Credibly Connect

Fortune Magazine Features SAMM and SMLI This Week - Don't Miss It!

2008-06-14T16:40:00.002-05:00

An animal-loving reporter at Fortune magazine caught wind of our charity, Save A Mexican Mutt, and sent a photographer to San Miguel de Allende last month. The article appears in Fortune on the newsstands Monday, June 16.

You can see the online version of the Fortune article here: http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/fortune/0806/gallery.Fortune40_after_work.fortune/3.html

If you are interested in learning more about the plight of homeless animals, are interested in providing a dog in need a forever home, or in credibly connecting with your employees by involving them in an experience in helping the helpless, see http://www.saveamexicanmutt.org . Volunteers for care, transport, foster, and donation are all needed and appreciated.

Also receiving mention in Fortune is the San Miguel Leadership Institute (SMLI), an educational organization founded by Dave Riveness and Jim Karger that creates unique learning environments for the exploration of intriguing and timely topics by organizational leaders. Forums are held in San Miguel de Allende and at corporate sites all over the world, with each program exploring topics such as employee engagement, emotional intelligence, and spiritual capitalism, all within a structure designed to drive interaction, discovery and application. Learn more about what is going on at: http://www.sanmiguelleadershipinstitute.com

Much positive is happening even in these difficult economic times faced by most in corporate America. Indeed, it is the tough times that present our most valuable learning opportunities.

Companies that prosper will be those open to new ways of thinking, new ways of doing -- those that don't pinch pennies to survive, but who are destined to thrive through their fundamental understanding that investing in their employees, securing their engagement, and showing them a path to personal and professional satisfaction is the only way to long-term success.

World Friends Week

2008-06-02T13:29:00.002-05:00

After several days on the road, I returned home to find this from a good friend in my inbox. I don't often forward things, but this I believe is worthwhile and speaks to the importance of relationships in all of our lives.

Think about this for a minute...

If I happened to show up on your door step crying, would you care?

If I called you and asked you to pick me up because something happened, would you come?

If I had one day left to live my life, would you be part of that last day?

If I needed a shoulder to cry on, would you give me yours?

This is a test to see who your real friends are or if you are just someone to talk to you when they are bored.

Do you know what the relationship is between your two eyes?

They blink together, they move together, they cry together, they see things together and they sleep together,

BUT THEY NEVER SEE EACH OTHER.. that's what friendship is.

Your aspiration is your motivation, your motivation is your belief, your belief is your peace, your peace is your target, your target is your heaven, and life is like hell without it.

It is "World Friends Week."

Who are your friends? You might think about forwarding it along to them to let them know you care.

See how many you get back.

(The person who sent this to me knows who they are -- and here it is right back at you.)

Big Weeks

2008-05-13T18:15:00.010-05:00

This week is a big week.

My son, James, who I saw graduate from college last Saturday, and his girlfriend, Sarah, joined us today in San Miguel and will be with us for the next eight days. Jamie (only I can call him that) has been here many times but this trip I sense is special, or at least, different. Like each of our children who have graduated university, he will likely find work after this trip and I fear that this may be his last for a while. So, I want to make it special for him and the special girl in his life and so we shall.

Later in the week, Kelly and I will be hosting a Fortune magazine photographer at our new home here. She will be photographing Kelly's work (her passion) saving Mexican street dogs through our charity, Save A Mexican Mutt.

To remind me what it is all about (something I occasionally forget) Kelly sent me this video made by one of her friends in rescue. I recommend it highly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtyrwNcG-OI

Then turn your browser to check the SAMM website at: http://www.saveamexicanmutt.org. There are some real opportunities for a big week there!

Yes, this week is a big week.

Last week was big, too. I got to spend time with old friends (who started as clients but became more) in California. That trip brought back fond memories.

Big weeks, two in a row.

Now that I think about it, I guess they all are big weeks, or can be. That is the choice each of us makes every week.

Here's wishing a big week for you.

Environmental Responsibility and Employee Engagement

2008-05-08T19:05:00.004-05:00

I sit here outside a rented bungalow overlooking Mission Bay in San Diego and I am reminded of people and communities who take social responsibility seriously.

Like Portland, Oregon, and Boulder, Colorado, San Diego, California wears its environmental awareness with pride. Indeed, over the last several days I have heard commercials on the radio warning of the effect of even throwing one gum wrapper down a storm drain; I have not seen a single scrap of litter; and hybrid cars here are endemic to the landscape. I often wonder why other communities aren't as "hip," and why most companies don't go further to involve themselves in socially responsible activities.

I don't pretend that for-profit companies exist for a primary reason other than to make a buck but making a buck is, in large part, due to the engagement of an organization's employees, that is, the willingness and desire of employees to want to come to work, to enjoy the experience, and to provide discretionary efforts while at work. That separates a few great companies from the thousands of "also-ran's."

In a recent study of more than 90,000 employees globally, the ten most significant engagement drivers were identified. One of those drivers is the employees' perception of whether or not their company is "socially responsible." While social responsibility encompasses many aspects of our lives, it most certainly includes environmental responsibility -- that is, the understanding that it is each of our obligations to leave the earth better than we found it.

Yet, knowing this, how many companies are you aware of that take affirmative steps to be responsible beyond the minimums government mandates, and how many educate their employees about the company's efforts? How many involve their employees in these efforts?

Alas, the answer is a small percentage.

I remain non-plussed by those employers who believe they can stare at the bottom line and make it change. It is like a batter in baseball staring at the left field fence because that is where he wants the ball to go when it leaves his bat. It is not likely to happen. Rather, the causes of a positive bottom line need to be the focus of every company -- that is their ball.

Some ideas? Though you'd never ask . . .

1. Teach employees good habits. Keep them aware, for example, of how they can protect their health, e.g., a new study of post-menopausal women published in the International Journal of Cancer shows that a chemical found in starchy foods such as French fries and potato chips called "acrylamide" doubles the likelihood of breast cancer -- the kind of fact your employees should know and will appreciate.

2. Get involved with "green." The newer generations who have entered and will be entering the workforce care and a high percentage use the green factor to determine the companies for which they want to work. Do your employees know what you're doing to reduce emissions? Does your company, for example, buy carbon offsets a way to help compensate for the global warming emissions we cause by helping fund green projects? Does your company use business travel "as needed," rather than "as wanted?" Two cross-country, round trip flights cause more emissions than a year of driving a high-milage car. Think about it and see www.nativeenergy.com.

3. Consider the environmental impact of your purchases. For example, PBDEs (polybrominated dephenl ethers or flame retardants) are linked to thyroid, liver, neurological and immune disorders. Europe has already banned the use of most formulations of PBDEs. When buying electronics does your company consider that certain manufacturers like Apple, Dell, and Sony are phasing out the use of PBDE's? If so, do your employees know that you use these considerations, and therefore their health, in your decision-making?

These are just three ideas of thousands.

What about you? What are your ideas to make your company more environmentally responsible? What should your company be doing to make sure its employees know of its environmental efforts?

Think about it and send your ideas along to karger@crediblyconnect.com and we will publish them here in a future blog.

Executive Compensation: An Issue On Which All Candidates Agree

2008-04-15T11:06:00.004-05:00

It is rare to find all Presidential candidates in agreement on any issue, but this morning Senator John McCain appeared on CNBC and had the following observation about executive compensation: "Greed and excess in corporate compensation is unacceptable in America. I'm not sure corporate America knows how bad their reputation is." Both Senators Obama and Clinton have also criticized not only the levels of executive compensation but the manner in which executive compensation is decided within most corporations.

Dealing with the results of disgruntled employees in businesses all across America, I work to ameliorate the consternation felt by those who suffer lower inflation-adjusted wages, increased costs of living and medical care, while reading their companies online SEC filings which, since 2006, have to reveal increases in executive compensation.

The fact that average CEO now ears 431 times the salary of an average production worker is not the problem, although many point to this literal disparity as a problem that continues to worsen.

The problem from an employee relations perspective is, interestingly, not literal, but relative. It is not so much how much the CEO makes but the fact that the average CEO enjoyed a compensation increase of 20.5% last year, this according to a study of 45 randomly selected public companies, while average revenues grew just 2.8 percent. By comparison, the median pay for workers rose only 3.5 percent, this according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Why the disparity?

Many say it is an inherent defect in the way executive compensation is set, a corporate governance problem, with CEO pay set by the Board of Directors which ostensibly is there to protect shareholder interests. Yet, oftentimes the CEO is the chairman of the Board of Directors and few would argue he or she can reasonably and objectively monitor his own salary. The average board member, oftentimes selected or recommended by the CEO in question, are beholden to the CEO for whom they will make compensation decisions. In the end, many argue the answer will be found in making boards of directors more accountable, and to that end, Senator McCain, in the interview this morning suggested he favors shareholder approval or disapproval of executive compensation packages.

