Resolutions, goals, happiness and engagement

---

Around this time, each year, many of us take time out to do a little reflecting and setting ourselves some hopes and expectations for the following year. This time last year, I posted a blog entry on how to stick to your resolutions. The ideas hold and I shalln't repeat them here - please check it out.

A few weeks ago, I posted a blog entry about happiness and how we were beginning to understand much more about the science of happiness. I mentioned that there are now a number of 'meta-analyses' summarising the research evidence and that these make useful points to check our intuitive understanding. So, given the time of year, I thought it might be helpful to try to capture the latest evidence around goals and human happiness and performance...

Back in the 1970s, psychologists commonly believed that personal happiness was determined by a comparison between our current state of being and what we thought it could be. If the gap seemed huge, we'd be unhappy; if it seemed easily 'achievable' then we'd be happier. Although they were a little more sophisticated in their argument, this was essentially the view of people like Campbell et al (1976), and represented the mainstream perspective. If this was the case, then the simplest way for someone to become happier, would be to lower their expectations of themself!

Psychology in the intervening years has, to some extent, politicized. Left-wing thinkers, seeking more equality in the world, reject this idea on the basis that it is likely to reinforce the 'have/have not' or 'us and them' mindset that dominates much of the world. Right-wing thinkers, who tend to seek the reward of 'excellence', also reject it, because it discourages their Nirvana-like seeking.

What, we now realise both schools of thought were missing, was that human beings do not approach their goal setting efforts as blank sheets of paper. Three things in particular affect our approach to the future: our present state of mind (on a scale from 'gloom', through 'neutrality', to 'optimism'), our determination to shape our future (from the passive to the dynamic) and our response to a world/system that doesn't change precisely how we want it to (our response to rejection - 'fragile' or 'resilient').

The key to happiness and our goal setting is the middle one of these: our determination to shape our own future. We know that children generally like to challenge themselves - without competing against others, they will instinctively set themselves scales against which they test their own performance. And it is in that self-reference that the secret lies. It is not in competing against others but in stretching ourselves that we achieve more AND feel happier. Happy people always have projects that they are working towards; new things to understand; new achievements.

If we set ourselves too high an expectation, then our frustration at not realising them taps into our ability to handle rejection and, soon, this translates into a state of despair and depression. It is important to stretch ourselves, but not too far.

Conversely, if we set ourselves too low an expectation, then we become bored. In the 1970s, the economist, Tibor Scitovsky, wrote a book called the Joyless Economy, in which he explored why so many people were unhappy, even though they had plenty of money. His explanation was boredom. They had chosen a state of comfort over one of stimulation. They had failed to develop interests outside work that engaged them, stimulated them, and encouraged them to seek to grow themselves emotionally and spiritually. Despite the huge pressure many people report themselves as being under today, the average American and Briton still find time to watch television for a staggering three and a half hours each day. Without being disrespectful to the TV producers, watching other people do things is no substitute for doing them yourself.

That boredom is a serious contributor to unhappiness is not a new idea, both Bertrand Russell and John Milton Keynes said as much too.

The psychologist, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1990), used the word 'flow' to describe the sense that we can all experience of being so engaged with something that we lose much of our conscious awareness of the rest of the world around us, albeit temporarily. This state is one 'goal' of meditation, but it is also crucial to athletic performance, the creative process, and sensuality.

So, this year, as the mince pies slowly work themselves through our systems, and we reflect on the coming year, let's stretch ourselves - but not so far that we are likely to be frustrated, and determine to find new projects and new ways of engaging - in which we can become truly absorbed. In these ways, we will be happier, more productive, and leave an even greater legacy.

In my blog last year, you'll find a link to the 212 - The Extra Degree short web 'movie'. If you find yourself struggling to accept that just a little stretch is all it really takes, or your boss is encouraging the 'reach for the clouds' sort of goals, then this will challenge your thinking, so I'd urge you to look at this and maybe even send them a link to it - hey, you could send them this blog and remind them that I'm available to help leaders as they achieve more than they ever dreamt was possible!

Best wishes

---

Helping people achieve things they never dreamt they could
t 07785 222380 | grahamwilson.org - inter-faith.net - thefutureofwork.org

---

When is a model more than just a pretty face?

---

There are a couple of schools of thought among the marketers of professional services. On the one hand, there are those who believe that professionals sell themselves - well, the relationship with them - and the warm experience that doing business with them provokes. The other school holds that we should turn ourselves into products as a product is, they argue, easier to sell than the feelings that one person provokes in another.

You will probably know which school I fall into, given that my website tries to convey something of my personality, that my business is simply named "Graham Wilson Ltd", and the current iteration of my strapline being "Working behind the scenes helping leaders to achieve more than they ever dreamt they could" - which describes what I do rather than using a product name.

