Category: Uncategorized

I’m currently advising startups via my alma mater’s entrepreneur accelerator program, and Appreciative Teambuilding would be incredibly helpful.

For one startup, it is a very tech-centered approach and they are trying to hit it big long-term with a very large-scope idea. However, the professor who is spearheading it, and coded most of the platform, is not the best with “soft” skills or leading his team. He has a few students or ex-students involved, but I am skeptical of their level of commitment and I know none of them have any defined roles apart from “well, let’s keep in touch and work on it and get the platform finished soon.” He also has no core business figured out, as far as the “why” (see Simon Sinek’s “Start with Why” talk on TED) and to whom he needs to go to as primary adopters of the product. A group discussion of sharing success stories and identifying strengths among the team members would be very helpful in something essential – assigning roles and some accountability/ clear action steps for everyone to do. Establishing the core and guiding principles would really help with the direction and identity of the company and product, and envisioning the future of all their roles is very important, as I think the students at least are pretty lukewarm as far as commitment long term or actually doing anything beyond “yeah, I’ll help.”

The second company has a surgical product to help rebuild cartilage, and it literally came up in our second meeting, when we were practicing “elevator pitches,” that the team members need to get away from just vomiting numbers and entrepreneur jargon and actually TELL THEIR STORY. The one founder literally had a nose reconstruction as a child, which was his inspiration for developing this product and company, but he did not even mention it in ten minutes of talking about his company!!! They can definitely use some AI-based focus and discussion of their unique strengths and experiences that will add the passion and relatability to their company that they need to be communicating – that sense of purpose beyond “this is a cool product.”

I thought it was interesting when Ron Fry said that positivity can often become an end unto itself, much to the detriment of the AI process. I can definitely see that, and it is perhaps the embodiment of some of the greatest criticisms of the AI process and the roadblock for its mass adoption and credibility. A lot of companies, mine included, do “team building activities” and positive encouragement and recognition, but with very little action or substance attached.
The generative process, as Fry continues, is best recognized when people do not WAIT FOR INSTRUCTIONS but instead are inspired to create and ideate amongst themselves and ACT on those ideas and improvements. This is clearly the characteristic of great companies – the positive ideology is so pervasive that it permeates to all levels of the organization, and people constantly make choices (and they have the agency and empowerment to act) to act on this core ideology. This process is not about people ordering change from subordinates, it’s about collaboration between people who see each other every day (and who better knows an employee than their coworkers?) and generative positive ideas and actions, and the resulting transformational outcomes.

I was especially struck in the video around the 18:30 mark when Max was told that he has great ideas, but because he comes at it from a negative perspective “nobody will listen to [him].” The new perspective for me here was that the man told max that nobody would listen because of the “environment” that Mac had created with his negativity – and I had never really thought about positive or negative energy (resulting from the accompanying positive or negative perspective/mindset) in the sense of creating an environment, for ourselves or others. I am quite aware of the impact of environment on myself and others, and it completely makes sense that we create our own environments by the energy we adopt in given situations. I had always thought of this more as kind of a rapport or vibe or authenticity or whatever, but thinking of it as an environment that we create is far more powerful.

I also think that (as discussed in the 15 minute mark) very few people would disagree that positive attitude and happiness have a huge impact on results – anyone who doesn’t want to be at timber top – or at work or school – is not going to do well.

The Pygmalion effect can be quite powerful in a variety of ways in determining people’s performances in given circumstances.

1. People who are given higher expectations in a healthy, “you can do this” way frequently perform better because they are instilled with the grit and confidence to do so (Angela Duckworth’s book Grit talks about this a lot)
2. People who are given higher expectations can perform better because their teacher, boss, or other figure who is responsible for measuring their results or facilitating their progress provides a higher quality of education, tools, or management that leads to a higher achievement. The big example of this is teachers and their students.
3. People who have higher expectations can be seen as performing better (especially when performance is not easily measurable in concrete terms) because the party responsible for determining their achievement has a more positive bias toward their expected performance.

Something that I think is important to maintain, however, is a sense of being genuine with expectations and performance – people need to feel like they are actually believed in in order to have a higher performance. If they feel they are just being hollowly motivated by someone who really doesn’t believe they can do it, the positive affirmation will backfire.