Regardless how one feels about the issue, it is an employee relations problem in many companies if only because demoralized and angry employees are not engaged employees. It appears the three remaining Presidential candidates see the current system of executive compensation as fatally flawed and all express an intent to deal with the issue if and when they take the top office.

The Working Poor -- Yes, they are bitter

2008-04-13T17:51:00.008-05:00

Let me first apologize for being such a poor correspondent of late . . . it has been two months since I have added to this blog and I have no excuse except being on the road relentlessly where, ironically, much learning occurs but there is precious little time to record it.

I have spent time in Little Rock, Los Angeles, and now a small town in southern Kentucky which will home for the next several weeks. The genesis of each of these matters sprang from the same dark fountain -- unhappy, dissatisfied employees who see their standard of living being eaten away by higher fuel, food and medical costs. To add insult to their injury, they worry that their jobs may not be here much longer. And these worries are legitimate. Manufacturing companies continue to flee the United States with impugnity.

This weekend as I catch a breath, I have been fascinated by the news of Barack Obama who is being virulently criticized for saying these words: "You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing has replaced them. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns, or religion, or antipathy to people who aren't like them, or anti-immigrant sentiment, or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Regardless of one's political persuasion, I don't see the problem in this statement, if only because it is completely consistent with what I have seen developing over the last quarter century. Surely the criticism can't be calling the working poor "bitter." They are bitter and they do lash out at those who they feel responsible for their plight. Their recognition that their labor has become dispensable, or if not, at least movable to save a buck, or make an extra buck, would make anyone bitter.

While there there is no candidate for President that fully expresses my views about significant social issues, including Mr. Obama, I congratulate him for observing what should obvious -- the working poor are bitter because they have been left behind or fear they soon will be, and as such they have every reason to be bitter.

Indeed to label Obama's observation "out of touch" is itself out of touch.

Take care friends and I'll write soon . . .

Remember What Is Important, Really

2008-02-01T10:04:00.000-06:00

This blog is mostly for me, because I am mostly guilty . . .

A few minutes ago I received a call from Katy, my oldest daughter, and an e-mail from my second daughter, Kandi, just a few moments later. One of their close college friends, all of 26 years old, passed away yesterday from cancer. It began as a small tumor on his tongue, metastasized and he suffered greatly before he died.

He worked for a magazine and had a bright future, a serious girlfriend, everything to live for and so much life left based on the odds.

But, I am reminded that the odds, or probabilities, of living 76.8 years are just that, what is probable. When you flip a coin the odds are 50% you'll get heads everytime you flip it. But even if you flip the coin 10 times and get heads all ten times the odds are still 50% you'll flip tails on the next toss. That is a metaphor for my life, for everyone's life, but I often forget it, acting as if someone has given me a guarantee of 76.8 years because those are the odds, spread over an entire population.

But I am not an entire population. I am one man who has arrived at 56 years old. And while the odds say I have 20 more Summers in which to enjoy the sunshine, 20 more Autumns to watch the leaves change, 20 more years to get up each morning and be productive if I choose to be, 20 more years to love my wife and children, and 20 more years to be thankful that each day is mine to enjoy if I choose to do so, those odds provide no guarantee that today or tomorrow won't turn up tails.

The tragedy of this young man reminds me that most of what I fret about is just part of the game - and that like all games, this game is meant to be enjoyed if only because the game is more about keeping the game going and enjoying every move than it is about winning, which I am reminded this morning is not possible.

So, with that observation I am going to get up from this desk right now, grab up some leashes and take two or three dogs to the park and I am going to try and be present enjoying every moment, and when I catch myself (as I surely will) fretting about some event that happened that didn't work out exactly as I had planned, or some future event that may happen, I am going to stop and say out loud, "You should be so lucky as to be here for that event or any other. The challenge is to figure how how to appreciate it."

"Money for Nothing and Your Chicks for Free"

2008-01-25T15:00:00.000-06:00

Mark Knopfler of Dire Straits sung those words about rock stars but American CEO's live it -- at least the part about money. Let's take a look . . .

Chuck Prince almost destroyed the largest bank in the world - Citigroup - and was awarded $24 million and change on his way out the door. Stan O'Neal was even worse. Merrill Lynch gave him a goodbye package worth $161 million. Maybe the worst in recent times was Bob Nardelli formerly with Home Depot. He was paid $245 million for five whole years of service in which shareholders saw no gain whatsoever.

And, it is worth noting that I am not anti-CEO. I count several as friends. Indeed, I would have no problem with Chuck and Stan or Bob for getting rock star money if they had actually delivered for their shareholders or employees.

But they didn't. They were goofs who looked good, spoke well, kissed enough butt to get to attain positions way beyond their abilities, and couldn't manage their way out of their own driveways -- as in "driveways" plural since all had several homes around the world each assumedly with at least one driveway.

And, I am dumbfounded by those who complain that employees have no right to bitch about their CEO's compensation, or even worse, that shareholders should be silent.

Not a chance, bud.

If I worked for Citigroup, or was a shareholder, I would be raising hell.

Citigroup posted a record loss last week and in the same breath gave new Chief Executive Officer Vikram Pandit $26.7 million in stock and he hasn't been there long enough to even find his office without a map.

So, what does that have to do with employees? Last week Citi announced it was putting said 4,200 employees on the street. Why? Because thanks to Chuck and his buddies Citi had to take a writedown of $18.1 billion on subprime mortgages. What have Citigroup's shareholders netted from all the compensation orgies? Citigroup shares closed at $24.40 the day the most recent bonuses were awarded, less than half the $54.77 closing price on bonus day last year, forcing Citigroup to quadruple the number of shares awarded to executives whose stock bonuses it wanted to double for reasons unknown to the rational.

While employees are sent home to tell their spouses and children they no longer have work, Sallie Krawcheck, head of Citigroup's wealth-management division, pocketed $8.43 million in stock, a 79 percent increase over the prior year. Vice Chairman Stephen Volk got $8.29 million in stock, an 81 percent jump. Vice Chairman Lewis Kaden got $4 million, a 22 percent increase. Ajay Banga, head of the bank's international- consumer division, was awarded $6.01 million in stock, up 93 percent. Steven Freiberg, who oversees the U.S. consumer division, received $4.36 million in stock, a 40 percent increase, all this according to Bloomberg.

And, let's not forget the money man himself, Citi's Chief Financial Officer Gary Crittenden, who joined Citigroup last year and netted a $9.21 million stock bonus, while Michael Klein, who oversees investment banking, got a $12.8 million stock bonus.

Here's a thought -- don't pay those who haven't performed. Instead, fire them. Tell them to put their "shit in a shoebox" and "get out." If you want to give them something, give them the shoebox. And, as for those who are just coming aboard, give them a decent salary and the promise of a big fat bonus if, and ONLY if, they perform for their employees and their shareholders.

Anything else is "money for nothing." Chicks, however, are never free, at least not for 50+ year-old execs. And that may be the only justice under the current system.

Sick Leave: A Step to Resolve America's Economic Paradox?

2007-10-28T10:33:00.000-05:00

Paradox: a statement or proposition that seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a possible truth.

When the subject is money, the world is replete with paradox. A good example is the paradox of thrift first identified by economist John Maynard Keynes. The paradox states that if everyone saves more money then aggregate demand will fall and will in turn lower total savings. So, if everyone saves, then there will be a decrease in consumption which leads to a fall in aggregate demand leading to a fall in economic growth, making savings bad, not good.

Indeed, the President of the United States became a leading advocate of consumption after 9/11 fearing that America would stop spending, start saving in anticipation of the next "event," and send the economy into recession. Yet, we all know that saving for a rainy day, retirement, or a new home is a positive personal trait, one that illustrates the ability to plan for the future, the willingness to assume responsibility for ourselves and our families. This leaves us on the one hand pumping consumerism as necessary to propel an economy that provides goods, services, and jobs, while at the same lamenting America's often negative savings rate as illustrating individual and collective immaturity, even moral derilection of duty.

The workplace, too, is filled with paradox, one being paid sick leave and whether or not it should be mandated. The paradox is that most Americans believe (or say they believe) in "family values," and ostensibly one of those values is to stay home to take care of loved ones who are ill, and to not be economically disadvantaged when we are sick. After all, how can one say "I believe in family," and at the same time say "I believe if you or a close family member is ill that you should be penalized." Yet, some argue that this is exactly what more than half the employers in the United States are saying by not providing a single day, not an hour, of paid sick leave to their employees, this in contrast to 145 countries around the world who require employers to "walk the walk" of family values.

