What we deserve

In the past few months, I've been thinking about the impact of choices and the meaning of them.

This goes back to the concept of "timshel" from East of Eden...that we have the choice to conquer sin.

I've also been really struggling with understanding and thinking and feeling through the idea of entitlement - what we as humans deserve. For a long time, I didn't think that there was anything that we were entitled to, that we deserved nothing. Afterall, we have been blessed to wake up in the morning...what's more important than that? Do we really need to ask God for anything other than the gift of life?

Anyway, I've been trying to push myself on that though. And thank to Jeff and Laura and Jenny and others. I'm starting to think that there is indeed one thing that we all deserve.

To be loved.

(Why we deserve to be loved is the topic of another post.)

But, getting back to choices by combining these two ideas.

One of the most important choices we have, in conquering sin especially, I think, is the choice we make to love others. To love animals, to love the earth, to love God, to love beauty...all of these things. But the choice we make to love others is especially hard, I think.

We have so many reasons not to love others - whether it's a colleague, a family member, a stranger...even a girl that has rejected or wronged you. It's so easy to think that we don't have love to give to people who do not love us. To people who can't, even.

But, I think we must. Loving others, despite their flaws or wrongdoings (to us or others) is conquering sin. It's something filled with grace. It's beautiful. It's impossibly hard.

And, it's painful sometimes. But how and who we love and the love we show to other people is soemthing we shouldn't discriminate - it must be permamment. It must be full and genuine.

I'm having a hard time writing about this - partly because of fatigue and partly because it's hard. But I guess I can put it this way.

I know in my heart of hearts that what's right is to love others, no matter what. Because, it's the one that everyone deserves. Not being loved is a terrible way to suffer and I can't participate in that. We should try to be loving. Everyone deserves to be loved. Nobody deserves to suffer.

-nt

The Leadership Quandry - initial thoughts for a future talk

The more and more I think about it, the more skeptical I get of leadership as a construct.  I think as a civilization we're missing something, really really big.  I know, audacious for relative nobody on the matter to say.  But, I'll probably convince anyone who is reading this blog (if not totally, at least an uncomfortably large amount) over the course of time - that we should stop focusing on leadership as a core emphasis of organization or at least radically rethink what leadership is and what its value is.  (Teaser: leadership is not nearly as interesting or useful as we thought it was - rather, it's a distraction).

I'm due to write about this on yammer for some colleagues, but I also want to play around with the idea here.  I imagine I'll pitch this to TEDxDetroit in the next year or some other venue, just to see if I'm not crazy.  And, to see what some actual smart people think about this.

Anyway, here's some messing around on what the structure of those remarks might look like:

We need a lot from organizations, that different than what exists today - [describe some fundamental assumptions about what organizations need to be and compare them with how they actually operate].

So, why does this happen?  I'd argue that making Leadership the holy grail has a lot to do with it. - [explain the leadership quandry].  [Also, concede that there could be other reasons, but give reason as to why to focus on this one].

So, you've outlined a big problem, but how do you suggest we run organization if not for leadership structures? -[ Ask the audience, to suspend reality for just a second. Then, explain the paradim shift to "gardening teams"].

Why not just improve the craft of leadership? - [Explain why that's silly and why a paradigm shift is necessary]

[Then, revisit the fundamental needs of organization and show the path that leadership goes down - it's a bad one].

[Admit you don't know have the technology of teaming at your disposal, but give the "all we need to do is scale it, and why can't we?" bit to the audience to give them hope that they won't have to fully suspend disbelief forever].

[explain the difference in the place for leadership and the place for gardening teams in the future - it's probably a shared world].

---

Shoot, a lot of gaps here.  It'll be fun to fill in.  I've gotta make time for this, maybe this summer, after the GMAT.

PS - Unedited, it's late.

Ideas about how ideas get big

I'm starting to have insomnia from time to time, which is probably a bad thing.  Fortunately though, some of my better thinking comes at the edge of sleeping and awake life (if I can remember it the next day).