There have been times when I have been urged to productise, and I'll play with the idea, but usually find that it doesn't work for me. Probably the last time was about three years ago when I created a six-session package of leadership mentoring called "Conversations with Leaders" in response to a request from a particular company.

Another form that this productisation takes, among the professional services sector, is to create a 'model' and promote it.

By the way, have I told you about my leadership development model? It's called TROI (TM). It's widely applicable and encourages leaders to explore more avenues before implementing strategic actions. The letters in the acronym stand for Thought, Reflection, Observation, Intervention. The idea is simple but, of course, the application is profound. The thought phase involves having a thought. These thoughts themselves are the essence of good leadership - a leader who doesn't have thoughts is a bit of a damp squib really. Some thoughts will be good thoughts and some will be bad ones, but having thoughts is important. I have developed, over the years, many very successful (naturally) tools to help the thought process and on another occasion I will write about some of these.

I digress slightly by explaining TROI (TM), but one of these days I will get around to writing a book about it, along with a number of practical tools, such as a pack of 52 playing cards that you can use to help with the Intervention phase. You see, timing is crucial in any leaders' role. Intervene too soon and you run the risk of destroying everything; intervene too late and you could have missed your opportunity. There's a Windows XP bundled version of the cards that you can use, but I often suggest to leaders that they are better using the more traditional manual tool. By distracting yourself in this manner it is possible to ensure that you don't suffer from premature intervention.

As I said in another blog recently, I freely admit, that in my naïve youth, I did create a couple of these models myself for real. Today though, I am generally critical of them. Why?

Well, firstly, in my experience they rarely have any science behind them. They are a simple representation of some basic idea that will never be validated because to do so would be impossible, the author lacks the academic rigour to do so, and no-one would fund them to either.

Secondly, their authors have an inflated perception of the importance and impact of the model often making quite ridiculous claims on their behalf.

Along with this exaggerated sense of value, their authors often try to limit the number of people who can adopt the model - by trademarking, copyrighting, or registering the name, then launching some kind of licensing scheme through which interested parties can only be approved to use the model with appropriate training.

Incidentally, the TROI (TM) masterclass will be launched in January and bookings are already being taken - our webshop is still under development, so a transfer of $1000 non-refundable deposit to my PayPal account will do fine. The venue will probably be the US CoastGuard vessel, Enterprise, which through its numerous international missions, has perfect facilities for experiential learning in the leadership field.

Now, from time-to-time, an author (usually an academic) does publish something that has real predictive value and is not simply a method of categorising observable phenomena. Once published, the paper or book is reveiwed by peers and subsequently refined. This process may go on for years before a wider audience begins to hear of it. They may be tempted to commercialise it (ie productise it) by launching tools, instruments, training events, grades of qualifications, and so on. But usually, their ego is not sufficiently tied to it and they allow someone else to do this if they really want to. Often, commercialised 'products' can be seen to be thinly disguised versions of something else that has been in the public domain for some time, usually the outcome of the work of someone whose personal values were altruistic rather than avaricious.

I am not saying that genuine discoveries don't occur from time-to-time, even amongst management consultants, but I am suggesting that a 'product' that lacks academic rigour, has little predictive power, can't be falsified, is deliberately simplified ['dumbed down'] to make it learnable, and is based on someone else's work, has little more to offer than some quack cure-all from a Spaghetti Western.

There are no absolutes in this - each case has a blend of originality, insight, and tack - and discernment is in the hands of the reader, but my criteria are these;

Does it have a body of academic knowledge behind it?

Is that body the author's own or, at least, are the originators openly acknowledged?

Can it be used not simply to classify but genuinely to predict future events?

Can we find settings where it does not apply?

If there are limits to its application, does the author openly acknowledge these?

Let me give a few examples to make my point a little clearer, I'll let you be the judge of their merit...

Mind Mapping or Concept Mapping?

Back in the 1970s, a British author, Tony Buzan, published a book called "Use Your Head" in which he proposed a method of note-taking which he called Mind Mapping(TM). These continue to be promoted by Buzan; there are books, DVDs, tools, software and licensed instructor training courses. What Buzan has not widely mentioned is that the generic form on which his idea was based, 'concept maps', have been used for centuries in learning, information gathering, memory development, visual thinking, and problem solving by educators, engineers, psychologists, and others. Some of the earliest examples were developed by Porphyry of Tyros, in the 3rd century AD, as he graphically portrayed the work of Aristotle. Philosopher Ramon Llull (1235 - 1315) also used concept (or mind) maps. The 'semantic network' was developed in the late 1950s as a theory to understand human learning and it was developed into mind maps by Allan Collins and M. Ross Quillian during the early 1960s. If anyone was to be described as the 'father of mindmaps' it would be Collins or perhaps Quillian, both of whom continue to contribute to academic research in the cognitive psychology field and whose work is really coming of age now with the growth in importance of semantic networks in internet searching. However, Buzan claims to have invented modern mind mapping, apparently 'inspired' by science fiction novels, such as those of Robert Heinlein and AE van Vogt. When compared with the concept map (as developed by learning experts in the 1970s) a mind map is simply a radial form with just one central key word.