How do most within our society resolve this paradox? With another paradox, of course, that being the "free market" which states the market, not the government (or the people), should determine how much, if any, sick leave employers should provide their employees. That might work but for the fact that the "free market" itself may be the ultimate economic paradox, espousing the principle that everyone pursuing their own economic interests and ignoring the interests of others nets a greater economic good for all. Indeed, at its foundation, the "free market" elevates selfishness to a virtue, which might work theoretically but for the religious foundations of society which are grounded upon giving, not receiving, as the virtue which should be valued and applied.

Regarding paid sick leave, America may soon have an opportunity to resolve a part of a multi-layer paradox that permeates our economic existence. The question to be answered is whether it is more important to support families and the employees who support them by requiring employers to provide compensation during some period of illness or is it more important to allow the free market to work its magic, knowing (or at least believing based on substantial historical perspective) that in the long term free markets right themselves between capital and labor. Applied to compensation and benefits, the argument goes something like this -- when paid sick leave is required to hire and retain good employees, then the market will require employers to provide it.

Ironically, the easy answer to the paradox of paid sick leave won't work anymore, that being, "Employees should save their money so when they are sick they can take care of themselves and their families," for as we all now know saving is no longer a moral virtue, but rather, a flaw that leads to economic Armageddon for all of us.

The upcoming debate over the Healthy Families Act which, if enacted, would require employers to provide every employee seven paid sick days a year may ultimately be reflected upon as a milestone in how America resolves a fundamental economic paradox.

"Going to the Dogs - Lawyer Trades Practice for Consulting and Canines"

2007-10-21T10:14:00.000-05:00

I thought you might be interested in this article from "The Texas Lawyer" which was reprinted in "The New York Lawyer" earlier this month. I value and appreciate the story but mostly I value the opportunity to help Kelly pursue her passion as she has for so many years done the same for me. (If the link below does not take you to the article, please copy and paste the link into your browser.)

http://www.saveamexicanmutt.org/pdf/texas.pdf

As we embrace this week and those around us, we guys can (at least in part) thank the human-animal bond for what nurturing ability we have. From this month's Men's Health magazine, the following:

In a 2003 paper in the journal American Behavioral Scientist, Alan Beck, Sc.D., director of Purdue's center of the human-animal bond, and Aaron H. Katcher, M.D., a psychiatrist at the University of Pennsylvania, point out that cultures like ours have very few forms of play that mold caring and nurturing behaviors in male children. "Boy children," says Beck, "tend to be very self-conscious about having to take care of younger brothers and sisters. They don't play tea party or dollhouse, because that's Mommy stuff. However, taking care of an animal is a notable exception. Caring for your dog is always okay."

This license to love persists into adulthood. In virtually every public setting, women are, by and large, much more demonstrably touchy-feely than guys are. With dogs, however, this gender difference vanishes. "Men are just as likely as women to pet and stroke their dogs, hold them in their laps, kiss them, and so on," says Beck. "It doesn't matter whether they're male or female dogs, either: Men can hug them without inhibition, without feeling any less manly. It's one of the very few areas in life where men feel truly comfortable as nurturers."

Don't miss the entire article which can be found at: http://men.msn.com/articlemh.aspx?cp-documentid=5558017&page=1

P.S. A recent study notes that 97% of people admit talking to their dog. 3% lie about it.

Best for the week . . .

Advice To My Daughter (Upon Request)

2007-10-05T14:54:00.000-05:00

It is an honor to be asked for advice by anyone, but never more than when one of your own children asks. After all, we parents spend a lot of our time as the village idiots among our offspring, or at least I did. This afternoon, one of my daughters sent me an instant message out of the blue and asked this question:

"Dad, do you have any advice about anything, life, being happy, being so critical of yourself, just anything that you think would be helpful advice to your daughter?"

"At 55, hon, I've learned more about how to get it wrong than how to get it right . . . so my advice is mostly what you should not do which will hopefully narrow your options and make it more more likely you will succeed if only because you won't make the same mistakes I did. So, here goes:

"1st -- Don't take anything too seriously. This ends the same for all of us -- we get sick, and we die. No one gets out alive which eliminates the option of "winning." That leaves you with one of two choices: life is either not worth playing or is just a game and should be treated as such.

"2nd -- Money is important but it is not as important as people. I'd rather spend an hour nursing a tall drip coffee in any Starbucks with you than be alone in the fanciest hotel in London or Singapore.

"3rd -- Your work needs to fulfill a passion, something that you not only want to do, but need to do. If you work only for the buck, you will quickly tire of the game. Work has to have its own reasons independent of the toys we are told we need to be happy. Work needs to fulfill you and this is important if only because we all spend most of our waking hours working.

"4th -- Living in the future is a loser. There may be no future (see the bus coming down the street -- it may have your name on it). And even if there is a future for you beyond today, don't allow your ego or some motivational speaker tell you that "you have total control over what happens to you." No, you don't. You never did. Genes and environment determine 90% of what will happen to you. You won't. Ever. Fate has far more control of the external than you ever will. The only thing you have control over is how you feel about what happens and that is your choice everyday.

"5th -- Don't be afraid. Fear paralyzes us. Fear is the dark side of living in the future. Fear is the brother of "hope" which is nothing but fear with a smiley-face painted on it. Look around. What are you doing? If you like what is happening at this moment, you come as close to winning the game as you ever will. If you don't like it, change it if you can, and see if that works better. If you can't change it, change the way you feel about it. Look at where you are right this second and if you can find one thing to like, focus on that thing, whether it is your job, your spouse, your pet, or a flower that is growing in the sun -- just like you are.

"That's it, sweetheart. That's all I know."

Are Mexican Mutts Worth The Effort?

2007-08-14T18:17:00.000-05:00

Yes, and so are the people who adopt them.

Below find a letter to which was attached an application for “Amber,” a Shetland Sheepdog mix found on the Save A Mexican Mutt (SAMM) website: www.samm.petfinder.org.

My household is made up of me and my husband, his retired dog guide, a 12-year old lab named Nathan and his working guide dog, a 3-year old German Shepherd named Tarby. My husband is totally blind and is currently on his 7th dog guide. I am legally blind, totally blind one eye, and also totally deaf in my right ear.

We believe we are responsible dog owners. We take our dogs to the vet on a regular and as-needed basis. We adopted a Greyhound/Britney Spaniel mix that followed my husband home from the grocery store when we lived in San Antonio, Texas. We had her altered and moved her with us to Albuquerque, New Mexico in 2000. Unfortunately, she became very ill in December 2005 and we had to have her put down in April 2006. We still miss her greatly as she was a wonderful dog.

On July 3, 2007, I had to have my wonderful dog guide Silka (who turned 7 that day) put down due to heart cancer. I am still dealing with my grief over her. I think I will always miss the dogs that come into my life but time does make it easier to deal with the grief.

We feed our dogs twice daily. Both boys are on allergy meds. Due to us being blind, we take our dogs out on leash so we can pick up after them and also know if they try to pick anything up in the yard. We live in a mobile home and have a fence on each side and a large redwood deck that is gated. We can all be on the deck together and enjoy the outdoors. We also often brush our dogs out on the deck as we are trained to do that for our dog guides.

Amber would need to be an inside dog due to our circumstances and also be able to get along well with our other dogs. Dog guides are trained from the time they are born to be around people and animals so I don't believe there will be a problem with the boys.

Due to my problems with hearing now, I have decided to have a pet rather than a dog guide. I do not get out too much by myself as far as shopping, doctor appointments, and grocery shopping since I cannot tell where sound comes from thus making it very hard to cross a street by myself safely. This means I would not be able to really work a dog guide like he needs to be worked but I can still walk a dog in our neighborhood.

I went and got Silka before I lost my hearing so we sort of learned things together. We clicked from the moment we worked together which does not normally happen as it usually takes six months to a year to build the kind of teamwork between a person and their animal guide. Silka was special and I am not sure I would ever have that experience again. I always wait between my guide dogs, as I do not want to compare one to the other. All dogs are special in their own ways.

My husband's dog guide, Tarby, sleeps on my husband's side of the bed on the floor. He has a foam pad (about 1" thick) with another dog bed on top. Old Nathan sleeps on the bed now. I figure he has earned it.

Thank you for any information you can send me on Amber.

When Kelly followed up by telephone with this kind woman the lady was concerned that we would not want to adopt a dog to a blind person. Kelly assured her that was not the case but asked how long Amber would be left by herself during the day, a standard question asked everyone. The lady replied, “Oh, I am home all the time except once a week when I get together with other blind ladies for a few hours and crochet things that we sell to help those in need.”

Those in need . . .

Here is a woman who has seen her husband go blind. Then she went blind. Now she is almost deaf. She lives in a mobile home park. Yet, with all her challenges, her interests are her animals, and those “in need,” and, yes, in a Mexican dog off the streets named Amber.

She doesn’t recognize herself as one “in need.” We should all be so brave as we face our challenges, ones that mostly pale in comparison to those with real challenges, those like this ‘blind lady’ as she refers to herself -- those who are strong enough to accept their challenges without complaint and who look beyond themselves to others.

