I used a “word picture” that helped illustrate the difficulties they are experiencing in communicating with one another. [Like most things, word pictures have their pro’s & con’s. On the one hand, they can powerfully paint an image that drives home a key concept. On the other hand, if taken too far they “break down” in their ability to communicate clearly.]

Women often say to me, about their husband, “He just doesn’t get it. He doesn’t understand what I am trying to say.” They go on to complain about how he is a poor communicator and a terrible listener. While this may be true, I try to explain the situation this way.

Communication is not “all or nothing”. Most guys can communicate some (give us a break here, gals). But how they communicate and what they communicate are often qualitatively different than the messages their wives send.

It is like this. There is a broad spectrum of communication media. In the old days (only used rarely now), there was morse code. Morse code is made of those beeps that make up dots and dashes on telegraph wires. Beep, beep, (pause), beeeep, beep . . . There is a single tone. It has no words (the sounds make up letters, which make up words) but it is a form of communication.

Then there is AM radio. More information is sent — including words and music. But the spectrum of the frequency of sound communicated is limited — it can sound sort of “tinny”. But it is a lot more full than morse code. We then can move to FM radio – a deeper, richer fuller sound and tone. There is a richness communicated in classical music (and classic rock) that AM radio just can’t do.

But we are still only sending audio information. So let’s move to television — starting with black and white, and then color. Now we have a whole new set of information being communicated — auditory + visual — we get pictures and moving visual images versus just sound. The breadth of information that is communicated has multiplied significantly.

Finally, let’s go to 3D movies (with THX sound, of course). Wow, now you are talking! Rich, loud sound. Beautiful color images that look like real life in three dimensions. The breadth, depth and scope of what is being communicated is amazing.

The problem is: some people (usually guys) are only built with the equipment to send and/or receive morse code or AM radio frequencies. So it doesn’t matter how hard their wife tries to communicate effectively in television or 3D mode, he only “gets” part of the information. The rest of the waves just harmlessly bounce off of his forehead. He truly doesn’t get it. And for many, guys. They just can’t. They don’t understand the depth of feelings and emotions their wives experience and try to share.

So now matter how hard he tries, or how hard she tries, there is an element of lack of connection. It (usually) isn’t because he doesn’t want to; he just can’t communicate at the same level — he doesn’t think that way (e.g. in color, if he is a black & white TV), and the messages don’t get through to him.

Sorry to burst some of your bubbles, gals (some of you younger wives won’t believe me yet) with a shot of reality.

So what is the answer? Several applications, really.

1. Understand the level of complexity at which you communicate. Then try to understand the level at which your spouse/significant other communicates. Do your best to match your communication with their style (”Just the facts, ma’am).

2. Don’t expect your AM radio partner receive and understand TV signals. Adjust your expectations to reality. (A special word of encouragement for those of you married to male, introverted engineers and accountants.)

3. Find others in your life — friends, sisters, mothers — who communicate at the same level you do, and experience your deeper life support and communication with them. Living a life in an AM radio world when you have color TV capabilities is boring and frustrating. Get your needs met in these relationships, and continue to communicate as effectively as possible with your spouse.

A couple of other suggestions. Morse code receivers cannot receive as much information as an FM radio. They can’t process it quickly enough and get overloaded easily. Too many words and too much emotion can do the same for guys.

Also, note that I have been largely talking about male/female differences, but these issues occur within same gender relationships as well. Some guys are wired more complexly than others, and are more reflective and aware of their feelings. These guys have a hard time connecting with those who are more “just the facts, ma’am” type. And some gals want to go “deeper” in their conversations and relationships than others.

Not sure how to end this, except: beeeeeep, beep (pause) beep, beep, beep. Hang in there, gals. I am sure there is a good reason why guys can’t communicate at the deeper levels you do — we just need to figure out what it is. [Kudos to my wife, who as a 42″ flat-screen HDTV, has endured living with an old FM tube radio for 30 years.]

What is trust, really? One definition is: “to place confidence in” or “rely on”.

Recently, I have worked with families, family businesses, couples, parents & teens, Boards of Directors (numerous ones) where a number of individuals within these systems don’t trust one another. And, unfortunately, the problem is that they have learned not to trust. That is, in many cases there was some level of trust previously that has now been undermined.

How does this happen?

Let’s first talk about some key components that are needed for trust to exist. One model defines trust as being comprised of three core components: competency, reliability, and looking out for your interests. Let’s look at each component more closely.

Competency. As I have stated previously, trust is situation-specific. Trust can only truly be defined within a context. No adult (except foolishly) trusts someone for all things in all situations. [Children may, but I have to think about that.] This is because no one is competent in every skill needed in life.

I may trust my financial advisor to develop a balanced approach to investing my savings, but I am not going to entrust my body to him to do heart surgery – because that is not his area of competency. We trust people in situations for which we believe they are competent.

Reliability. Part of trust has to do with the belief that a person is going to “be there” when they are supposed to. An employer expects a worker to show up for work day after day. A child expects their mother to “be there” when they need them. When we have a team working together on a project, we expect our team members to show up and be prepared for their role. Conversely, you may have a gifted and talented team member who really shines during presentations, but if they occasionally are late to meetings, come not prepared, or don’t show at all, then your trust for them in those situations is seriously undermined.

Looking out for your interests. If an advisor for your business is highly competent and reliable, but you are not sure they are primarily considering your interests in the work they are doing for you, you probably have an undertow of mistrust in your interactions with them. This is at the heart of the problem of trust in many business relationships – there are competing interests among various individuals and groups. And if you are not convinced that your interests are being considered (at least as highly as others’ interests), then it will be difficult for you to fully entrust your situation to others without seriously evaluating how they will benefit from the transaction.