Fierce Conversations or Person-Centred Counselling?

In the 1990s, Susan Scott, published a book entitled "Fierce Conversations". It has been transformed into a slick marketing operation (Fierce (TM) Inc) with... tools, licenced training, etc. No-one would deny that it's a clever marketing gimmick to rebrand 'flower arranging for senior managers' as 'aligned stalking'. However, when you read the book, you might be a little surprised to discover that it has a striking resemblance to the work of the internationally acclaimed psychotherapist, Carl Rogers, whose approach was known as "person centred" and the attitude underlying it was "unconditional positive regard". "We are not therapists...", Scott proclaims, but the person whose work she has commercialised most certainly was.

Situational Leadership

Back in the 1960s, Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard wrote a book called the Management of Organizational Behaviour, in which they postulated a model of leadership that broke away from the one style suits all and instead recommended different styles to suit different situations. The 'situations' were determined by the development level of the person being led - whether they were technically savvy or not and whether they were confident in their abilities or not. This was ground-breaking at the time. Other models did not look at the individual but at the circumstances (for example, leadership in war, in factories, in shops and so on). Of course, a criticism of their work might be that it assumes only one category of leader and yet four categories of follower, but it depended on its simplicity to be used and besides few leaders would like to be told that they somehow fell short of perfection. The Hersey-Blanchard academic collaboration has endured and their book is in its 9th edition. They both developed spin-offs - Hersey and his "Situational Leader" (SL) products and Blanchard and his "One Minute Manager" series. Both have produced licenced products and training and have seemingly been successful at it, but their core is their academic research and it's robustness. There have been times when new research has led them to adjust the approach and while this has often merely affected the odd word or two nevertheless their products have not become stale.

The five stages of Grief

Back in 1969, a Swiss-born Psychiatrist, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, published a book, "On Death and Dying" in which she put forward a model of the stages through which an individual passes when they are experiencing the loss of someone. Known today as the Kubler-Ross model of the Five Stages of Grief it has been almost universally adopted by professionals concerned with loss, not simply through death but jobs, divorce, financial security, even organisational change. Kubler-Ross had plenty of opportunity to commercialise her model, but she did not. Her interest lay in providing for those whose lives were to end, and in 1994 at the age of 68, her home and possessions were lost when arsonists destroyed them to prevent her from establishing a hospice for babies dying of AIDs in Virginia. She died without commercial gain, but her legacy is her work, her impact, and her model.

And finally, lest anyone should think I was serious... More information on the TROI model of reflective leadership can be found [HERE].

Best wishes

---

Working behind the scenes, helping leaders achieve things they never dreamt they could
t 07785 222380 | grahamwilson.org - inter-faith.net - thefutureofwork.org

---

The Myth of Positive Stress

---

At some time in the late 1970s, a well known TV scientist put forward the idea that there was a certain level of stress that was optimal for performance. He had no evidence to support this 'claim' but asserted it with sufficient authority that it was widely accepted and adopted into a lot of 'stress-management' literature. It continues to resurface today, often in management literature, and is particularly popular among the "positive psychology", "psychology of achievement", and some goal-oriented coaching communities.



The concept was used to justify management practices that put pressure on employees to perform - such as setting 'stretch' targets and high proportions of performance-related pay in an individual's remuneration package.

The rational that was used to support this model was two-fold; a sporting analogy and a model of creativity that assumed that people would devise more creative solutions to problems when they were moderately stressed.

Sports people depend on a build up of adrenaline to perform at their peak, especially in shorter duration events. This is probably the only situation where deliberate pressure works to improve performance. Performance in almost all other jobs depends to a large degree on clear decision making and creativity. The effect of adrenaline actually works against both of these.

Endorphins (or more correctly Endomorphines) are produced by the pituitary gland and the hypothalamus and they resemble opiates in their ability to produce analgesia and a sense of well-being. Discovered in 1975, they are released during long, continuous workouts, when the level of intensity is between moderate and high, and breathing is difficult. This also corresponds with the time that muscles use up their stored glycogen and begin functioning with only oxygen. Workouts that are most likely to produce endorphins include running, swimming, cross-country skiing, long distance rowing, bicycling, aerobics, or playing a sport such as basketball, soccer, or football.

For a short while it was assumed that endorphins were responsible for the 'runner's high' after finishing a race. Again, this entered the popular mythology and it was suggested that promoting an 'endorphin high' was a good way of motivating people at work.

