Education(?) and Learning(!)

    Think back. What happened in your third-grade classroom on this date in May? What did you learn that day? 

     The day was maybe six hours long, but by now it is an undistinguishable fragment of your education career. You don't remember what was going on in that place on that day, because it almost certainly is buried in your great mass of schoolroom experience. 

     Overall, you probably sat in various classrooms for eight school years or so of elementary education and four years of high school. How can you know what all that sitting contributed to who you are today? 

     And then maybe you went to college, and perhaps grad school. What exactly did all those hours do for you? It may be easier to identify specific payoffs from certain grad courses and from skills training courses and workshops -- but even some of that wasn't of use to you, or has been forgotten. 

     On the other hand, how much of what you know or do was acquired in one-on-one conversation you had and demonstrations you watched? And trial and error? 

     And how much knowledge and understanding, however it came to you, was absorbed and integrated into your immense mental capacity, the great dynamic that drives the thousands of tumbling thoughts, reactions and decisions that create and determine the days of your life?

     It's useful to turn those memories and questions over in the mind as we witness -- or conduct -- considerations about education today and how we do it. 

     My Dad and I discussed the best purpose of education, specifically in terms of higher education, when I was preparing to go to Holy Cross, as he had done (Dad, Class of 1923; Jim, Class of 1958). We did not at all consider college to be skills training. It was to develop the mature person, the contributing citizen.

     Occasionally, I have wondered over the years if that concept was too grand and somewhat empty, maybe too vague. Well, maybe not. Read on. 

     My daughter Maureen extended the Milliken-HC line with her 1983 English Lit degree, and likewise became a newspaper editor. A few years ago, she was quoted thusly in a Holy Cross magazine article:

            My father did a lot of hiring during his newspaper career and always said that a good liberal arts education, combined with newspaper experience,  was      preferable to a journalism degree. 

         To that end, I believe I got a fantastic education - not only the subject matter, but the Jesuit emphasis on analysis and thinking, questioning and delving deeper. I see so many people in this business who just don't know how to think, how to question. You'd think in journalism it would be second nature, but with a lot of people it doesn't even occur to them. 

         On top of that, I find a lot of people have very limited world views, very limited knowledge of history and the world around them, and don't even have the smarts to realize they need to know more  or the ability or curiosity to find it out.

     In terms of newswriting, interviewing, deadline-meeting and other technical skills special to newspapering, Maureen picked them up easily, as I did and as I presume my Dad did, on the job. How? Using those superior skills, the ones she articulated so well. 

     I'm convinced that no particular day of school, or moment in class or conversation, was determinative in the development of my accumulated abilities to think, learn and communicate. I'm equally sure that the overall progress, the direction, the specific judgments were rooted in those long-ago exchanges with Dad. Plus the recent insights from my daughter.

     Thanks, Dad. Thanks, Mo.

        

     

Language Abuse, Grammar Addiction

     "I'm silently correcting your grammar."

     That's what it says on my new coffee cup, and that’s what I do. Can’t help it. I'm commenting (to myself) about the stylistic quality of what I'm hearing in this conversation we're having. I'm commenting in detail, all in my head.
 

     An obsession with the rules of language arose in me early, and has sent down deep roots over the ensuing decades.

     I'm the son of an editor. I wrote well from an early age. I was successively an English major, a newspaper editor and a management/writing instructor. I designed and delivered a three-day course in Business Writing and a daylong training session for working professionals called “A Grammar Refresher.”

     You don’t easily get over such a history.

Holding My Chin and Shutting My Mouth

     Holding my chin while I’m trying to think deeply may not be necessary, but it seems to help. 

     When I’m trying to listen, on the other hand, shutting my mouth is more than helpful. It’s absolutely essential. So is clearing my mind, and so is focusing my attention – sort of like deep thinking. All that is a lot of work, so we don’t experience a great deal of it around us.

     Here is how it works: When I am in conversation and, shutting my mouth, put my hand to my chin, I am signaling my partner in that situation that I am thinking (maybe deeply) and focusing my attention.

     If, at the same time, I continue looking at the other person, they will tend to conclude that I am taking them seriously and paying attention to what they’re saying.

What Do You Mean, "Done?"

     What do you mean, “Done”?

     It’s obvious to you what “done” is. It’s also obvious to me.

     Problem One:

     Your “done” is different from mine.

What Do You Mean, Communication?

 

    The sign on the back of the truck says, “Safety Is My Goal.”

     No it isn’t. Safety is not the goal – of the driver, the owner or the truck, whichever one “my” refers to.

     A goal is the ultimate outcome sought by any activity. The driver’s goal is to get paid. His employer’s goal is to make a profit. The truck has no say.

     This is an example of hyping an otherwise worthy consideration into something it’s not. It’s an effort doomed to failure.

     While every following driver could have understood what was meant by the sign on the truck, many of them might be negatively impressed.

     Couldn’t the company’s leadership, and/or its marketing people, have come up with something true and interesting, rather than an obviously insincere cliché?

Good Finish Needs Strong Start

House built on a rock foundation,

                                                 It will stand, O yes!