Yesterday, I was also lucky to have been inspired by Josh Linker (read more about him here) as he was speaking at our office's quarterly all-hands meeting.  Sadly, I had to miss the first 60 minutes of his remarks due to a client call.  He spoke about creativity.  I can't really go into more detail because I really only caught the tail end of his talk (which I'm super bummed about).

Earlier in the day we also had a "Detroit Community Involvement" Panel Discussion.  One of the themes of the discussion was that community involvements begin with just a small moment or conversation that blossoms into something larger (and usually really awesome).

Thinking about ideas and how they get big

Both of these combined got me to thinking about ideas and how they go from "start to awesome"...let's break this down into a process map of sorts:

Pre-idea observations, listening and reflecting -> Idea forms -> Idea has increasing returns and blows up

• Pre-idea observations - this is the step where something brews in your mind, it's a product of what you see, know, hear, do and feel
• Idea forms - this is the really hard step where all those stewing things form into an articulated thought that can be expressed to other people
• Idea blows up - this is the fun part when people build upon your idea and it gets momentum - it "catches legs", if you will

Josh, from what I could gather, was really going deep on the "Idea forms" step - which is really, really important.  It's so hard to get some stuff in your head out onto paper or into a group of people.  He had some awesome tips and stories about it.  Again, he may have discussed other things while I wasn't there, but this is the essence of what I heard while I was.

In our Detroit Community Involvement Panel we kind of had the perspective of "ideas blowing up".  We got a flavor for the awesome things which can happen when people come together around a common cause.

Now, let me get back to the big picture for a second.  It seems to me like there's a BIG jump from an idea forming to it blowing up.  It's almost as if there's a step in the process flow we've forgotten:

Pre-idea observations, listening and reflecting -> Idea forms -> ? -> Idea has increasing returns and blows up

I think there's this often unnoticed step that is really, really crucial in the creative process - I'll call it "launch".  And by this I mean, someone has to get the idea off the ground before it fades away.

The way I figure it, after a great idea or brainstorm there are probably lots of ideas.  And, there are probably many millions of great ideas floating around people's heads across the world.  A non-trivial percentage of those ideas are probably already expressed out loud or even in some document, somewhere - whether it's on a napkin, a whiteboard, or a PowerPoint presentation.

Those ideas never "get legs", I think, because someone has to follow through on them.  Someone has to document them and share them after they are concieved.  Someone has to marshal people, expertise and legitimacy to the idea to get it off the ground.

I liken it to a NASA analogy.  When launching a spacecraft there are two mission controls - one in Florida and one in Houston.  The one in Florida has control of the mission for about 7 seconds and Houston gets it for the rest of the time.  Why?  Because the first 7 seconds (the launch) of a flight are so different and incredibly difficult.  So, so many crazy things can happen.  So, NASA splits the mission into two components (let's set aside all the time and energy required to even put a spacecraft on the launchpad for this discussion) the launch and the flight.

I think the same is true for ideas.  Some ideas (which may be great or not so great) seem to launch themselves without much intervention.  But many ideas seem like they're left on the launch pad - even though they are great, great ideas.

So my learning here is, don't forget about the very deliberate step of "launching" ideas after they are conceived and even loosely articulated.  The only way to send an idea to the moon is to get it off the ground first.  Sometimes that's easy and sometimes that's hard, I think.  Either way, it has to be done.  Sometimes it has to be a very deliberate step in the process.