However, scientists now believe that the 'rush' or 'high' is a euphoric response to completing a challenge rather than as a result of exertion. This is similar to that experienced by many people from eating chocolate, smiling, laughing, sunbathing, being massaged, meditating, singing, listening to their favourite music, or having an orgasm. (In other words, situations that are generally associated with relaxation and the absence of stress!)

We now believe that this feeling is not related to endorphins (or any other opiate, for that matter) but to cannabinoids - a group of chemicals most commonly associated with the cannabis plant, but also produced in the neural pathways of mammals (incl. humans).

The creativity link between stress and problem solving is constantly being disproven. Even simple experiments, using tests of problem solving performance with individuals under naturally occuring levels of stress shows that their performance is hampered by the stressors.

So, if you want your people to be optimal performers (especially in times of economic uncertainty) the answer is NOT to spell out the severity of the current world, your dependence on them to exceed their previous levels of performance, or to offer ongoing employment or financial bonuses based on this. Yes, be open and honest, but also help them to test the reality of the tales of doom and despair (and do so yourself), help them to explore their options and understand the choices THEY can make. Buffer and protect people, don't expose them to further fear. If there was a single service that the news media could perform right now, it would be to take a more responsible and balanced approach rather than adopting scare tactics and sensationalist headlines. The less people live in fear the more they will be able to achieve.

Best wishes

---

Helping people achieve things they never dreamt they could
t 07785 222380 | grahamwilson.org - inter-faith.net - thefutureofwork.org

---

Developing Social Intelligence

---

Thorndike, in 1920, divided intelligence into three facets; understanding and managing ideas (abstract intelligence), concrete objects (mechanical intelligence), and people (social intelligence). In his words: "By social intelligence is meant the ability to understand and manage men and women, boys and girls -- to act wisely in human relations".

In 1933, Vernon provided the most wide-ranging definition of social intelligence as the person's "ability to get along with people in general, social technique or ease in society, knowledge of social matters, susceptibility to stimuli from other members of a group, as well as insight into the temporary moods or underlying personality traits of strangers".

When we speak of 'social' in this context, we don't mean simply at parties or other informal gatherings. We are referring to all settings where two or more people interact. The behaviour that they exhibit though is not related to any positional power or other authority - it is consistent regardless of these. This leads to the concept of living 'authentically'. Authenticity is a technical term in existential psychology, where the conscious self is seen as encountering external forces, pressures and influences which are very different from it. Authenticity is the degree to which one is true to one's own personality, spirit, or character, despite these pressures.

In 2007, Shaun Killian, an Australian educational psychologist provided a useful model identifying five characteristics of socially intelligent leaders:

1. They are confident in social situations.
2. They both have and demonstrate a genuine interest in others.
3. Whether dealing with people they know or strangers, they are adept at reading and responding to others.
4. They are able to express their emotions and feelings in a clear and appropriately assertive fashion.
5. Their understanding of social environments and the dynamics within them is well developed.

Confidence in social situations

These people know that they can be effective in a social situation. They present themselves with conviction and enjoy playing to a social audience.

People who are not socially confident are self-conscious and shy. This prevents them from developing the other traits. Feedback that they receive reinforces their sense of social ineptness making them even more self-conscious and shy.

For anyone who lacks social confidence, developing it is the essential first step in developing social intelligence. We now know that social inhibition is associated with biological differences in the neural transmitter patterns. These neural patterns become strengthened with repeated use, which is why it is hard to change our patterns of behaviour, but there is plenty of evidence that such pathways can be relearned.

Having and demonstrating a genuine interest in others

Socially intelligent people show a genuine interest in others, but this is something that they concern themselves with even when they are alone.

When interacting socially they put aside their own internal mental distractions and externalise the focus of their attention. This is known as being "in the moment" or "fully present" and achieving it in every conversation makes the person very responsive to the other one - less so at the intellectual level but in understanding the other person's feelings and emotional responses.

People lacking in social confidence, tend to internalise - their attention being on their own thoughts and (usually) discomfort. As a result they miss valuable cues and appear disinterested.

By being fully present, socially intelligent people remember faces, names, eye colour, and other details as well as being able to notice subtle changes or differences in someone such as when they change their hair style.

Showing a genuine interest in others though goes beyond just being fully present as it is an attitude that persists even when they are alone. It involves caring about their well-being. This interest shows itself in both simple and complex behaviours, such as being on time for appointments, maintaining appropriate eye-contact, anticipating people's needs (such as offering them refreshments or pointing out facilities to those who might need them).

Without this authentic base, the individual is simply seen as being manipulative.