                                                                                        Hosanna – Harry Belafonte

     Married 60 years? Wow! What’s the secret?

     “We agreed at the very beginning,” the husband said. “I’ll make all the major decisions  and she’ll make all the minor decisions. And, so far, nothing major has come up.” In 60 years.

     See? It’s all a matter of definition.

     You can visualize a marriage in which the parties have such a gentle, pleasant way of describing how they manage their relationship. It might not make sense for you or me, but it works for them. That description results from the decades-long negotiations that built and maintained the marriage. They can call it anything they want.

Listen Up

     If you think you’re not a good listener, you’re probably wrong.

     Listening researcher Kevin Murphy asserted that in his book “Effective Listening: Hearing What People Say and Making It Work for You.”

     Murphy questioned a sample of 20 top managers, “all business leaders whom I had known to be truly tuned to their employees’ needs and goals“.

     “Are you a good listener?” was Murphy’s question. What was the result?

     “More than 75 percent of the good listeners I surveyed answered no. Why? Because the better you listen, the more you learn about how little you know.”

     So the good listeners were harder on themselves than the independent experts were. Unhappily, the opposite also is true. In general, studies show that most people think they’re good listeners – and most people are wrong.

When the Buck Never Stops

 
  “I never put anything in writing,” the boss said.

     That simple admission said volumes about his view of his job and his responsibility.

     He confided it as a revelation straight out of the secret handbook known only to the highest level of management and leadership.

     I saw it as something of the opposite: A refuge for weak people, a selfish risk avoidance strategy and a loophole to escape blame. Don’t believe everyone else in that organization didn’t know that about the top guy, even without sharing his secret.

     When the buck has no place to stop, a major group activity is to keep passing it on.

How to Argue -- Properly

     This very intense, very intelligent guy startled me by saying something I never had heard before.

     He interrupted a vigorous argument with me by saying. “You know, Jim, I see your point now. I agree with you. You’re right.”

     I was beyond surprised. Why did he do that?

     I’ve thought about that conversation often, and it has changed my basic thinking about why and how to disagree. I now see that the man understood argument in its finest sense, as an opportunity to jointly seek truth and value.

     At first look, this idea may seem ridiculous. But if you put aside conventional thinking, it changes the entire perspective.    

      Some people set out to win all their arguments. Some never win any. Many, perhaps most, rarely argue at all.

     Thoughtful people disagree with all of them. They know that all three types – those who dominate, those who lose the battles and those who avoid engagement entirely – are missing important opportunities. None of the three really know how to reap the benefits of constructive interaction amid differences. They misunderstand what argument can be and what it can do.

Writing Is a Powerful Tool. Treat It as One.

            There were these six guys, submarine diesel mechanics in the U.S. Navy. Their early careers had not involved writing, and that was fine with them, because they weren’t very good at it. One of them misspelled the same word six different ways in the same document. 
      Now they needed to write. Fighting vessels were periodically refitted at their naval shipyard, and the mechanics had to write reports on their examination of the engines. I was a writing coach working with them.
       The reports had to be clear, accurate and complete. People’s lives depended on those engines.
       The Navy mechanics’ problem differed only in degree from that of many fully functioning, intelligent, articulate adults, including project managers and team members. Many people don’t like to write. Many simply avoid writing. Why?
       There are various reasons. Sometimes it is the narrow inflexibility of writing as compared to personal conversation. Sometimes it is the one-way nature of the form, making true exchange clumsy and inadequate.

Mean It? Then Write It.

     I once had a boss – a general manager – who said, “I never put anything in writing.”
     It was a point of pride for him; he spoke in a tone that suggested we owed high respect to his executive wisdom.
     It also was an index comment to his management philosophy. He was implying that real leaders get things done only through in-person communication. If you were to succeed in that workplace, the way to go would be your direct, personal contact with the boss. 
     As a subordinate of his, I found it disturbing.
     In the abstract, there is something to be said for his point of view. The written word can be rigidly limiting, particularly when it is used to communicate directives and executive opinion. Writing is a one-way medium, both in assertion and in response.  It can easily be misunderstood.
     In the world of nuts-and-bolts management, there are other reasons why my old boss would avoid putting anything in writing.
  

Bad Meetings Don't Kill Projects . . . They're Just There for the Wakes

     I ran nothing but lousy meetings before I got into project management, and quite a few after I should have known better.
     Meetings too often are where good ideas go to die, or get loaded down with impediments. That’s a shame, because good meetings provide value that is so essential to organizations.
     Human beings cannot collaborate without meetings, gatherings with a purpose. Meetings work best face to face. When that is not possible, there is some value in virtual gatherings such as teleconferencing and online sharing.
     Meetings do not work well when they are poorly planned and poorly managed, which is most of the time. Serious organizational meeting malfunction is more prevalent than it should be – more prevalent, in my experience, than good meetings are.
     Actually, while awful meetings are so obviously a waste of time, money and talent, they are more symptom than cause. As projects go awry, poor meeting management is always in the mix somewhere.