I am reminded of something Og Mandino said many years ago, “Never again clutter your days or nights with so many menial and unimportant things that you have no time to accept a real challenge when it comes along. This applies to play as well as work. A day merely survived is no cause for celebration. You are not here to fritter away your precious hours when you have the ability to accomplish so much by making a slight change in your routine. No more busy work. No more hiding from success. Leave time, leave space, to grow. Now. Now! Not tomorrow!”

Epilog:

We leave Mexico on August 24 on our way to Dallas, Texas to bring as many dogs as we can get adopted along the way, after which Kelly will then drive Amber to her new forever home along with others to foster homes in Albuquerque and Santa Fe, New Mexico. If you want to leave time, leave space, to grow, to help those “in need” and can provide a forever home to one of SAMM’s wonderful animals, please see www.samm.petfinder.org and let us hear from you. Thank you.

Late Night Thoughts From Detroit

2007-07-30T20:37:00.000-05:00

Detroit is memories of the days when the Big 3 were rolling, when GM, Ford and Chrysler were, for all intents and purposes, the only game in towns all across America.

That was then and this is now and today Detroit is home of the Big 3 who are being rolled over, beaten into total submission by, well, almost every other carmaker in the world. Earlier this year, Toyota took over King of the Hill status from the once invincible General Motors.

As I stare from the window of my hotel this late night, even if I didn’t know it I’d know it. You would, too. You can see in the faces of the people -- a disturbing dull-eyed stare of those who have lost their jobs and their middle-class lifestyles as their employers lost their market positions. They look like assault victims still in shock.

And I wonder why it happened. Who is to blame? Who is the next victim?

Good questions, and there are plenty who will jump headfirst into the blame-game. It is one of those strange situations where facts actually get in the way of understanding.

Employees point to the almost criminal-negligence with which American cars were designed and manufactured for so many years.

Employers point to unions that had so many rules that even the best-designed car could never be built, at least a price that anyone would pay.

Unions point to the employers who, after all, agreed to all that featherbedding.

Executives point to employees who didn't perform and employees point right back at them.

And they all are right -- so busy being right they are not open to seeing a way out or better said, a way back up.

Whether execs, employees, unions, or customers, each sees me, you, and them, and the object of the game is to get yours, to make sure your head stays in the feed bucket longer than all the others, that you stay fat, dumb, and happy figuring the others will take care of themselves and if they don’t, who cares?

It is a zero-sum game. Someone has to lose for another to win but in this case it turned out to be everyone who lost.

No one was open to the idea that it isn’t about the company, the execs, the shareholders, the employees, or the unions. It was about something else that they paid lip-service to, but never considered -- the product. It sounds reasonable but to have even uttered those words might have found you naked and dead in the trunk of a stolen rental car in west Detroit.

Yet, it was true. And it is true. In the 1970’s when I first came to Detroit I had a nascent sense that what I was experiencing wasn’t real, or if it was, it couldn’t last. It wasn’t just the lack of efficiency, but the lack of care that was palpable. The game everyone was playing wasn’t about making cars. It was about making money.

And when the game, any game, is about making money, no one wins for long. It is like telling a batter in baseball that the game is about the outfield fence. Looking at the fence instead of the ball only insures the ball will never leave the park.

The people I know who have made the most money focus the least on it. They focus on what they are doing and what they are doing is not making money. It is something else – it is their product or service, the byproduct of which is money.

The endgame could have been different for Motown if money and selfishness had not been elevated to virtues, if money wasn’t the measure of greatness but the result of it. If each of the nags at the feedbag had focused not on the money but on the moment, on what they were doing, and are doing, Detroit would be different tonight.

Presence: Hard to Define But You Know It When You See It

2007-07-16T17:22:00.001-05:00

There are a few experiences that the moment they happen you know you will never forget. Sometimes you can seem them coming, as in the birth of a child, but sometimes epiphany can strike from just a word or two in casual conversation that changes your perspective forever, that makes you understand that the way you have known it is not the way it is, but only one way.

The Casa Hogar Don Bosco orphanage in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico, houses 33 girls. It is run by dedicated Dominican Nuns who work non-stop to care and love these children. They receive no government or church support. Most of the girls have families somewhere, but have either been abused and removed, are unwanted, or their families are too poor to feed them. These girls are not typical orphans waiting for adoption. Instead, they are stuck in an unholy middle ground – they do not live with their families but cannot be put up for adoption because they have families somewhere.

When you walk into the compound that houses their simple collective they smile at you, not forced smiles but smiles of real joy. In a matter of minutes one of the girls will walk over and take your hand and she will not let it go until you tell her that you must leave. Her last question will always be the same, “When are you coming back to see me?”

A few weeks ago, our friends, Lisa and John, took several girls from the orphanage for ice cream and to the movies. For some it was the first time they had ever seen a movie. When Lisa and John returned, even though there was to be no movie that day, the joy was palpable.

Most of us go through life with a family. We have friends of our choosing. We go to the movies and we eat ice cream and we don’t think much about it. We know there is someone somewhere who loves us unconditionally. And, we take movies and ice cream and love for granted.

Last week Kelly took one of the girls, Maria Juanita, to lunch. It was far from a fancy place but when Maria Juanita saw the prices on the menu she would not order. Indeed, Kelly had to cover up the prices on the menu before she could even get the little girl to tell her what she liked to eat. The thought of spending three or four dollars for one meal was too much for Maria Juanita to bear.

As they were waiting for the food, Kelly was making small talk and asked Maria Juanita, “When is your birthday?” The cherub-faced little girl looked up at Kelly and replied, “I don’t know.” She did not say, “I am so sad that I don’t know my birthday,” or “Pity me, I don’t know my birthday,” but matter-of-factly, “I don’t know.” Kelly fought to hold back the tears.

After all, who are you if you have no family, or the only family you have has abused you, or one that doesn’t want you at all? Who are you if you don’t know when you were born or where? Who are you if you share a room with 15 other girls each with exactly the same stuff, the same experiences, the same yesterdays and the same tomorrows? Who are you if your greatest joy in life is the company of strangers?

Who are you if you don’t have a story to tell? Who are you if you don’t have a future to hope for?

It is the answers to these questions that are the epiphany that cannot be said but only experienced. That admitted, I’ll give it a try.

When you are with these little girls, you understand, if but for a moment, that you are more than your story, more than your past, and more than your future. You are more than your hopes and more than your dreams and more than your fears. You are more than your mind and more than your ego and more than your stuff. You are more than the world tells you that you are and you are less.

You are now. And, that is who these little girls are and, perhaps better said, when they are. They don’t dwell on their past lives before coming to the orphanage and they don’t wonder aloud what may happen tomorrow or next year or when they grow up. They are here now, and you can feel it when you see them playing, cooking, cleaning, or washing the two dogs that they love unconditionally and who love them back.

When you are in the presence of presence there is no word description for the feeling you experience but you know that you want to feel it again. Maybe not knowing your birthday is the price some pay for being here now, because the past cannot be infused with as much false importance. For others, the price of presence may be not to know what will happen to them when the day comes they must leave their sisters, because the future is unknown, must remain that way, and cannot become the focus of one’s present.

I suggest that if these are the prices of living in the now, they are worth it.

If you would like to know more about Casa Hogar Don Bosco, point your browser to http://www.virtualvisitor.com/casahogar.html.

Wall Street Journal: 10 Years After

2007-07-10T17:31:00.000-05:00

Thought you might be interested in a piece that appeared in today's Wall Street Journal Online, a follow up to a piece that appeared 10 years ago.

http://blogs.wsj.com//law/index.php?s=katzke&x=11&y=8

If you enjoyed this article, please leave your comment under the article where you will find a hyperlink that links to "Comments." Thank you and very best!

Jim

So, Just How Happy Are You?

2007-06-09T20:39:00.000-05:00

Only you know the answer to that question for yourself but the world happiness survey once again tells us that when it comes to being happy, money and power matter but not all that much. Indeed, all six of the countries which boast the highest percentage of people describing themselves "very happy" are Third World, to include Nigeria, Mexico, Venezuela, El Salvador, Puerto Rico, and Vietnam. High income First World countries don't fare near as well as most would imagine, with the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, at 13th, 14th and 15th, respectively.

How can it be? Most scientists who study this seeming anomaly have concluded that getting what you want isn't nearly as predictive of happiness as wanting what you have -- regardless whether whether what you have is a little or a lot. In other words, happiness is more a decision than a situation.