Reading and responding to others

Once someone can be fully present in a conversation, they need to be able to listen attentively to the other person. Attentive people notice facial expressions, body language and tone, and then put these clues together to read how people are feeling and whether or not they are being genuine. The problem is that such interactions happen almost instantaneously and this depends on intuition. While it is possible to teach someone to do this better at the rational level, it is far harder, though not impossible, to develop the intuitive sense.

Expressing emotions and feelings clearly, being appropriately assertive

The assertive expression of ourselves depends heavily on non-verbal communication and tone of voice.

Socially intelligent people express emotions well and they do so in ways that benefits those around them. Emotions are said to be contagious, and if they are expressed clearly and intensely, then other people will catch them. While remaining authentic, socially intelligent people express the emotions and feelings that they want others to catch.

In general, positive emotions improve performance in the workplace, and yet joy, happiness, and excitement are the least expressed emotions in the workplace.

There are times, of course, where other emotions are called for. Sadness improves our ability to learn from failures and setbacks. Fear enhances our ability at anticipatory action learning, through which we can see (and therefore put right) faults in plans before we implement them. Anger drives us to try to put perceived wrongs right.

The socially intelligent express contagious emotions that are appropriate to the context and the task at hand.

At times, we need to show empathy, by expressing emotions on behalf of others. Empathy is not just an awareness of how others feel; it is feeling it with them. It is possible to develop empathy. For example, try to imagine how someone is feeling in a paticular situation, then remind yourself of a time in your past when you felt the same way. Feel the emotion return to you, and then you are more likely to genuinely express it.

Understanding social environments

Finally, a good knowledge about people and the workings of the social world can then be applied to any social situation. Socially intelligent people understand the different personalities of those they work with, whether intuitively or by study. This helps them to motivate and deal with different people in different ways. They understand the, often unwritten, norms and etiquette for varied social situations. Socially intelligent people are also aware of the social connections that exist between staff members and the different forms of power relationships within the group.

Developing social intelligence

While we now believe that genetics does play a role in determining social intelligence because of clear links to personality characteristics such as extraversion, dominance, social presence, affiliation and self acceptance.

However, social intelligence can also be developed. Understanding it is a good first step. Developing social intelligence though means changing the way you act and interact with others, and then turning these changes into new habits. This takes focused attention and practice over time, allowing new neural circuits to form within the basal ganglia of the brain.

Have a look at my guide to emotional literacy for more ideas on how to develop this essential aspect of social literacy.

Best wishes

---

Helping people achieve things they never dreamt they could
t 07785 222380 | grahamwilson.org - inter-faith.net - thefutureofwork.org

---

Emotional Literacy

---

I don’t like the term ‘emotional intelligence’, or EQ, for several reasons; it is only one aspect of a more substantial area of psychology – social intelligence - that has been around since the 1920s; it is a cleverly marketed but shallow treatment of a complex subject; it implies that it can be measured and that there are therefore ‘norms’ to which people can be compared; and, as it was originally defined, it is highly manipulative of others. I prefer the educational psychologists’ term ‘emotional literacy’ – which I see as a fundamental stepping stone to social intelligence.

Developing emotional literacy in adults can’t be reduced to 10 simple steps. It involves a great deal of self-study. It isn’t something you simply learn and then use – instead you have to go through many iterations, thinking you have got the message only to have to re-visit and re-do the thinking. Slowly, unconsciously, you change. It isn’t sudden or conscious. You don’t simply take something on-board and then behave differently - the things that determine how you behave are too deep-rooted. You can change though and this guide offers a few approaches to help you.

NB If you would like a pretty formatted copy of this guide, click HERE.

1 There are no quick fixes

Developing your emotional literacy means investing time in yourself – observing, interpreting and acting on, your behaviour. You need to invest and to accept that some of what you discover may be painful until you ‘deal’ with it.

2 Keep a personal journal

Almost every ‘expert’ or ‘path’ expects you to keep a personal journal of your observations, tentative questions, analyses, and interpretations, with details of your successes and failures along the way. Write a few words every day or so. It isn’t a ‘diary’ or a biography – it’s a place to record your feelings and your interpretation of them. Use it as a place to ask yourself questions.

3 Describe your personality today

Try describing your personality as it is today. Ask friends, colleagues, or people who see you from a distance, for honest feedback. Family are usually part of the reason why you are the way you are, and rarely dispassionate. It may seem unusual, but if you don’t feel comfortable asking others, then start with an astrological description – you can usually find a description on the internet of your star-sign. Don’t accept all it says, but ask if you feel it fits?

4 What has shaped you so far?

Look back over your life and ask yourself where these characteristics came from. Most originate in childhood, so what do you think led you to be like this? For instance, if you feel you’re shy, when did you first feel this? Were you ‘always’ like it or did something happen that so embarrassed you, that you avoid attention at all costs? Did you live in the shadow of an older sibling? Again, you need to keep returning to this step.

