical benefit is, for the present time, the clear winner. Hence, I shall pen these musings as one Walter Bradford Jones.

That said, here is a riddle. The SHA1 digest of my first, middle (full), and last name (all letters lowercase and including spaces) as computed in PHP Version 5.2.0RC6-dev is 28c2323c86c1ac810e4504e80efa8e61e581d4ff . Who am I?