The reward of the happy doesn't stop with their smiles. Studies show that people who are compassionate toward others and illustrate that compassion through daily volunteer efforts are 10 times more likely to report themselves to be in good health than those who strive and stress for traditional success. And their observation about their health is correct -- it seems the compassionate are more relaxed, with their metabolisms, heart rates, blood pressure, and breathing slower which leads not only to healthier lives but longer ones, too. One recent study has shown that people to volunteer on behalf of others are 63% more likely to live longer lives than those who focus on making themselves happy.

Where to begin the practice of compassion? Volunteer work is a great place to start and we have found that one of the best ways to improve employee morale is for each location of a company to take on a cause and encourage employees to participate.

On a more personal level, we can exercise compassion each day just as we exercise our muscles in the gym. In his book, Resurfacing: Techniques for Exploring Consciousness, Harry Palmer suggests that we can practice altruism, compassion, and understanding no matter where we are -- airports, coffee shops, grocery stores, even at work with co-workers.

Before judging another, look at the person upon whom you are focused and repeat to yourself:

"Just like me, this person is seeking happiness in his/her life."
"Just like me, this person is trying to avoid suffering in his/her life."
"Just like me, this person has known sadness, loneliness and despair."
"Just like me, this person is seeking to fulfill his/her needs."
"Just like me, this person is learning about life."

It is more difficult to convict others if we go through this five-step process before making a conclusion on the "good" and the "bad" of another if only because the other becomes less someone "out there" and much more like that someone "in here."

Gasoline Is Too Cheap: A Contrarian’s View

2007-05-28T10:39:00.000-05:00

A recent poll reveals that half of all Americans believe gas should cost no more than $2.49 a gallon; another 40% believe it should not exceed $3.00 a gallon, only a statistical handful believe gasoline should cost more than $3.00 a gallon.

This is not surprising, of course. We have all been taught from the time we were propped up in front of the television set that when it comes to paying for anything, less is more.

Regrettably, “cheaper is better” ranks as something less than a universal truth. Gasoline is a good example of an exception to the rule. Indeed, I posit gasoline should cost $6.00 a gallon, perhaps more, and that would be a good thing.

Heresy? Perhaps. For sure the proposition that gasoline should double in price won’t come as good news to a nation of drivers, where jumping into a car by one’s self and driving 20 miles to work or 100 miles to see Mom and Dad in a gas-guzzler is considered as much of a “right” as speaking about it.

And, while gasoline and speech are both subject to inviolable law, they are subject to different inviolable laws. Indeed, I suspect gasoline is subject to a law that is even more inviolable than free speech. Gasoline is subject to the law of supply and demand, a law that cannot be denied, at least not for long. And, as soon as the reins come off the market, gasoline will be $6.00 a gallon.

Six dollars! Can we stand the pain? Yes, we can. Others do it everyday. I was in Belgium last year doing some management training and I was shocked to see gasoline priced over $6.00 (U.S.) a gallon. Even more shocking was that there was no wailing and gnashing of teeth, no bawling, slobbering, or whimpering, no pandering and no begging government to "do something about it!" Indeed, no one said much of anything about gasoline prices. It was just the way it was and, more importantly, people in Europe have learned to adapt. They drive less and they drive more fuel-efficient vehicles that result in the use of less gasoline. The use of less gasoline, over the long term, exerts downward pressure on pricing – you remember, that pesky law of supply and demand?

To the contrary, our seeming obsession to hold down the price of gasoline will have the opposite effect. Lower prices will increase demand and put upward pressure on prices. Moreover, the longer we keep the lid on the pressure cooker of gasoline prices and our finger stuck in the relief valve, the more assured the coming explosion will be severe, dramatic and tragic. In a nation that pays homage to the “free market,” this one should have been obvious.

Finally, consider there is one more law, or better said “principle,” that demands gasoline cost more, not less. It is a principle even more important to our welfare than “get it cheap now.” It is a principle that recognizes diminishing commodities that come from the earth are not ours for the taking but ours to use for the “common good,” a value of democratic society that somehow got lost in the virtue of selfishness. It is a value that includes the best interest not of just us, but of our children and their children and so on. It is a very old principle, one the Lakota Indians articulated as follows: “The world is not a gift from our parents but is on loan to us from our children.”

A wise friend, Carl Hammerschlag, who lived the first half of his life with the Indians interprets this to mean that we owe to our children a world at least as good as we found it. To leave it as good as we found it means to leave it clean and to leave some for them. Some of what? Some of everything.

My generation and the ones who have followed have done a disturbingly poor job with that thing called fossil fuels, ignoring their diminishing quantity, their lack of renewability, and their impact on the environment we are leaving to our progeny.

A suggestion: While we cannot right all of the wrongs generated through greed and avarice, perhaps we should at least throw those a bone to those who are to follow us here and belly up the bar where a gallon of gas reflects not just the price of oil and the cost of cracking it into gasoline, but the cost of a diminishing, vanishing resource which future generations will need if only to buy enough time to replace it.

The Art of Balance

2007-05-17T14:53:00.000-05:00

I spent yesterday afternoon with a good friend who, like me, spends a lot of time on the road talking with managers and supervisors about the art and science of management, team building, mentoring, workplace relationships, and leadership. Sitting near a beautiful hot spring outside the high desert city of San Miguel de Allende, Mexico, that we both call home, the cool breezes wafted off the mountains that surround this special place and our discussion progressed from the ideal institutional manager to the person inside that manager, and we examined the premise that until a manager becomes balanced internally he or she cannot balance others, lead them, set an example for them, or motivate them over the longer term.

How can a manager, for example, concerned about the future of his children in a world with an ever more impoverished environment be a willing party to pushing ever more waste into our biosphere? How can a manager who has little knowledge of other cultures and fundamentally misjudges them, or least shoots his values through the western prism, ever understand, let alone motivate, those upon whom he looks as lesser? Can a manager balance her work with the rest of the moments in her life by increasing work hours or tethering herself to the job with one of the myriad of electronic marvels? How long can she ignore the guilt we all feel when leaved our loved ones to their own devices?

What efforts do most of us put into understanding our environment, culture, ethics, values, and how we fit into this living world? How do most institutions help managers address these issues, if they address them at all? Can institutions simply mandate behaviors that ignore fundamental beliefs? The answer is, "Yes, they can," but only for the unthinking, for those who have given up trying to make sense of work and life and how they should be connected in a way other than work being a necessary evil to provide for the rest of life. There are many managers and other employees who are willing to just stay busy and get paid, if for no other reason that it takes away the pain that comes when trying to adjust one’s beliefs and actions to make them consistent. Unfortunately for most institutions, the busy are not the creators, but merely the executors of instructions.

Jeremy Narby, an activist anthropologist, observes that the answer may not be found in institutional solutions, those solutions imposed on us by modifying our behaviors, but inside those who control institutions, to-wit, leaders must first learn to control “[their own] predatory nature[s],” and that [just] because we have made our way to the top of the food chain, if we are to survive successfully in world of ever-diminishing resources we can’t act “like hormonal adolescents with power tools,” an elegant way of saying that there has to be something more than the profit-motive to motivate the best and brightest among us, those who think, who are socially conscious, who care how it all ends.

How many managers do you know who have come to peace, meaning a balance, with what they are doing vocationally and their fundamental beliefs about life, family, friends, animals, the earth, that which really matters? Perhaps the system isn’t the solution, after all, but rather the solution is found inside each of us and is different for each of us – that one size does not fit all. Perhaps our learning to distinguish between “me” and “you,” and “us” and “them” as the primary paradigm of life has resulted in a duality that defines success not was winning, but rather, in making someone else lose, whether it be the person in the next cubicle or the next company or the next country. If it is not in our nature to hurt others, and I believe it is not, then a new paradigm of cooperation, participation, and self-organization should be considered as an alternative to the command-and-control model of management. That said, this requires more than simply teaching participation “techniques.” It means looking at the world differently and seeing more one than two.

To find our answers, we need to spend more time thinking about what matters, and less time fiddling with our integrated circuits, playing with our “executive gameboys,” and sending electronic mail, which serve the worthwhile purpose of high speed communication but regrettably allow us to lose ourselves “out there” and forget about what is “in here.” Technology in some ways has made us better and more efficient at doing that which we have not taken the time to understand.

How to achieve this balance will be the subject of many more discussions among us, and from these may emerge some answers, not for others, but for those who participate. If there is a learning from these conversations that can be projected, can be passed on, it will not be in the form of answers with universal applicability, but rather, in the form of creating an environment in which each participant is comfortable in identifying his or her fundamental beliefs, what they value, and then determining whether his or her actions are consistent with those beliefs, and if not how balance can be achieved.

Outrage Trumps Speech: The Dangerous Precedent of Don Imus

2007-04-15T11:54:00.000-05:00

I hate to be politically incorrect, but that has never stopped me and it won't stop me now.

After reading press accounts of Don Imus' termination, I have come to believe that perhaps I am the only person in the country (or in my case outside the country) who believes Imus' firing was wrongheaded for a number of reasons we’ll get to in a moment.