How to launch an idea

This raises an obvious question - what falls into the discipline of "launching" an idea...how do you do it?  Well, I think there are a couple things to think about:

• Prototype it, fast - I think getting the idea into a share-able format is really important.  More importantly, though, get it share-able as fast as you possibly can.  Don't invest 100 hours, invest 2.  Then share it as fast as you can and improve it as you go.  It's hard to stick to something for 100 hours when you have no momentum to begin with.  Stop at two hours and get some fresh insight, people to help you and some excitement.  Also, once you start sharing it you may realize that you don't really like the idea or could use your time better on something else.  So sharing it quickly can save you 98 hours worth of work on something that you don't even want to pursue.
• Share, but listen more than you speak - So, share the idea.  Obviously.  But, don't forget to listen either.  If you could launch the idea yourself, then why are you talking to other people?  Don't only share or only listen - do both simultaneously.
• Focus - big ideas can get wayyy too big really quickly.  Don't let them buckle under their own weight.  This isn't to say narrow ideas into small boxes which suddenly become irrelevant.  Rather, I mean set boundaries so you can focus your time and resources going deep in a new and interesting way.  Don't irreverently add scope.  Add the right scope and cut the things that don't matter.  Then, grow the idea into something bigger. Go big, but not foolishly.  Be disciplined.

Anyway, these are just some random thoughts on a Saturday morning.  Thanks for entertaining some of my insomniac musings.  Now it's time for some Raisin Bran and some GMAT-ing.

Also - I can't wait to talk about progress to our skills-based volunteerism pilot program (which we're starting to call Grassroots Pro-bono, actually) this idea is starting to catch legs as we speak.  Phase II is going to be legit (thankfully, I think we're clever enough to make it work).

For the city,
Neil

B Series - Conflicting Identities

- Beware, this isn't proofread -

I suspect that this topic will bubble up on many occasions while trying to do this deep introspection.  Again, it's pretty important context setting.

For whatever reason, my identities - physical, emotional, spiritual, social, moral, intellectual, experiences etc. - conflict with each other.  Or, at least they do on the surface.  One of the more difficult things I feel like I do on a daily basis is finding some calm between those warring identities and weaving together a cohesive internal narrative.  Let me try listing some examples:

• Indian and brought up in America, and "white" by upbringing to an extend - but still rooted with relatively traditional values.
• Theistic, but not subscribing to the framework of an organized religion
• I've been bullied and have been in positions where I could bully other if I wanted to.
• Dance, Football, Backcountry Camping, Tennis, Soccer, Weightlifting - all these are favorite athletic pass times
• Fraternity Man (with associated antics) and subscriber to Aristotelian virtue ethics
• Deeply ponderous and reflective but intensely extroverted but also active listener
• Arrogant, but feel uncomfortable taking praise

And many others.  These are pretty surface level, I'd say, but the hint at things which are more deeply rooted, I think.

But, what's the implication of having conflicting identities?

Well, there are real, front-line costs.  It's hard for others to figure you out, and therefore have trust in you.  If you're not predictable, then, how does one have intimate relationships?  It's not impossible just more fleeting.  The other side of this is that it's harder to feel a sense of belonging anywhere.  Everything is shaky, because you never feel comfortable exactly where you are.  You feel like an outsider and an insider at the same time.  "Home" is difficult to discern.

More tactically, if one is all over the map with identities (and identities are heuristics for day-to-day decision making) how does one make decisions with conflicting identities?  First, you do make decisions.  It's just really taxing, it becomes extremely deliberative in one's own head.  There are no shortcuts to making decisions.  There's nothing that feels quite right.  But I suppose that's the case for everyone.

I suppose there are upsides, though.  It becomes easier to move between communities of different people when identities don't lock you into a single paradigm.  It also leaves lots of life as your oyster to be opened.  Among other things.

But, what's the big takeaway here?  I have many conflicting identities (maybe more, or maybe less than I think they are), but so does everyone, probably.  Takeaway number one is that it's okay.  (Wow, I've never said that or thought that - it's okay to be you, snap.  That's probably the first of many realizations over the course of the next year).

Takeaway number two is that you must be you.  With conflicting identities, its possible to try to copy the way others are or do what other people think you should be doing.  That's maybe the worst thing you can do.  That errs you even farther than your true self.  And if you do that, you no longer have any trust in who you are and what you think because you've introduce foreign identities into an already weird mix of thoughts and feelings.  The identities of others is something that you can never measure up to.