5 Recognize your emotional buttons

What makes you uncomfortable? Build up a list of things that make you feel uncomfortable. These may be things you do not like doing or feel uncomfortable doing. Think how you would know – apart from simply putting off doing them, does your jaw lock, do your fists clench, do you become ‘grumpy’ or break out in a cold sweat? Common ‘buttons’ include: public speaking, writing letters, confronting people, borrowing from people you know, shopping for clothes, dancing, dating, sex… Go through step 4 again – where do these things come from?

6 What makes you happy or not?

Which aspects of your life are you happy with and which less so? Look carefully at what they tell you about yourself. EG: If you loathe commuting to work, what led you to a job that involves a commute? What is stopping you from doing something else? We’re not interested so much in the practicalities as the emotions and the arguments behind them – many of which will be flawed.

7 How authentic are you?

Do you wear a mask? Many people do, yet those we respect for their wisdom don’t – they are authentic – what you see is what you get regardless of the circumstances. We often wear two or more masks – such as one at work and one at home. A supposedly very emotionally-balanced ‘spiritual guru’ (who often spoke of the need to stop our egos controlling our lives) had photos of herself and copies of her books displayed all over her house. She was wearing two masks. Would anyone get to know her? Draw your masks – whether in words or images – and go through step 4 again.

8 Draw on your intuition

Do you draw on your intuition when making decisions? People are frightened to admit that they have no rationale for a decision. Companies imply that it’s bad not to justify something rationally. Yet we all make intuitive decisions. Behind most decisions is an intuitive element. Emotionally literate people recognise this, are comfortable drawing on their intuition, and accept emotive reasons as just as valid as rational ones. Decisions are not all major and life-changing nor are they often about right or wrong, so try asking yourself more often what your ‘gut-feel’ is or what you would like to do rather than what you feel you have to do.

9 What can you learn from others?

Do some people “push your buttons”? What is it about them that gets you going or makes you clam up? They often represent something about ourselves. Whether they come across as patronizing, flippant, overly friendly, controlling, ‘in your face’, flamboyant, or dogmatic, there is usually someone from our past who had similar qualities or they are qualities we’re afraid we have ourselves. Go through step 4 again!

10 What happens when you feel threatened?

We may deny that we feel threatened, or draw on a complicated repertoire of ‘coping strategies’. This would be fine, only we acquire these when we were a child (NB go through step 4) and they have often ceased to work in adulthood. Probably the commonest is ‘sublimation’ – we throw ourselves into something highly absorbing, such as a hobby or committee, rather than examining what else is missing from our lives.

Best wishes

---

Helping people achieve things they never dreamt they could
t 07785 222380 | grahamwilson.org - inter-faith.net - thefutureofwork.org

---

Why Social Intelligence is more important than simply EQ

---

There’s more to success than manipulating peoples’ emotions.

The idea of emotional intelligence seems to have pervaded business thinking since the book on the topic by Daniel Goleman was published in 1995. The first use of the term is usually attributed to Wayne Payne's doctoral thesis, “A study of emotion: Developing emotional intelligence” which he presented in 1985. Before this, though, the term had appeared in Leuner (1966). Greenspan (1989) and Salovey and Mayer (1990) also preceeded Goleman.

The idea that the management of our feelings (including emotions) was important to success in our society is not a new one. Even Darwin postulated that emotional expression was important to survival and adaptation. In the 1900s, even though traditional definitions of intelligence emphasized cognitive aspects such as memory and problem-solving, several influential researchers in the intelligence field of study had begun to recognize the importance of the non-cognitive aspects.

The science that encompasses EQ though dates to the 1920s, when EL Thorndike, used the term “social intelligence” to describe the skill of understanding and managing other people. Without wanting to seem pedantic, I think this is a far better place to start than Goleman’s popularised version.

Without doubt, marketing is crucial to business success and a catchy title to a book makes a big difference to its sales even if the content is a little less than revolutionary. In the case of Goleman’s EQ, the reductionist approach and it’s subsequent exploitation by a number of other authors has sadly created a body of knowledge that is exceptionally ‘leaky’ and relatively few ‘professionals’ in the field give it much credibility. Criticisms range from its lack of originality and substance, inability to predict, too broad definition, and worst of all that it contains assumptions about intelligence that are simply not correct (or even may be discriminatory).

Wherever we begin, the reason that these theories have become important is that the traditional approach to intelligence, measured as IQ, had long been known to be a poor predictor of personal success, performance, or any other outcome – it simply measured the ability to perform a set of relatively abstract tests.