As a side note, it’s a fundamentally ironic quality of the stock market that it is so fickle. When people feel like things are going badly, they make things go badly. I remember a town manager once told me about how her town of Cary, North Carolina, recovered faster from the economic downturn of 2008: she said that she insisted they maintain the budget for keeping the town beautiful with painting, landscaping, etc. and helped small businesses (like coffee shops, restaurants) stay afloat. This provided people with a sense of normalcy and safety, and the consumers resumed “normal” behavior and spending habits sooner than elsewhere.

I thought the AI summit regarding Idaho education for the blind and deaf was fascinating in the lengths gone to include everyone that needed to be included – guide dogs, braille, sign language translators, etc.
I’m sure seeing those provisions also opened a few eyes as to the achievability of these accommodations, as well as perhaps unlocking a bit of empathy for those in these circumstances.

I liked how Diana defined integrity as more than just a personal thing; instead, it is a concept that requires concern and stewardship for a whole organization. “Integrity” cannot be achieved in the AI context without assuring that it implies inclusion of all involved and consideration for the success of the organization as a whole.

Some ethical challenges I have been in include being encouraged to lie to potential clients about services rendered or potential therein – for example, staffing companies’ sales people are encouraged to tell clients that they have lots of candidates that would be a good fit just waiting around eagerly, or that they have a special process that yields higher quality people; in reality, though, it’s pretty much the same and involves just scanning Careerbuilder or Indeed just like anybody else. Some agencies do have a “pipeline” for certain jobs, but it’s usually just general labor type positions.

Additionally, in startups people frequently choose language carefully or use B.S. projections to sound better, especially when raising capital or applying for accelerators/incubators. I’ve been involved in this and it takes quite the mental gymnastics and semantic manipulation for some founders to really believe what they’re saying. It’s important to believe in what you’re doing, but a lot of people try to skip steps and just talk the talk without being able to walk the walk, so to speak.

 

I believe in authenticity, growth, collaboration, pragmatism, and taking advantage of the time we have on this earth. I feel that if something is worth doing, it’s worth doing right.
I think I am pretty solid on the former, but with the latter especially I struggle with having the discipline to exemplify and manifest my values 100% of the time. Of course, we are not always perfect and that should not be expected (even though we often expect perfection in others but are quick to forgive ourselves), but I feel that I could do a far better job of taking my own advice (I give excellent advice on how to live life but follow about half of it at best!) and presenting a consistent example of practicing what I preach. I’m working on it.

 

 

What do you think you do best?

This is a pretty broad question, probably intentionally so. I’m tempted to divide it into “personally and professionally,” although I think they bleed together too often to warrant a separation.

I think I do really well, in general, at maintaining a growth mindset. This leads to a lot of attributes

• I am constantly reading, learning, observing, thinking, etc.
• I stay in shape physically and try to get better at the sports I do
• I love traveling and learning about other cultures and people
• I consider myself a pretty good listener
• I have a wide variety of experiences to draw from
• I love learning new skills and competencies
• I relate well to people, and a wide variety of people at that
• I am generally optimistic and open to try most things
• I am generally less defensive, or try to be, and try to be more self-aware

 

Why do you believe as you do?

I’ve read / listened to a lot of material that discusses this mindset and it seems to be pretty accurate. I also get feedback from people pretty consistently – I am told I am interesting, weird, unique, generally easy to talk to, understanding, motivated, active, etc.

 

What are your key strengths, and what leads you to believe that they are strengths?

I think my key strengths are the aforementioned (or, rather, their application). I am a quick learner and can adapt pretty quickly, even when situations are outside of things I typically have experience with. I also relate well to people and can usually problem solve fairly effectively. I also know that I am not the most disciplined and structured person in many ways, but I excel at being creative and drawing on different perspectives within a structured environment or mindset. I can usually think of new angles and ways to view things, and can process quickly others’ input and actions in context of the circumstances – at work or interpersonally.
I know I also have a service-oriented mindset, and I love doing things for others and being helpful. Sometimes my mother reprimands me for doing too many things for other people and not prioritizing myself.

I can start by saying that I pretty much wholeheartedly agree with points made in the video; while the topic of “happiness” is far more complex, what he said lines up with every book I’ve read, every podcast I’ve listened to, and every experience that I’ve had until this point in my life – and they have been numerous. When he talked about “trying too hard to be happy” or “trying to hard to achieve success,” I was reminded of Charles Bukowski, who spent most of his life as a failure but eventually achieved success and a measure of fulfillment – at the end of his life, on the topic of happiness and success he literally just said “don’t try.”
Also, the quote by Nathaniel Hawthorne was brought to mind; although it is far overused in shallow social media profiles, the point he was trying to make is similar – “Happiness is a butterfly, which when pursued, is always just beyond your grasp, but which, if you will sit down quietly, may alight upon you.”

