rethink PERFECT

Why do we need to stand up for stepping up?

In my view the most important way to step up is to complain.
It is also one of the most annoying things to experience, having someone complain
to us, about us, especially as it is rarely done very well. It is usually blurted out,
with something like “I am sick of this….”, having allowed it to build up inside of us.

But imagine if we all agreed to appreciate someone’s complaint (stepping up) even if it was about us? That we encouraged  each other to complain first and then get the quality of content and delivery to a satisfactory level afterwards.

I think that this would change relationships dramatically for the better in ways that we could not even imagine. This would really be a paradigm shift and one that is very easy to
agree to but a life time to perfect.

It is what I call trying to complain responsibly and preparing for the failure.

I think that there is always an extra way of thinking. ie

1. Your way
2. My way
   and
3. The right or perfect way of thinking

I have yet to meet a person that could convince me that they have ever thought in this extra way and it seems pretty clear to me that your way and my way are not the
right way or perfect way of thinking. However it also seems to me that most people seem to think that their way is more than a possibility that it is this extra or  right/perfect way.
This explains why so many can tell us what way we should or should not be thinking or doing. Parents, teachers and managers can be great at this as you may well know. But we all seem to fall into this trap of thinking at any one moment especially when some emotive subject is discussed like sex, politics or religion for example.

If my way or your way was the right or perfect way then what would be the point of having a conversation other than trying to convert the other non right or wrong way of thinking.

That is why I say, that I think we need to agree to the existence of this extra way of thinking, just to help us moderate our own dogmatic ways.

Funny, ask anyone if there is a perfect person and I have never found anyone to say yes.
However, ask someone if they have ever made a perfect decision or had a perfect thought and most seem to be able to put up their hand. I find this very hard to comprehend how an imperfect being can come up with perfect thoughts or even one.

Finally my thoughts on this subject can still comply to this model as it is only my thinking and along with yours, I am sure it is flawed and can be improved but still allows for the existence for a right or perfect way. Heck the reason that I am writing it here is to get some imperfect feedback that will further improve my flawed thoughts.

Any imperfect feedback much appreciated.

In my view there are three levels of thinking, your level, my level and the just right, actual or perfect level of thinking.

So I may think your level of thinking on a subject is under thinking and you might think my level of thinking on the subject is over thinking and then there is the possibility of one or even both of us thinking just right or perfectly on that subject.

Why is this important? Because if there is this third level of thinking then it is possible that just because we may think the other’s level is wrong, we too could be wrong in our level of thinking. This can then allow us to appreciate the others thinking level or view more rather than simply considering them as as wrong and ourselves as right. 

Now some of you may say that all thinking levels are relative and that there is no possibility of the perfect level of thinking. Well here is the clincher to this idea. If I were to swing a pendulum at some point it will cross over the perfect point of balance. Just because we will possibly never be able to identify this exact point that does not mean that it does not exist. The same is true with levels of thinking in my view. If I approach a subject and start by under thinking it and then cross to over thinking it, then I must have crossed this perfect point of level of thinking and for the briefest of nano seconds been in a state of perfection in level of thinking.

This point is the 3rd level of thinking, in my view (IMV).

Images from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum

Sometimes I am over thinking and sometimes I am not thinking enough or under thinking but one thing, I think I can guarantee, is that I will not be thinking perfectly.

I know that this is going to sound the most obvious thing in the world but for some reason I think that we have forgotten this at the moment of our decision making.

No system is perfect. “There is a crack in everything…”, as Leonard Cohen says in his song,
“That’s how the light gets in.”
Nothing that we think, do, hear or say can be perfect, (even this).
We can only make decisions incrementally, by a series of over and under choices.
The more imperfect choices that we make the closer we get to perfect.

So don’t be surprised when we make them. Make as many as we can. And smaller is probably better than big ones in the scheme of this crazy, imperfect universe.

The default state for humans is calmness, ie. when things are humming along.
Anger, annoyance and frustration are not accepted by us as the default state.
They result when things stop humming along and we are not prepared for them.

For some reason we tend to blame or fault someone or something when things
are not humming along. And this only takes us further away from the default state.

The default state for the universe is that things don’t always hum along.
If we could learn to understand this universal default state it would help us maintain
our default state even when things stop humming.

My sentiments zackly Seth!

Anyone for :
Rethink Perfect. The Upside of Uncertainty and the art of moderating our own disputes.

Seth Godin says:

"I don’t get it"

"I don’t like it"

"I don’t understand it"

Those are the only responses your new idea can possibly generate from many around you if your new idea is actually a great idea, something ownable, something you can build work around.

The popular, obvious, guaranteed ideas have definitely been taken, or are so small that they’re not really worth your blood and tears.

That means if the new title of your book is instantly understood by all, it’s generic or descriptive, not something that people will associate with you as a creator or as someone who brings us new insight.

That means if your app does something so predictable that everyone is sure it’s going to work, you’re not making a big enough leap.

And that means that if your political idea is so palatable that everyone is going to vote for it immediately, it’s not going to change anything.

"I’ll ask around the office," is shorthand for, "no. Make it more boring. Banal. And less likely to succeed, please."

What is a team of excellence?

Is it all relative and therefore we can never actually aspire to having one in common with another? Possibly so, but here is what I think a team of excellence would look like and to me the results of what the team ultimately produce as well as the happiness of the team would be the measure.

• It requires more than one person for starters although an individual can start one.
• A team of excellence would be continually improving rather than being excellent.
•  A team of excellence is different than an excellent individual, in that the a team of excellence may not have excellent individuals but as a team produce excellence.
• The members in a team of excellence have a greater desire to be part of the team than to be an excellent individual.
• A team of excellence would have members that already started preparing for the team of excellence and be willing to agree to the premise of  such a thing existing.
• The individual members would believe that as a team they can produce more than the sum of the parts.
• They will be practiced in resolving differences aiming for a better and a more efficient way.
• The members will believe that one member’s problem with them (within the context of the team) is their problem also and will be keen to help them resolve it.
• A team of excellence will have processes in place to assist members of the team resolve their differences.
• No problem of difference would be too big or too small to help solve in the context of the team.