But first, a disclaimer: I'm not a fan of Don Imus or an apologist for his recent commentary. I have never watched his TV program if only because I find the whole idea of watching radio to be contrary to its purpose -- which is to listen.

Like Howard Stern and other shock-jocks, the few times I've heard Imus on the radio I have found him not particularly well-informed and his outrageous humor and language only remains interesting until one habituates to it, which in my case took only a handful of experiences.

That said, I understand others (as in millions of others) feel differently. They love outrageous chatter and can't seem to get enough of it. My guess is these are the same people who watch reality television, a misnomer because that is not reality. That is sensationalism. But whatever it is, it is their right to watch it and listen to it.

I vote with my fingers when it comes to radio and TV. If I don't like what I see or hear, I don't watch it and I don't listen to it -- simple as that. I change the channel. We all should do the same, the only exception being children who are not capable of making those decisions. That is what parents are for and we’d all be better parents if we eliminated television from our homes at least during our children’s formative years.

Now, what was the problem with firing Imus for his outrageous comment? Several reasons come to mind.

First, it is like firing a turtle for being slow. You knew the turtle was slow when you bought it and it is disingenuous to be angry now because it is not fast. Imus has always been outrageous, from day one to the last day. To suddenly take him out for doing what he has always done smacks of hypocrisy mostly because it is hypocrisy.

Second, it was not the outrageousness of his speech that caused him to be fired and silenced. It was that his outrageous speech was racial, and outrageous racial commentary (as opposed to other outrageous commentary) is politically unacceptable. You can talk about giant dildos on the radio because sex is OK. You can even talk about (and show) the most hideous of violent acts on TV and that is OK because for some reason violence got a pass, too. But to utter a racial remark, even in jest, will convict you of a crime for which the only penalty seems to be death.

And that makes no sense to me.

I am likewise non-plussed, but not surprised, by the gutlessness of MSNBC and CBS. They are financial whores who took the opportunity to take out someone who has been a thorn in their side for years. I’m convinced they would fire their own mothers if they thought it meant a buck and when it did mean a buck – that is when GM and a few others pulled the plug -- rather than stand up for their listeners, not to mention free speech, they fell apart like a cheap suit.

But, perhaps my greatest disappointment is in the General Public. They took the easy way out, the politically correct way out, the way out that required no effort whatsoever. It is, after all, easy to offended by speech one finds offensive -- you can just sit in front of the tube and be outraged, righteously indignant, and somehow feel morally superior by calling for the head of anyone that offends you.

I'm unimpressed.

Far more difficult (and effective) is to be outraged about things that are dangerous, and that might actually require us to take action, spend our money, and get off our behinds, to make changes that matter.

What kinds of things? Well here are a few that come to mind this week (not necessarily in order of importance):

The U.S. tax code. I don't believe I (or anyone else) should have to spend two weeks every year trying to figure out how much I need to pay for having to work the other 50 weeks. That is something that is unnecessary and unproductive. But, unlike calling for Imus’ head, we can’t just sit around and bitch about taxes and expect anything to happen. Instead, we have to demand an alternative to the thousands of pages of laws and regulations that only insure that whatever we file each year is not going to be right. If we wanted a fair system, a value-added tax that added 15% to everything we buy (except food, basic shelter, education, and a few rags to wear) we could make it happen. We could eliminate the income tax because each of us would pay as we go. No questions about anymore loopholes, not to mention the positive product of encouraging Americans to save -- something most Americans have forgotten how to do as evidenced by the nation’s negative savings rate. How? Get politically active. We could actually vote. We could elect people to Congress who aren't in the business of protecting the status quo. We could demand public financing of elections to take the lobbyists out of the picture of politics. We could have clean, simple government if we wanted it bad enough and my guess we would feel a whole lot better about that result than most feel about taking out a radio announcer for saying something stupid.

If we want to change the world for the better, we could stop supporting the slaughter of baby seals in Canada by pipe-wielding thugs, an annual murderous spree that has gone on far too long. Could we stop it? In a New York minute. But we can’t do it by watching television and shedding a tear or two. We could handle the problem with our wallets. We could stop buying anything made in Canada, ever, for any reason. We could stop traveling to Canada and let the Department of Tourism there know why we won't darken their door again until this outrageousness, the type that costs lives, stops and we could tell everyone we know about it. I feel a lot better about doing that than about Don Imus getting pegged for a slip of the tongue.

We could deal with species extinction, most of the blood of which is on our human hands. Scientists have learned that once a species is gone, there's nothing we can do to bring it back, and it's place in the amazingly intricate web of life on Earth cannot be filled.

Speaking of the earth and science and outrageous conduct that is dangerous, we need to do something about global warming. It's real; it’s dangerous; and we need to either get used to the result or change it. Every Nobel Prize winner that has studied the topic has acknowledged the grim reality of the situation and our generation will be rightfully judged grossly negligent toward future generations if we continue to ignore it and if we don't do something about it. Those who deny it exists are, in my opinion, both ignorant and outrageous, but I’m not calling for them to be silenced. Let them jabber on, but for the majority who say they care it is not enough to sit in our easy chairs and call for the heads of industries that produce the most greenhouse gasses. No, it requires us to do something like stop doing business with those companies. It means getting in gear with alternative energy sources. If you can't afford a solar water heater, use fluorescent light bulbs, or sell that big SUV and be cool by hooking up with a hybrid. And, if that doesn’t slow down gasoline usage, here’s another idea that will: Anyone who buys a car that gets less than 25 miles per gallon should pay a tax of $2,000 per mile per gallon the car is rated less than 25 mpg. That money would then be divided up and rebated to those who buy cars that get more than 25 mpg. That way anyone can drive anything they want to drive but hogging resources would become very, very expensive.

Oh, and lest I forget while I'm on this rant, I'm also outraged by executives who are paid obscene amounts of money, many of whom have done poor jobs for their shareholders and employees only to be further rewarded on the way out the door, the most recent example being Bob Nardelli who increased the share price of Home Depot by exactly nothing – zero, nada – in the six years he was running the show into the ground and then took $210 million home when was fired. We can do something about that nonsense, too. Just don't buy those companies' stocks. I check to see what the CEO is making before I buy any stock in any company, and if I find it offensive it is “no sale.” Studies have shown that there is no relationship between what a CEO is paid above real market value and his or her performance. Indeed, one recent study illustrates to the contrary -- if you have a CEO who takes his pile ‘o cash and builds a house of over 10,000 square feet, look out below. Best sell now. Their stocks underperform those of CEO's who pay attention to their businesses, not their living quarters, by a whopping 42%! But that requires effort. It requires more than just being righteously indignant.

All this said I am not defending Imus' comment. It was stupid. It was outrageous. It was offensive. And if I listened to his show, I’d probably stop listening. But that is different than silencing him.

Think about it. If stupid or outrageous or offensive were the standards for being silenced and fired, none of us would ever speak or work again. We've all said things we wish we hadn't. If we're sorry about it, we say we're sorry. We mean it. Those who matter forgive us and we move on in hopes we’ll do better the next go around.

Don Imus’ humanitarian record illustrates he isn't a racist and racism is not why he was fired. He was simply outrageous like all of us are from time to time and should have been treated as each of us would hope to have been treated in the same situation – castigated, even vilified, but knowing that a sincere apology would result in ultimate compassion and forgiveness.

And, perhaps most importantly, we should never forget that outrageous speech is still speech. It, along with freedom of the press, are the most fundamental protections we enjoy and we should be most careful when an opportunity arises to silence anyone, for the next time it may be we who are silenced.

P.S. This blog is a good example of what I’m talking about. If you find what you have just read to be offensive or outrageous, I have no problem if you vote with your fingers. You can hit the “unsubscribe” button anytime. Just don't try to take away the right of those who find pieces like this provocative and thought provoking from reading it. That you do not have a right to do, nor do I, nor do any of us, and for that we should be most grateful.

Perpetual Dissatisfaction: A Failed Model

2007-03-28T19:02:00.000-05:00

If you listen, you hear it everyday . . .

“I’ll be happy when . . . [fill in the blank]

I have more money.”

I live in a bigger house.”

I get a promotion.”

I have a new boss.”

I get that new job.”

The voice you hear may be your own.

That satisfaction is a state in the future to be attained is so common a belief that its premise is not even questioned. Nowhere is this better seen than in societies where money and power are the yardsticks of success.

This equation of happiness goes something like this -- > = > ☺, and if we have more of it – whether it is money, fame, power, or good looks, more will eventually become enough. And so most of us struggle to make one more dollar, get one more promotion, or buy the next new toy -- the one that will make all the difference.

This perpetual struggle has created a society filled with stress, depression, and anxiety. Everyone can see it, and most feel it. Yet, ironically, most are not looking to escape it, but to pull out a victory in the final seconds.