I just finished Mark Manson’s “The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F$%k,” and he made many of the same points as well, especially with the Cult of Optimism referenced in the video. All the media we are bombarded with on the daily is just shallow, positivity BS that forgets the obvious fact that there is no positivity except in light of negative, that there is no life except in acknowledgment of death, and there is no success or dream outcomes except with a realistic acknowledgment of failure and reality. I especially liked in the video when he said that we need to learn to handle uncertainty and act in its face, acting in accordance with reality and WHAT WE HAVE TO WORK WITH NOW as opposed to establishing some arbitrary “positive” vision and trying to bend reality to it. Success is never glamorous or sexy until it’s achieved; the road to it is made of many small, uninteresting, ugly, difficult steps and habits. PROCESS GOALS ARE NOT OUTCOME GOALS.
This whole view is echoed in the book I’m reading right now -Atomic Habits. The basic thesis is essentially the same as the video purports – “feeling” like doing something is just adding a hurdle (making positivity an additional requirement). Instead, we should identify the process that leads to success and focus on taking those small steps and making the little things habits until, before we know it, we’ve reached the goal – because if you rely on your willpower and feeling like doing it, you’ll never get there – because you will rarely feel like doing it.

 

The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, and that step should be made first. We can’t always assume that we will be our best selves, but we can realize that we are imperfect and still implement the framework that will get us to where we want to go.

I am very on board with the research and tricks brought to the table in this video. I’ve read a lot about the topic of happiness, and listened to a variety of audiobooks and podcasts, and everything I learned or heard was in line with what this guy said. I think the most important thing is to view happiness as an actionable perspective or choice in life – it’s not something that “just happens” as you check certain boxes or achievements – but it’s also not an end in and of itself (because you will never reach that end) – it’s something that happens along the way.
I once had a professor make the bold assertion that “there is no such thing as stress.” Everyone was very skeptical, but he went on to clarify that what he meant is that there is no actual stress as an independent object, but rather a stress RESPONSE to a situation that you have deemed (subconsciously) as stressful. And this can absolutely be trained and modified throughout life, and explains how some people can be “stressed” by some things, but not by others, and how we cannot simply downplay people’s responses to things that we think may be trivial – because, to them, it’s still highly impactful.

“The Geography of Bliss” is a really interesting book that explores different countries rated the happiest, and the least happy, in the world – as well as why they are like that. Many countries with a standard of living that should dictate happiness are not really that happy, and many that should be miserable are quite happy (Latino countries and their emphasis on enjoying life and family ties are some of these). As the guy in the video said, perspective is key (choosing the lens and changing it over time through which we view our lives and the stimuli therein), as are relationships. A leading theory for why people live so long in the Blue Zones (places where people frequently live to over 100) is based on relationships. For a long time, people thought it was diet, exercise, climate, etc. These are all factors, but it is seeming more and more that the main factor is that people in these areas have socially based lives with frequent and meaningful human interaction. For example, you can imagine the old person who sits at home in his house and watches TV and goes to the grocery store occasionally, as opposed to the old person who walks (not drives) to the baker, the butcher, the grocer, etc., having conversations with people all along the way.

• I feel that I work pretty well with other people. At most jobs I’ve had, I’ve received the feedback of being approachable, giving what is requested to fellow employees in a timely manner and with a good attitude, and being friendly, trustworthy, and upfront. I can be rather shy about some things, but generally am quite outgoing, especially in a workplace environment. Sometimes I can “cross the line” a bit as far as some people’s comfort zones, but I generally find that I rarely get along with these types of people anyway.
  I am pretty upfront about most things – I don’t like when people dance around what they are trying to say in a professional environment. If you are making a sale, then people dance around, but I dislike having to play that game with people that are on my team and I work with on a daily basis. To facilitate this, I really do care about people and try to communicate that, and I want them to feel comfortable to be upfront with me in return. I have a highly collaborative mindset and am not afraid to ask for, or offer, help when needed.
  –
• I think that people would say that I can improve in general structure (timeliness consistency, little details, etc.) and sometimes in maybe being a bit more tactful or reserved. There are times professionally when being straightforward doesn’t necessarily pan out in the desired way, and they’ve seen that happen – or in some relationships / interactions. And they are certainly correct, as I’ve spent a lot of time trying to realize what the little details I neglect say to other people about me, and trying to fix some bad habits and create structure and discipline.