Thorndike was the one of many to suggest that there was more than one determinant of how people perform. In 1940, David Wechsler described the influence of non-intellective factors on intelligent behavior, and argued that our models of intelligence would not be complete until we could adequately describe these factors. In 1983, Howard Gardner's “Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences” introduced the idea of Multiple Intelligences which included both Interpersonal intelligence (the capacity to understand the intentions, motivations and desires of other people) and Intrapersonal intelligence (the capacity to understand oneself, to appreciate one's feelings, fears and motivations).

Definitions vary, but Salovey and Meyer focused on emotions – the ability of an individual to perceive, use, understand and manage, their own and other peoples’ emotions.

Goleman effectively took the definition back to the Social Intelligence construct of Thorndike, by saying that it was both emotions and feelings that were being perceived, used, understood and managed. In doing so, and in popularising this approach though, I believe that something has been lost and it’s helpful to go back to Thorndike’s original model of social intelligence if we are going to really be able to perform more effectively.

Edward Thorndike deserves a far wider popularity than he receives. Born in 1874, he devoted himself to understanding how learning happens and how to maximise its benefits. He was, without much doubt, the father of modern educational psychology. His initial research was on problem solving in cats trying to establish whether they really had exceptional insights. In the process he developed the concept of learning curves which we still use today. In WW1 he devised a method of screening applicants for military service which is still in use today. This method, a form of psychometric assessment, recognised (and broke free from) the limitation of English language ability to make this assessment. He recognised how seriously another ability (like the use of English) could influence other factors, and this led to him to develop the basis of Action Learning, which (amusingly) every generation since seems to reinvent as if it were their own.

Action Learning draws on the idea that traditional teaching (and preaching) are limited to the scope of the teacher rather than the student. They will progressively reduce knowledge and skills rather than expanding them. This is the theory which explains why coaching, counselling, facilitation, and peer supervision work more effectively. It’s also a powerful argument against hierarchy in organisations and many other structures.

In the next part of this blog, I’ll explain more about Social Intelligence and how it ‘works’.

Best wishes

---

Helping people achieve things they never dreamt they could
t 07785 222380 | grahamwilson.org - inter-faith.net - thefutureofwork.org

---

What makes us happy?

---

Over the last five years or so, there has been a fairly dramatic shift in the way in which psychologists look at the human condition. For the last hundred years or more, they have based most of their understanding on our problems… essentially by studying people with known medical conditions and mental health issues, they have evolved a science of human dysfunction.

The radical change in direction has been to study instead what is ‘normal’ and what makes the majority of humans ‘normal’. At one extreme of this has evolved a branch of psychology known as ‘positive psychology’ – which takes as one of its guiding principles the idea that it is not satisfactory to be ‘normal’ but instead it is preferable to be positive.

‘Positive psychology’ emerged as a new area of psychology in 1998 when Martin Seligman chose it as the theme for his term as president of the American Psychological Association. The term originates though with Abraham Maslow, who coined it in his 1954 book ‘Motivation and Personality’.

Recently a number of ‘meta-analyses’ of positive psychology have been published, and from them some interesting aspects unfold. One such dimension involves happiness and what makes some of us predominantly happy and some of us predominantly unhappy. Three studies in particular have contributed to our current view of happiness – the German Socio-Economic Panel, the US General Social Survey and the World Values Survey. The findings provide a useful focus for those of us working with individuals who would like to be happier, as well as to policy makers in Government who are concerned with ways of promoting happier societies. If you are interested in a detailed summary of these issues, check out Lord Layard’s book “Happiness – Lessons from a new science” on which much of the following is based.

Firstly, let’s be clear about a few things that we can be sure do not really contribute to happiness;

Age

Gender

Appearance

IQ

Physical energy

Mental energy

Education

For each of these, we now know that the contribution to an individual’s happiness is extremely low or non-existent at all.
Instead, we can say that there are seven factors that contribute to the bulk of an individual’s happiness. In order of decreasing importance, they are;
1. Family relationships
2. Financial situation
3. Work
4. Community and friends
5. Health
6. Personal freedom
7. Personal values

Family relationships – When most people marry or have children they enjoy a peak of happiness for a year or so before returning to their previous level. When they separate or divorce they suffer a drop in happiness for a year or two. Men return to their underlying level sooner than women. Half of US children will be living in a single parent household by the time they are 15, so marriage break-up is a very real cause of reduced happiness. Couples who remain ‘in love’ tend to have better sex lives, have better hormonal balance, be healthier, live longer and be happier than they were four years before they were married.

Financial situation – There have been some fascinating studies on income. Absolute income has little or no effect on happiness. Two things do. Firstly, the relative level of income to who ever we compare ourselves with (generally our local community). Secondly, changes in our income. We are generally happier being poor but with good prospects of an increasing income than being well-off but with little chance of an increase.