This is the third and probably most difficult conclusion - all your identities have to be woven together some way, or some how.  May that's what integrity is - all of you woven into one story that you can explore, deepen and stick to.  That's like, inner peace, if I've ever heard it.

So then the question becomes, how does one find inner peace with his or her identities?  I obviously don't know the answer to that question.  But, that's a good goal.  That's kind of what my equilibrium project is all about - making my conflicting identities, thoughts and feelings play nice together in my brain.

Even though I don't know the answer to the question, I think it's a start to figure out who you are by learning about where you came from - i.e. unpacking your baggage.  And, the long road ahead begins.

B Series - Context

Before I start this "B Series" (B for baggage, naturally) of posts - the aim being deep introspection to understand the emotional and spiritual barriers that exist in my life and expressing it - I feel like I have to do a bit of context setting.

I'm really lucky.  I have parents who love me deeply and family which does the same.  I'm lucky enough to have many friends who aren't like family, they are family.  I have been blessed in many ways by God.  I've been lucky enough to be educated.  I have good health and am fully abled.

Of course, I've had my fair share of difficult and most of my character has been forged from intense pain, sorrow, empathy and struggle.  There are "wounds" that still haven't "healed".  I sometimes don't feel deserving or needing the love and care of others, or whatever.  I'm not entitled to anything - breathing is an enthralling gift and that's enough.

But, I'm lucky.  And with great luck comes ability.  Response-ability, if you will.  And that's where the story begins.

But the fact is, I must always remember that I'm not ever truly alone.  Or that I have everything I need to be happy.  Someday, I'll come to feel that I'm more than just "good enough" - in whatever context that is.  I 

B Series - Intro

Jeff recently purchased me a book from Amazon - which was written by their Pastor in New York.  It's called Emotionally Healthy Spiritually.  I've only begun to read it, but something is very clear (Jeff and Laura also mention this a lot) - that folks have to unpack their baggage to be emotionally healthy.

And, on this quest to find equilibrium I have to do the same.  And, I suppose this is where the blog comes in.  Unpacking all these things in my own head isn't the hard part (even though, it is hard to be real with oneself about stuff like this).  The hard part is sharing it with other people.  I can't do it.  Or, not yet.

So, here goes the B Series of posts.

Revisiting Timshel

Revisiting Timshel -


The echoes of Dr. MLK are reverberating in my head like crazy, right now.  There were speeches on NPR, quotes abound and a mess-load of tweets to that effect (myself included).  There's all the stuff about "dreams" and "injustice", but let me pass at those and defer to wiser men, but instead elaborate on a line of thinking more accessible to those in our generation.

There are many quotes, from many people in fact, that equate to this basic idea: there are two kinds of malfeasance in human affairs (and I mean malfeasance in the strongest sense) - 1) when bad men do great evil, and, 2) when good men see evil and are silent or do nothing.  Both are offensive, immoral and in some cases criminal.  The latter is also an embarassing travesty.

We know that when bad men do evil it's an atrocity.  There are many men who do this, but I think it only the sort of affairs for impotent men who must consciously be wicked to make any gains or profits.  Let's set this aside, we all know that it's wrong.

Now, there are two options for good men - do something or not do something to conquer evin.  Similar to the aforementioned scenario, let's set aside the decision for good men to do nothing.  It's just as immoral as doing evil, except more regrettable for the agent.

But, take the more textured case of good men doing SOMETHING.  There are at least two manners in which good men can do something, depending on whether they are opportunist or if they are sincere.

The opportunist seizes power to act, and probably accomplishes some good.  In fact, they may accomplish the most good as far as outcomes go.  The way they accomplish those ends, however may not justify the means.  They may exploit some to benefit others.  They may be arrogant or greedy.  They may seize power because they can, not because they have earned it or have pure intentions.  Good men often have power, but still abuse it.