Rejected is another possibility: the problem is not the present; the present is fine just as it is; no change in our lives is necessary to be happy, satisfied, and content. Perhaps satisfaction is a decision, not a set of circumstances.

Such possibilities are not even discussed. Since each of us was old enough to be propped up in front of a television set, we have learned that happiness is never now, but always tomorrow when we get/attain/achieve/have what we “really want.”

In one sense the perpetual dissatisfaction model has been successful. The largest economy in history has been built on the single premise that more is better, and the more subtle implication that one day more will become enough, even though it doesn’t, it can’t, and it won't. Indeed, if we as consumers ever decide that more has become enough, game over.

If perpetual dissatisfaction as a life model was limited to our economic life, we might be able to survive happily if only because other dynamics in our lives, not mediated by future-think, would balance our unhealthy relationships with all the other “stuff.”

Unfortunately, perpetual dissatisfaction has permeated all of life – “if only my child made better grades,” “if only my husband was more attentive,” “if only I was prettier, thinner, younger.” Perpetual dissatisfaction as a way of living tells us, “You are not enough and something different must happen to make you enough – to bring you lasting satisfaction. So, go get it.”

And, we try. We continue to chase the mechanical rabbit around the track, even though we can see it is has failed others and is failing us. Whether we dream of a future with more money, better relationships, fame, power, or knowledge, we look for something outside ourselves to make it right inside ourselves, and most of us die looking.

Even when we do catch the rabbit, it is only for a moment and our satisfaction is short-lived. Whether more money, a promotion, falling in love, or getting our name in the newspaper, the present is soon in the past, and we are often disappointed when the new toy, the new thing, the new person didn’t make us more worthy, valuable, enlightened, or satisfied, leaving us again looking to the future for salvation.

We should have seen our error long ago. If money, fame, or power could make us happy then the wealthy, the famous, and the powerful would be happier than those who simply accept what is. Social scientists have spent lifetimes studying human satisfaction and they have observed that the most satisfied among us are not those who get what they want but those who want what they have. Unfortunately, we haven’t been looking or listening. We have pulling the harness in blinders hoping against hope it will turn out different for us.

We keep playing, striving, and stressing, euphemistically justifying our own dissatisfaction as “hope” or “aspiration” or “drive.” We paint a happy face on this dysfunction and leave it to semantics to justify it. In doing so we ignore what we each know, see, and intuit -- the game is not made to be won but simply to be continued. No amount of money, no title, not even another person is going to make any of our stories work out. We age, we get sick, and we perish. That is how it works out.

To pretend that if we play the game better, and faster, and harder than all who have come before us will cause the game to end differently is folly – a mind projection that has no basis in fact or in history. Running and playing at any pace is fine if it brings satisfaction now, today, in the present, but if we are running to the promise of the future, we are placing burdens on our present that our futures can never satisfy.

Grief Is For the Living

2007-02-28T21:43:00.000-06:00

Boulder, Colorado

We are in that place some refer to as "20 square miles surrounded by reality."

Maybe so, but reality or not, there is much to learn here.

Our good friends, Bob and Sandy, share their home with us this night.

More importantly, they share a recent loss and gain with us.

Their Barney, an American Red Cocker Spaniel, passed recently, and they handled his loss with grace, with understanding, and with learning for them, for all who will listen.

Barney was 13 years old, in pain. Rather than let him die “naturally,” which is not natural at all, Bob and Sandy set up a shrine in Barney's life, called their veterinarian, lit candles and incense and waited.

When the vet arrived, Barney suddently became excited, as if he was ready.

He was. Barney was ready.

Barney lay on his bed on the floor.

At first, he seemed reticent. After all, no one wants to die.

But Bob and Sandy carefully and slowly coaxed him back onto his bed.

He was at peace.

The first injection took away any regret.

The second took his life.

Or maybe it didn’t.

Barney’s “wife,” Bessie, a beautiful English Cocker, was pensive throughout the process, until Barney stopped breathing.

Then, suddenly, Bessie became excited, literally bouncing off the walls.

“Why?” Sandy asked.

Their veterinarian, more than a doctor of medicine, said, “Dogs have a special sense – they are in touch with the astral plane. Barney has moved there. Barney is young again. Bessie can see Barney. Bessie is playing with him.”

Bessie remembered me when I came into Bob and Sandy’s home last evening and I could see in Bessie's eyes what she could see in mine.

There is no end. There are only beginnings.

Tomorrow we leave our friends but we also remain – just as Barney remains here forever.

Grief is for the living.

And living is for the dead.

Puppy Size

2007-02-18T19:53:00.000-06:00

2006 found me on the road more than 100 days on three continents. Those hundred days sometimes seem more like two or three hundred when I wake up in a dark hotel room and reach for the yellow pages for a clue to where I was when I last collapsed.

Sometimes when I return home I wonder why I still "do it."

The are lots of easy, convenient, self-serving, and inaccurate answers. They go something like this: I am blessed with work that is interesting, challenging, takes me to interesting places, and the money is good. But, while all those reasons are reasonable, they are no longer enough to overcome the wear of 30 years of chasing airplanes, rental cars, sweating like a hog in the south in the summer, and freezing to death in the north in the winter, seemingly never dressed appropriately for the mood of the climate. In other words, the reasons that have arguably driven me for three decades are no longer enough to get up me at 3:30 in the morning to chase some form of transportation.

I have long sensed the “why” is for some other reason, and have hoped that the some other reason is not just habit -- like a plow mule that pulls forward whenever the blinders are strapped on. Yet, while I have sensed there was a reason, I have never been able to get a handle on it, intellectualize it, say it.

As I readied over the weekend for a 3 ½ week road trip – a highway run that will take start in central Mexico, and take us through San Antonio, Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Denver, Boulder, St. Louis, Oklahoma City, Little Rock, Dallas, and Austin, I was tired and excited at the same time. This trip will be a mixed bag of delivering ten of Kelly's foster dogs to their adoptive families, doing some business, a little training, seeing a few friends, and visiting family. As I was working on my “to do” lists today with some trepidation, even regret, I received the following story by e-mail.

It falls under a lot of headings, one of which is that sometimes you get what you need when you need it.

The story was titled, “I Wish You Puppy Size.”

"Danielle keeps repeating it over and over again. We've been back to this animal shelter at least five times. It has been weeks now since we started all of this," the mother told the volunteer.

"What is it she keeps asking for?" the volunteer asked.

"Puppy size!" replied the mother.

"Well, we have plenty of puppies, if that's what she's looking for."

"I know...we have seen most of them," the mom said in frustration...

Just then Danielle came walking into the office

"Well, did you find one?" asked her mom. "No, not this time,"
Danielle said with sadness in her voice. "Can we come back on the weekend?"

The two women looked at each other, shook their heads and laughed.

"You never know when we will get more dogs. Unfortunately, there's always a supply," the volunteer said.

Danielle took her mother by the hand and headed to the door. "Don't worry, I'll find one this weekend," she said.

Over the next few days both mom and dad had long conversations with her.

They both felt she was being too particular. "It's this weekend or we're not looking any more," Dad finally said in frustration.

"We don't want to hear anything more about puppy size either," Mom added.

Sure enough, they were the first ones in the shelter on Saturday morning. By now Danielle knew her way around, so she ran right for the section that housed the smaller dogs.

Tired of the routine, mom sat in the small waiting room at the end of the first row of cages. There was an observation window so you could see the animals during times when visitors weren't permitted.

Danielle walked slowly from cage to cage, kneeling periodically to take a closer look. One by one the dogs were brought out and she held each one.

One by one she said, "Sorry, you're not the one."

It was the last cage on this last day in search of the perfect pup.

The volunteer opened the cage door and the child carefully picked up the dog and held it closely. This time she took a little longer.

"Mom, that's it! I found the right puppy! He's the one! I know it!" she screamed with joy. "It's the puppy size!"

"But it's the same size as all the other puppies you held over the last few weeks," Mom said.

"No not size ---- the sighs. When I held him in my arms, he sighed," she said.

"Don't you remember? When I asked you one day what love is, you told me love depends on the sighs of your heart. The more you love, the bigger the sigh!"

The two women looked at each other for a moment. Mom didn't know whether to laugh or cry. As she stooped down to hug the child, she did a little of both.

"Mom, every time you hold me, I sigh. When you and Daddy come home from work and hug each other, you both sigh. I knew I would find the right puppy if it sighed when I held it in my arms," she said.

Then holding the puppy up close to her face she said, "Mom, he loves me. I heard the sighs of his heart!"

When I read this story, I closed my eyes for a moment and thought about what makes me sigh. Sometimes it is puppies, sunsets, moonlight, or the brush of cool air across my face on a hot day, but mostly I hear sighs in the arms of close friends and family, and even feel it when I see some clients who are hard to distinguish from friends and family, if only because that is who they have become.