Project Management: Words Matter

     We’ve all had a lot of fun considering whether Project Management is an art or a science. Or both. Or a business. A profession? Maybe it’s just a craft, or a trade. Or have we just gussied up plain garden-variety management to get attention?
     Well, words matter. So do vague and generalized perceptions.
     The current popularity of project management in the business community is a boon to those of us working in the field.
     The opportunity door has swung wide open because many executives and managers have come to believe that bringing in a project manager is the solution to functional and process tangles in their organizations.
     The boon part can deflate instantly, though, when the enthusiastic prospects hear about the specifics. Clear words dissipate illusions. Too often, project management runs sharp treads right across favorite habits and processes. One in particular, the perceived inviolability of executive/management authority, can take a serious hit.

Project Communication: Not Quick, Not Easy

     “The communication is terrible around here.”
     Of course it is. Communication is terrible everywhere.
     Communication is the lifeblood of collaborative human behavior, especially in the pressurized environment of a good-sized project. True projects are innovative, meaning they’re intended to create something that hasn’t existed before, at least with those particular people in that place.
     So there is uncertainty, and there are gaps in information and there is risk. Often, you are dependent upon people you don’t know well and usually have no real control over. Time and resources are tight, and persons of importance can have demanding expectations.
     Yet, despite all that, nothing will happen unless those involved get active and make it happen. Not so easy.

'Don't Argue with Me'

     “Don’t argue with me – I have debated before the American Bar Association.”
     That is one of the more efficient discussion killers I have collected in a lifelong study of human conversation. If the remark doesn’t instantly freeze the other party, it sets an agenda for a losing exchange. You are put down and set up in one neat pre-emptive strike.
     Are you going to now argue about whether you’re arguing, or debate debating with a master debater?
     You got into the conversation originally to explore differences and seek understanding. It hadn’t occurred to you that it was a competition. If that’s what it is going to be, you’ll need to reorder your entire frame of mind. Probably need to do some research, too.
     That is, of course, if you buy the choice you have been so smoothly locked into. If you don’t buy it, how would you rate your chances of resetting the basis for why we’re talking?  
     Perhaps the politic thing to do is just just acquiesce and withdraw.

The Ultimate Project Manager Habit

     “You can’t start a successful project without a charter.”

     Ask five project managers whether they agree with that statement.

     Then ask them what a project charter contains and entails.

     Hey, ask those project managers if they’ve ever seen such a document.

     Even if they all work for the same organization, you’re very likely to get as many as five separate answers to most of the three questions – if not all of them.

     A project charter:

     Is it a detailed specification of desired actions/outcomes/constraints determined at high management levels and issued to the project manager?

     Is it the foundational description of the key project elements developed by the actual leaders of the project?

     Is it an expression of mutual agreement among all key stakeholding decision-makers, after negotiation of their interests and commitments?

     If there isn’t something called a “charter,” what do the project managers base their project planning and execution on? What do they call it? What does it do?

     

Project Attitude

     "You've got an attitude."

     Wait! Wait! Don’t get angry!  I don’t mean to insult you – I’m just describing you. Me, too, as a matter of fact.

     In the United States, we’ve come to interpret that word “attitude” in many contexts as meaning “BAD attitude.” And “bad” is not good.

     So we have an attitude about “attitude.” I have no doubt other cultures have theirs, too.

     The point of that little semantic jaunt is to encourage all of us to be aware of our attitudes. Let’s think about how they work and what they do for us and against us. And, of course, what we should do about all that. If indeed we can do anything about subsurface mechanisms such as these.

     When the slang dictionary says you have an attitude, it means you’re resentful and hostile. That’s the definition addressed in the opening lines above.

'Soft' Skills Are the Hard Part

      This guy had something of a problem. He wandered through the crowded social event, approaching women with an intense stare, mumbling something and scaring the hell out of them. They all reacted in ways that drove him off, but he stayed on the hunt.    

     No one knew what to do. People went over to the organization’s president, urging/demanding that he do something. He would say, “Yeah, I’m going right over there.” But he didn’t move.

     Someone else, realizing nothing was going to happen unless someone did something, did something. He went up to the problem person, spoke quietly to him and took him gently, firmly by the elbow. There was no resistance as he guided the fellow out the door and drove him home.  

Argument Builds Relationships

     This guy startled me.

     We had disagreed, and then I described in greater detail what I meant. He listened. Then he said, “You’re right. Now I see your point, and I agree.” I was really nonplussed. That had never happened to me before.

     I came from a large, very verbal family, and one thing we never did was give in on an argument. If the words didn’t work, even in waves of escalated volume and intensity, we tended to get physical. Growing into the larger world, and learning to keep it strictly verbal, I discovered that most people are not accustomed to debate as sport, or even as instructive.

Career Move: Talk to the Boss

     It was still summer, but for some reason the department secretary asked our city editor whether he was planning to attend the boss’s annual staff cocktail party, generally held in the early fall.

     “No. I’m busy that day,” the guy said.

     “But you don’t even know when it will be,” the secretary protested.

     “I know,” he answered. “I’m still busy that day.”

     The boss – specifically, the top editor of our medium-sized daily – was not a bad person. Kind of distant, though, and committed to a somewhat alien set of standards. I bumped into him once at a big university while I was there on a recruiting trip for reporters and interns.