The prospect of a drop in income of one third is used as a benchmark of many other factors in studies of happiness. For example, the impact of separation is FOUR times greater than that of a drop of income by one third, and the impact of being widowed is DOUBLE.

Work – Work provides not only income but also meaning in our lives. It also provides self-respect and a social network. The impact of being unemployed is three times greater than our benchmark of one third income drop. Being employed but in an environment where unemployment is increasing substantially, is also seriously bad for happiness. So, believing our job is stable and living in a society where unemployment is low and also stable are good predicators of happiness.

The nature of the work is also important. Dull repetitive work has a direct and substantial effect on our health, literally doubling the likelihood of arterial related diseases.

Community and friends – The impact of the quality of our community is two-fold – how much we trust people and how safe we feel. We feel happiest when we live in a community where we can trust people around us. Asked whether they could trust most people around them, 5% said so in Brazil and 64% in Norway. The impact of this on national happiness (still measured at an individual level) is the same as a drop of one third of income.

Health – Although we generally care about our health, it doesn’t feature as a particularly high factor in determining happiness despite lots of reports in the 80s and 90s about endorphins as nature’s ‘prozac’. Generally, people adapt well to the loss of health and it has little impact on happiness, with two exceptions – mental illness and chronic pain. These two elements are largely a reflection of our inner feelings than any physical limitation. Their impact is roughly the same as becoming unemployed.

Personal freedom – A fascinating effect on happiness (again, measured at the individual level) at the national level is that of perceived personal freedom. When people feel that they have more control over the government policies affecting them they feel happier. The impact is huge – as much as marrying (and this is sustained throughout rather than dropping off after a couple of years)!

Personal values (our personal philosophy of life) – There are two factors that have the greates impact on personal happiness; believing in some kind of higher purpose for society and caring for others. People who care about other people, rather than being pre-occupied with themselves are happier. Interestingly, people who worry about “doing well” in their lives suffer from more anxiety than those who worry about “doing good” for society in general.

Whatever the belief system, when people believe in some higher purpose (whether it is God, spirituality, or mindfulness) they are TWICE as happy as the effect of our benchmark 1/3rd drop in salary.

Summary – So, to capture all of this; working on our relationships, managing our finances, having meaningful work, living in a community in which we feel safe and can trust people, seeking help promptly for mental health and chronic pain, taking an active part in government and developing our sense of connectedness and spirituality, will all have a profound impact on our own happiness.

Best wishes

---

Helping people achieve things they never dreamt they could
t 07785 222380 | grahamwilson.org - inter-faith.net - thefutureofwork.org

---

Fertilising trees to combat climate change

---

We live in a world of relentless technological advancement, and I've been writing and speaking for some time about the potential for technology to address many of the immediate environmental concerns that confront us. My own view is that these 'solutions' will really emerge in the Pacific Rim area as rising sea levels, especially, begin to threaten the economic dominance of the region. This scenario was recognised by the US defence staffs back in the early 1990s as being particularly likely if the US began to focus more on internal threats (eg domestic terrorism) and less on global interventions - a direction that appears to be unfolding as Barack Obama develops his new political agenda.

When we speak of 'technology', we usually do so with digital science in mind - communications, data processing and so on. When we think of 'biotechnology' it is often with genetic and nano-technologies in mind.

It's important to remember though, that biological solutions to environmental concerns have been with us for many centuries and some may, with a lot more care than has been exercised in the past, offer the potential to tackle today's crises.

Two groups of researchers, one at the University of New Hampshire and the other at the University of Bologna, have independently begun to concentrate on the interplay between natural Carbon and Nitrogen cycles as a mechanism for regulating the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Essentially, trees with high levels of nitrogen in them absorb proportionally higher levels of carbon dioxide and reflect higher amounts of solar energy. The exact relationship between nitrogen and solar reflectivity remains a mystery. It seems as though nitrogen could act like a switch, changing the structure and cellular properties of leaves so that they become more mirror-like especially within forests in the cooler regions of the Earth.

The potential therefore exists, in these cooler climates, for us to increase the proportion of trees with naturally higher levels of nitrogen in them, and to fertilise trees with increased nitrogen thereby reducing the carbon dioxide levels and reducing greenhouse effects in the atmosphere.

The balance is complex though, as nitrate leaching into groundwater and emissions of nitrous oxide are as environmentally threatening. In dry climates too, such fertilisation may not work as plants with high nitrogen levels also tend to have high water needs.

However, we already know that trees in the vicinity of high industrial and vehicle nitrogen emissions are absorbing more carbon from the atmosphere and it may be that this approach is an important one in well targeted and carefully controlled environments.

Best wishes

---

Helping people achieve things they never dreamt they could
t 07785 222380 | grahamwilson.org - inter-faith.net - thefutureofwork.org

---