That may explain why I still "do it."

The story concludes that these sighs we all hear from time to time are the sighs of God. I don’t know. Whatever they are, and wherever they come from, we would all be better served to take the time to stop and listen to them because maybe it is true that "life is not measured by the breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away."

Notes From Singapore – Dramatic Differences In Similarity

2007-01-21T06:51:00.000-06:00

Singapore is hard to know if only because it gives you so many looks.

On the one hand it is a small island off the coast of Malaysia with four million people and no natural resources – not even water.

On the other hand, everything is here. Orchard Road is Rodeo Drive on steroids. It is materialism magnified -- Armani, Cartier, Fendi, Boss, Vuitton, Tiffany, Dunhill, Chanel, and the list goes on. If high-end retail is heaven, this is where you go if you’ve been a very, very good shopper.

Indeed, Singapore is one of the few countries in the world that is more materialistic than even the United States say the social scientists. And, like the U.S., materialism has not brought the people of Singapore more happiness. To the contrary, studies show that materialism here, as in the U.S., negatively correlates to life satisfaction.

So, it would be easy to write this place off as just another in a long list of societies caught up in the “Best Buy Syndrome,” but such a characterization would be neither accurate nor fair.

Singapore is different and it took me a while to put my finger on it.

Unlike most countries where more has become the point of living, there is comparatively little poverty here. Some attribute it to the excellent public education system, but I sense it may be more because Singaporeans are raised to understand that their special place in the economy of the east comes from their talent and their focus. Almost all are raised bilingual – English and Mandarin -- the two most important languages of world commerce. And many, if not most, speak at least one other language. Children on the subways study intently as they make their way to school. They are serious as a heart attack about success.

Singaporeans are also multi-cultural. While many developed nations are working overtime to keep immigrants out, Singapore has long had an open door to immigration. Chinese, Malaysians, Indonesians, Japanese, and Indians all come here for work and, until recently, few Singaporeans seem bent out of shape over that reality.

Even more striking is religious diversity here – Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus have all figured out a way to get along. Perhaps it is because Singapore as a nation is only 50 years old and no one has yet staked a “claim” to the place. Or maybe it simply that there has been enough to go around, regardless of head wear.

And, it is safe, making it very different from most other places. More than one cab driver has bragged to me that a woman can walk down Orchard Road at three o’clock on any morning alone wearing expensive jewelry and nothing is going to happen to her. Statistics support that proposition.

The Singaporean’s view of government is likewise different from other reverentially materialistic societies. The average citizen here living in a four-room flat with three school-age children receives subsidies from the government of between $18,000 and $36,000 U.S. dollars every year, this to assist with the cost of housing, education, and medical treatment. Government-subsidized housing is the standard, not the exception, and even the most humble of apartments is well built, clean, and notably there is no embarrassment associated with receiving this government assistance. In other words, while Singaporeans may want the latest and greatest toys, they seem not to resent paying a high price to insure that others here enjoy a decent lifestyle.

From a customer’s perspective, Singapore works because employees here are service-oriented. They look you in the eye and they smile. Each morning at six I make my way to McDonald’s for coffee. If anyone on Orchard Road should have a complaint with the way things are it should be employees of a 24/7-hamburger joint tucked away below street level so the rich don’t have to look at it. Yet, I see the same young man every morning and he goes out of his way to say “hello” and “have a nice day.” Perhaps it is wishful thinking, but I believe he means it. At my hotel, service has been superb – friendly, timely, and helpful. When I noted that fact to my host, she seemed surprised. “That kind of service,” she observed, “is not ‘above and beyond here.’ That is what is expected.” I don’t know where the desire to serve others comes from but it has given Singapore an edge up when it comes to global corporations deciding to locate here not to mention the 32 million tourists who come here to spend money each year.

All this said Singapore is not perfect. The difference between the have’s and have-not’s is becoming an issue. In today’s newspaper, the government announced a corporate tax cut and in the same breath a general sales tax increase that seems none to popular with the locals. There is no pretense that speech is free because it is not. Criticize the government with too much fervor and you may end up in jail. Democracy, little “d,” is iffy by western standards. There have been only two presidents in Singapore’s 50-year history, one being the father of the other, and there appears no viable minority party. The vaunted absence of crime here might rightfully be attributed to the swift and severe punishment for infractions, most of which involve being beaten with a cane, not to mention the long list of offenses for which death is the only penalty, to include possession of certain drugs and kidnapping. In fact, Singapore had the highest per-capita execution rate in the world between 1994 and 1999, more than tripling second-place Saudi Arabia. In short, there are a lot of rules and they expect you to follow them.

Like most places in the world, you can find that which you like and that which you don’t. Singapore is no different and, on reflection, I still don’t know very much about this island-nation except that there is much here the rest of the world can learn, and as I pack up to leave I know that I am better off for having witnessed it.

These People Do Not Build Toyotas (And It Doesn't Matter)

2007-01-12T11:32:00.000-06:00

Narita Airport, Tokyo

Maybe it is me.

Maybe it is that I started today at 4 a.m.

Or, maybe it is that I don’t what day it is anymore.

All I know for sure is that it is not today. It is either yesterday or tomorrow.

Which is not the point.

Rather, the point is I expected something different when I arrived in Japan. Specifically, I expected efficiency. After all, these are the people who build Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans, and every other car that anyone wants to drive who is spending their own money. This is the land where high-def television is passé, where everyone packs multiple mobile devices in bandoleer belts, where everyone is supposed to be the mirror of efficiency.

That’s what they say.

But, I don’t believe it. Not anymore.

After a short, refreshing 14-hour flight from Houston, I unglued myself from my seat and entered not the land of Sony, but the land of Laurel and Hardy. Everyone is smiling but no one in the Narita airport, including the intelligent high-tech flat panel flight displays knows either where I am or where I should be. The people are not the same ones who build Toyotas, but whoever built this passenger warehouse should be put into prison for a long, long time. (Here’s a random thought on airport design: If you’re going to have two terminals, say, 6 miles apart, connect them in some way.) Standing in a forever-line waiting for a bus in the rain is not efficient and it is not safe, especially when you put 371 people in that line with nothing in common except being locked up for the better part of day in a 70,000 pound extruded aluminum tube and each of you feels somehow abused.

And, I can testify that no one here is in the mood for anymore helpful messaging, from anyone, including those ominous messages about our safety. “Buy the ticket, take the ride.” That’s my philosophy of air travel. If you want to be safe, stay at home and lock the doors and keep your Pit Bull on a gunpowder diet.

But, if you want to go somewhere far, far away, here’s reality: You may not make it. Pretzels may be your last meal. A flight attendant with fried hair the tensile strength of piano wire and disappointed in her career decision to be a waitress may be the last person who tells you to sit down and shut up. Or, you might be minding your own business in the lavatory and be sucked down that long blue tube in a moment of irrational exuberance. Or, your fate may be in the hands of someone who is unhappy with the air experience or your religion and wants to make a lasting statement. If so, you’re going to make one of those “water landings” they ramble on about in the safety briefing card, which I like to refer to as a “crash,” if only because that is what it is.

Adios, amigo. Vaya con Dios.

I know that sounds harsh even as I reread it but it is not meant that way. There is actually freedom that comes with risk because in the end, you realize there is no risk at all. The outcome has been pre-determined. You’re going to die. I am, too. The only relevant inquiry is "when?" Because we can’t know the answer, we can either fret about it and hope minimum-wage airport security workers are going to save us from high-tech guerrillas or we can get on the plane and stop whimpering. We can hope that Genentech comes up with a pill that lets us live with whatever it is we’ve got until the insurance money runs out, or we can understand and accept that death is not a risk. It is a guarantee, and I don’t mean like the one that came with your laptop computer. This guarantee you can count on. We can do anything to prolong our lives even if it means fear and misery, or we can understand we get no points for a long life, but only for a good one.

In the end, this experience isn't defined by inconveniences just like it is not defined by conveniences. Standing in the rain waiting for a bus in the middle of the night at Narita is, well, standing in the rain waiting for a bus in the middle of the night at Narita. It isn’t good. It isn't bad. It just is. If I need to fret over something, I need to make it something important, like love, for example. I need to spend less time angry that my head is getting wet and spend more time exhibiting care, compassion and concern for those who pass through my life.

Well, it is time to go. I’ve gone from Terminal 2 to Terminal 1, from Gate 28 to 59 and then back to 34 just in time to make the final leg, which means I won’t be sleeping on blue plastic chairs in the Narita airport tonight under a pile of newspapers, and for that I am grateful. My guess it will be two days ago when I arrive in Singapore eight hours from now but I’ll wait to be surprised when I wake up tomorrow, or yesterday, as the case may be.

Selah.