How do you know?

Posted on by
1

As happens from time to time, here in New Hampshire we’re in the midst of watching a political scandal unfold. It appears our young majority leader in the state House of Representatives falsified a document, quite elaborately, in order to complete his graduation requirements for law school. Reports tell us of his asking a fellow party member for an internship in his law office, then failing to actually show for the hours and assignments promised. Despite this failure, he documented the clients and cases he “worked on,” and submitted the report to the school. When the hiring attorney discovered that this young man had participated in the graduation ceremony, he started digging, called him out on the internship no-show, and ultimately demanded his resignation. With the facts thus presented and no where to turn, still the majority leader took one more opportunity to blow it, offering a covered over announcement of his decision to step away after one term of service. At this point, with the truth more or less revealed, the sad fellow has resigned his seat immediately and apologized for his conduct, disputing none of the details.

Here’s what I’m curious about: What carries a person through such a lengthy series of ethical lapses? From my count, he had at least 4 obvious chances to step off the liar’s track and get lined up with the truth. He could have called the hiring attorney as soon as he realized he was not going to be able to fulfill the internship. He could have contacted the law school to inform them that he would be shy the necessary credits this internship would have provided. He could have spoken to fellow students and told them he would need another year to complete school. He could have taken the quietly worked out, face-saving resignation offered him right at the end when the facts came clear to the various authorities. What keeps a person clinging to an ideal of himself that doesn’t line up with easily discovered facts? It’s an interesting question, but it brings me to the question I believe is more useful as a Microwave Meditation: how do you know in the moment when you slide off the ethical track?

I consider this from my own history of ethical imperfection. In my work life, I can think of the times when it took me hours, or on a couple of occasions days, to swallow hard, walk into the boss’ office and spit out the truth about my own failure to deliver. Those days were hell, literally. There is a physical and mental distress involved that makes a simple medical ailment pale by comparison. And yet, I clung. In hindsight, I have to call myself lucky. Soon enough I would realize it was time to fess up. I position myself somewhere in the middle of the bell curve on work ethics back then. I had enough decent upbringing and self-interest to keep myself out of serious trouble. These would somehow kick in and rescue me from the worst.

Nowadays, I’m in a lot better shape. I credit a careful meditation practice that has given me much quicker access to my own body and thought data. I know the signals of distress, generally in the moment of temptation to veer off into obfuscation or deflection. Nausea, chest muscle tension, jitters, plus a particular quality and pace of mind activity, scrabbling and anxiously searching for an escape… these are my cues for waking up to an instance of dancing around the truth. Being able to pay attention to these gives me the early chance to stop, get my story straight for myself, and proceed from there. What a gift.

When you are at an ethical fork in the road, how do you know?

~Margaret

The Buddhist Fan of the Web

Posted on by
2

One of the central dynamics of our times is the tug of war between the virtual and the tangible, between the technological and the human. This tension recently came at me from an unexpected direction.

When a Buddhist monk tells me that online learning can be better than a real classroom, I have to take it seriously, if for no other reason than it challenges my stereotypes of Buddhist monks.

The monk in question is David Caruso, the president of Antioch University New England, where I happen to sit on the board. I confess that I am a traditionalist when it comes to education. I believe that a good teacher is a stage performer who plays off the reaction of her audience. I believe that when we share an idea, the way we speak carries as much information as the meaning of our words. I still think I’m right on those points but I am reassessing whether those aspects trump everything that takes place in learning.

Over dinner, David, rumpled my easy assumption that Buddhism equals technological simplicity. Now, it’s possible that David is not a very observant Buddhist but setting purity of practice aside, he did make a persuasive case for the virtual classroom.

“We romanticize our own educations,” he said. “In most classes, maybe one third of the people speak up. One third never do and one third tune out. Online, you can require that everybody chimes in.”

As David sees it, participation is key to learning and being in the same room with a bunch of people isn’t the best setting for most people. The very same social cues and social communication that come with a live classroom could in fact undermine more people than are helped. When we speak in a group, we know we might be judged; about what, we might not be sure but if everything in a class has an element of performance, then stage fright will be part of the mix.

Meditation class in Second Life via Robin M. Ashford, Flickr Creative Commons

The virtual classroom puts a big cushion between each person; it’s like hiding behind a two-way mirror until you are fully ready to speak and even then, your voice is masked. No one can tell if you are dressed well, have a confident tone, or forgot to brush your hair. Your opportunity to choose the right words is much greater when you can type something, swap out a word or two and polish it before you hit Enter. In many ways, your ideas speak for themselves and take precedence over everything else. If we trust the world of ideas, shouldn’t we prefer this approach?