The other route is that of humility and sincerity, which is ultimately the route that few men (seem to) choose.  It is a hard one. Nice guys, after all, finish last.  But, this route is ultimately the route we must take or at least try to take - for the sake of our friends, families, country men and fellow world citizens. To truly serve humanity, one must not pursue power, the world's recognition nor the applause of men.  One must instead put the cause and others ahead of themselves - they must strive to have their conscience untroubled by remorse for past action or regret for missing opportunity to help others.  They must be pure of heart.  If they do not, the data and logic suggest that they will become wicked.

For those that we trust with our lives, with our families and the ability influence us, I pray that they have taken the noble path, even though they are powerful enough to amass fortunes and power for themselves, their families and their entourages.  Because if they have not, we are surely endowed with a future of imperfection - and to lift an idea from the story of Adam and Eve - a future of original sin.

On this topic, I have been reflecting much on a concept from one of my all-time favorite books - East of Eden.  There is a concept that is at the crux of the narrative - timshel.  It's the idea that we're not compelled nor guaranteed to conquer sin - we "MAYest" conquer sin.  We have the ability to, it's our choice.

We have to, if we do not, I do not see any other outcome but the perpetuation of suffering and triumphing over good.  That's not something my mind, body and soul will tolerate.

I try to take the "virtuous path" so to speak, but it's incredibly difficult.  There are weak minded people that you can either dupe, mystify or coerce into doing what you want...really easily.  This goes for everything from phishing them out of $5000 or taking advantage of them at a bar and bedding them.  The moral choices we make on a daily basis could fill an infinite scroll every day.  We have many opportunities to practice timshel.

There are days when I want to throw this virtuous path to the birds.  But I cannot, and if you are considering it, you cannot either.  I (and I'm sure you have as well) have made a commitment, promise or oath to uphold what's right and reject what is not - no matter how tempting.  I need your help to succeed and I will also provide it, we must all be eachother's keepers in this effort.

Many great men have failed in this effort, but we must not.  If one of us collapses others also will.  And, if we get to a certain threshold or collapsing principle, I really believe that humanity will be doomed.

So to summarize MLKs echoes from the day - it's not good enough to just do "something" or "speak", one must also do what's right.

This is all really preachy and somewhat narcissistic, I know.  I really feel strongly about this though.  I think the world really does hang in the balance when it comes to good people choosing to do what's right or not do what's right.

Alas, I am hopeful.  Because there are many good men in the world.  It is our choice whether we will try to be pure of heart, mind and soul and choose that path.

Peace.

-Tambe

Remembering Nakul

On days like these I think about Nakul. Although I suppose that's every day.  I still don't understand the gravity of his death nor feel absolved of it.  It still hurts, though I suppose we all have found some peace with it.  At the same time, I'm proud because his life saved many more.

And I suppose I'm lucky, even though it's perhaps the most guilt one could feel, that his death has taught me what life is all about - family, community, service, integrity, grace/faith*.  All of the things that are bigger than us, individually.

I miss you, brother.

---
* - Added at 5:09pm EST.  Duh.  Still learning to think about and express spirituality and what it means to me.

Cross Post - Have you read too many books to believe what you're told?

Argue with me about the liberal arts on the Umich Dean's Alumni Council Blog: http://lsarecentgrad.wordpress.com/2012/01/12/ive-read-too-many-books-to-believe-what-im-told/

-Neil

Beast mode

People say you have to compromise who you are to get what you want. I refuse to believe that.

I think you can do the right thing AND get what you want AND be happy AND have deep, deep relationships AND make a difference in the world AND have fun along the way.

I'm back on the warpath to prove it.

Peace.

How could you falter when you're the rock of Gibraltar
I had to get of the boat so I could walk on water
This ain't no tall order, this is nothin to me
Difficult takes a day, impossible takes a week
I do this in my sleep,
I sold Kilos of coke, (so?) I'm guessin' I can sell CD's
I'm not a businessman, I'm a business, man
Let me handle my buisness, damn! - Jay Z in Diamonds of Sierra Leone