David offered other benefits. Conversations aren’t lost and you can always go back and see the flow of ideas. If you hit the web to look up some factoid while class is in session, you are more likely to hold on to that information because it came to you with some context rather than as a free floating bit of trivia.

I can see the advantages in all this. I wouldn’t carry this benefit to the extreme and say we should eliminate face-to-face classroom time. Speaking in public, or at least in a group, by itself is a critical skill and we should develop it. But I am also ready to accept that learning in a social setting has drawbacks that the online classroom can fix.

The irony of this discussion is that I doubt I would have taken David’s words so to heart if we hadn’t been speaking in person. His eyes twinkle with good humor as he launches into a full bore disagreement with you which makes it hard to get your hackles up. He knows how to be emphatic without being strident. Also, when you are talking over dinner it’s essentially impossible to walk away.

The personal and direct relationship matters a great deal, apparently, even when making the case for virtual interactions. The untidyness of life merits a hearty round of applause — but please, use one hand.

Missing Out

Posted on by
8

Jon and I met as usual, this Monday morning, to check in, brainstorm, and co-create this blog. I kicked us off the way I often do, presenting a vast concept deeply in need of sculpting into a 3-minute package. And that’s how Jon and I got into an energetic debate about a sip of coffee. Seriously, you need to hang out with us, our conversations are just sizzling.

Ahhhhh…. if only I had actually enjoyed it!

What was with this sip? Picture this: I’m at my laptop, alternately entertaining thoughts about my impending meeting, scanning emails, shuffling written detritus and pondering my assignments for the day. As I’m mentally flitting around in this way, I notice my hand. It’s reaching to replace my half-filled coffee mug onto my desk. I just catch onto the fact that I’m swallowing something. In that late instance, there was a feeling, a recognition of “auto-pilot”-type moment. No sense of thirst, no conscious decision to take a little pause and refreshment, just boom! before I knew what was happening, the sip was done and swallowed. I missed it!

There’s no need to make too big a deal out of missing this particular pleasure. There are plenty more sips where that came from. Still, there’s an insidious something here with vast implications. I have seen what it’s like when I “dial out” of the coffee moment. There’s a clear sense of loss, and a sobering question follows. How many of my life experiences am I actually “here” for, meaning awake to, clearly present for? And when is it otherwise,  drifting or skittering around, directionless, in that virtual realm I call my mind? Quality-wise, it’s like the difference, if you’re thirsty, between looking at a photocopy of a glass of water versus actually taking a drink.

Find your coffee sip-style moment today, and discover for yourself when you’re actually here and whether you’re missing out. ~ Margaret

Why Not Hit the Gas?

Posted on by
3

Six of us were having dinner the other night and things being what they are these days, the conversation turned to climate change.  If you are a climate change denier, read no further because I take it as sufficiently proven that humans are changing the climate in ways that are not good.  For those of you still reading, let me say that the chatter moved hither and yon, covering the usual line of impacts on the world, people and the economy.  Somebody probably spoke darkly about the promise of beach front property in Poughkeepsie and other devastations.

At one point I took a poll.  I asked each person to put their hand behind them and hold out one or two fingers.  If they thought the die was cast and people would fail to wake up in time or, even if they did awaken, the momentum of climate change was upon us regardless, they should hold up one finger.  If they thought the world might come to its senses and hugely curtail carbon emissions, they should hold up two. When it came time to show our hands, not a single person was holding two fingers.  In that room, we had no optimists.

From TWMDesign via Flickr Creative Commons

So then I asked, would this bleak future lead anyone in the room to stop trying to reduce their carbon footprint?  Would they stop thinking about how much they drive and the emissions that come from their car?  Would they heedlessly turn up the thermostat in winter or crank the air conditioning in summer?

As I expected, I had no takers.  Everyone would continue to act according to how they thought they should act, regardless if it altered the trajectory of climate change. We all would continue to do the right thing, even if doing so failed to produce the tangible result of a cooler planet, less human suffering and less environmental destruction.

Try this alone or better still, with your friends.  Do the one finger-two finger survey and for those choosing one finger, ask them what they would do?

And then ask  this final question:  Why?  Why engage in moral behavior that you believe will fail to shape the world accordingly?  Please share your answers.

~ Jon

Have a great meeting!

Posted on by
5

I caught myself the other day saying “Have a great meeting!” to a colleague, as we parted ways. This was a sincere gesture on my part, a well-wishing for the work day. She looked at me like I had gone absolutely battty. Friends! Is this what we’ve come to? Is it true, with this particular form of engagement at work we call “meeting,” that it’s inconceivable to have a good time? I’m asking you to look into this.

Are we having fun yet? (and, thanks for Flickr Creative Commons for the image)

I’m not interested in having you force a particular experience.  Nor is this a suggestion that any given meeting has only one quality to it.  I simply invite you, throughout this week as you partake of any meetings you happen to have, to ask yourself the following: What kind of time am I having?

Let this be a quick kind of check-in. No need to make anything more of it, just simply note a one- or two-word answer that captures the essence of a given “meeting moment.” If you can, come back after a day or two and give us your results. What do you discover, with this experiment? Does the “great meeting” exist?

~Margaret

Taking a Cue From the Creative Spark

Posted on by
2

I’ve been having a bit of fun reading a couple of reviews, and especially the reader comments, about the book “Imagine:  How Creativity Works” by Jonah Lehrer.  One review is glowing and the other slams the entire premise and style of the book.  Part of my amusement is that the nasty write-up got 27 comments, mainly from some very articulate folks saying to the reviewer, “Atta boy.  That’s the way to nail this sort of drivel.”  The favorable article drew 4 comments and most of those disagreed with the reviewer.

This all goes to show that we are more inclined to act when we are feeling feisty.  I won’t say feeling negative but that’s generally the case too.

Now for those who haven’t heard about Lehrer’s book, in it, he dissects the neurological and social roots of creativity.  He’s a little too glib for my taste but when I heard him interviewed, I liked his explanation of why we tend to have bright ideas at certain moments, like when we take a shower.

In the shower, we’re off the clock.  You can’t really get a lot done in the shower except take a shower.  Lehrer says at times like these, our mind wanders and that’s when the right side of our brain can pop out a notion that the left side of the brain says, “Hey, that’s pretty cool!”  Lehrer gives examples of companies, like 3M, that build free time into the regular schedule where people still get paid, but are formally off the clock in that they are supposed to do something other than work on a company project.

My gut sense is that in the shower, my internal editor is putting his heels up.  He’s not watching and judging every thought that crosses my mind, giving that one a thumbs up and the other a thumbs down.

Most of the time, he’s like the readers of those reviews.  He’s on the case applying all the little rules he uses and he’s a little more energized by things he dislikes than those he enjoys. As a result, some fresh material doesn’t pass muster and never makes it to consciousness.  It becomes the collateral damage of my cognitive process.

The habit of judging too early isn’t limited to our internal life.  It happens all the time in our relations with  others and that’s where we might stand to learn from the creative process. I defy anyone to say there’s never been a time when some bit of malarkey that came out of another person’s mouth turned out to have some merit at the end of the day.  The challenge of living consciously is to have that flexibility to withhold judgment and let things evolve –when we’re not in the shower.

~Jon

3-Center Check In

Posted on by
4

When it shows up in Harvard Business Review, maybe there’s something to this…

I’m referring to a recent article outlining the potential made available in the workplace through the practice of mindfulness. Genentech began this effort more than 6 years ago, and they report the benefits continuing to grow. I’ve left you a link to an HBR article about this below, and encourage you to read further there. And, just having spent 5 days at the Scientific Conference at the Center for Mindfulness, UMass Medical School, I can tell you that interest in mindfulness in the workplace is HOT. Because one way or another, we all have work to do.  So what better place to develop clarity, emotional intelligence, focus, inner fortitude, and compassion?

Here’s one of Genentech’s gems. It’s called the 3-Center Check In. It’s based on the fact that most of us are operating under the incomplete assumption that thought alone will get us through. To get all of your resources in play, there’s a lot more information you need access to. Put simply, you’ll need to invite body sensations and feelings into the picture. For many of you, that’s going to sound strange, maybe off-putting. Still, try the following 3-Center exercise a few times this week and see what comes of it. Here’s how:

Beginning with thought, ask yourself, What am I thinking right now? and pause, letting yourself become aware of the content, message, tone without engaging with any of it. Stay with this for a few breaths. Maintain an allowing attitude, with no need to judge or manage anything you observe. Next, ask, What am I feeling right now?, and pause, letting yourself feel what’s in your heart. Stay with this for a few breaths, as a companion to whatever you find. Now, ask, What am I feeling right now? and open your awareness to your whole body, all the physical sensations, surface and interior. Pause, letting yourself be aware without needing to change or fix anything.

This whole exercise can take about a minute, or less if that’s all you have. Genentech’s meditation teacher/consultant calls this the “gateway drug” to mindfulness, without having to call it meditation at all. It’s a simple, efficient way to call all your resources together, for the work ahead. Check in to the three centers–mind, heart, body–as often as possible. You can do it multiple times a day. You can do it anytime, anywhere. You can try it to see what effect it has on your day, your week. Try it!

Now, here’s the link to the Genentech story. Enjoy!

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/12/developing_mindful_leaders.html