From this perspective, trust is much like a three-legged stool. You can have two of the legs, but the stool won’t function without all three. Let’s examine each scenario:

Competency + Reliability – Looking Out For Your Interests. This combination leads to mistrust of the other person’s motives. No matter how well they can perform, you always feel like you have to “watch your back” so you won’t be taken advantage of.

Competency + Looking Out For Your Interests – Reliability. This is the “I just wish …” scenario. You have a competent individual whom you trust their desire to help you. But they just can’t keep it together to show up reliably (or on time), be prepared, and follow through on commitments made. You would like to partner with them, but you are concerned about the ramifications when they let you down.

Reliability + Looking Out For Your Interests – Competency. These are quality people who are faithful, will show up when they say they will, and they want to help you out. But they just don’t have the skills, training or experience needed to get the job done at the quality level you need. Often they are “over-reaching” their skill and ability level out of a desire to help (or to grow professionally), and as a result, often others need to come in and help finish the job.

Trust rarely is “all or nothing”. Remember, trust is situation-specific. In most of our relationships, our willingness to trust (or not trust) is not a black-and-white, “all or nothing” position. Rather, there are certain situations that we would be willing to trust the person, and there are other circumstances where we would not be willing to trust them.

This is an important point because in meetings I often hear people say, “I don’t trust him”, or “I’m sorry, but I just can’t trust her” – as if it is a carte blanche position. I work hard at helping people reframe both their thinking and their speech – to more clearly delineate “for what” they currently are unwilling to trust the other person. (“Currently” is an important word as well, because we want to frame the situation whereby the other person could potentially demonstrate they are trustworthy, and be trusted in the future in a similar situation.)

The Creation of Mistrust. An important question is: how do individuals come to mistrust others in their lives (family members, business partners, colleagues, suppliers)? The obvious answer is: “from a lack of one (or more) of the three requisite ingredients for trust.” And this is true. [I would propose that a lack of reliability is a common source of mistrust, especially in personal relationships, while doubt about the other person’s genuine concern for your interests is a more common source in business-related relationships.]

But a closer examination of relationships characterized by mistrust actually leads to some additional sources.

Lack of adequate, clear communication. Unfortunately, mistrust can develop through a lack of information communicated, or communicated clearly. How often do you hear, in the midst of a conflict, someone say, “Oh! I didn’t realize that”, or “Well, if I would have known that I would have reacted differently.”

Guilt by association. Some business professions have a reputation for being largely self-interested (used car salesmen, professionals who sell life insurance) – that their primary goal is to make a sale, whether the product is what you want , need or not. This puts trustworthy individuals in these professions at a disadvantage. They must work harder to demonstrate that they are considering the interests of the potential customer in the transaction they are proposing.

Misunderstanding of the other person’s intent. In situations where self-interest can be a factor, and where there has not been a long-standing trusting relationship, the misinterpretation of motives can easily occur. Many times people mistrust others because they have a misunderstanding of the potential benefits that might be realized, and think the person is acting primarily from self-interest.

Mismatch of expectations. Sometimes relationships are strained with one party’s expectations not met by another’s well-intended actions. If a friend volunteers to help decorate the banquet room for a fund-raising event, and the quality of the work is below your expectations, tension can arise. Often this is the result of lack of clear communication about what is expected.

A summary word: trust is easily lost, especially when people quit communicating with one another. Whenever possible, if you believe another person is struggling with trusting you in a situation, be proactive and find out what the issue is. I think you will find that the beginnings of mistrust can quickly be corrected either through an apology (if you have not followed through on a commitment made), clarifying your actions and intent, or coming to an understanding of unmet expectations and how these might be addressed in the future.

I’d like to share some thoughts about fathers, from a variety of perspectives.

First, a few thoughts about my own dad who died 15 years ago this summer — he was 71 years old and I was 37. My dad, Roger White, was a very bright, largely self-educated man. When I reflect on some of the core character qualities that he had, I think of:

*Provider — he took his role of providing for our family seriously, and strove to do the best he could for his children and grandchildren;

*Life long learner – my dad was always learning- about engineering, mechanical design, sailing, construction, investments, how things worked;

*Problem-solver — a common dinnertime discussion topic was a recent problem he had observed and his thoughts about different ways the problem could potentially be solved, and he encouraged us to be observant of problems that needed to be solved in the world around us;

*Giver — dad was generous to those around him - to mom, to the kids (and our spouses) and grandkids, to friends and those in need that he saw;

*Hard worker — this was a “given”, if you were a member of our family (nuclear or extended) you were a hard worker;

*Focused — this was both an asset and a liability for dad, he could become focused on an issue, problem or topic and it was tough to get him off of it.

I am thankful for the legacy he left to me and my children through his modeling of these character qualities.

A second perspective comes from the fact that I conducted a family meeting this past weekend that included a multi-generational discussion on the dynamics of relationships between parents and their adult children. And there were some interesting points made and comments during the discussion.

One of the themes we discussed was the roles and responsibilities of parents (both mothers and fathers) when children are growing up. These include the responsibility to:

nurture, protect, encourage, model, teach, discipline, entertain, transport, facilitate personal development,

provide - food, clothing, shelter & other resources, make decisions, train in social skills, expose to the larger world.

When the young adults in the room saw this list growing, they spontaneously commented: “Whoa! That is a lot of responsibility. I’m not sure I want to be a parent!”

Additionally, as we worked through the different stages of parent / child relationships (childhood, adolescence, adult children), we talked about the tensions of transition in different stages. One thought shared was that parents of adult children often are confused about how much input or counsel to give their children (and their spouses). Many parents don’t want to be overly involved or intrusive, and can actually “back off” too much where they become disengaged from their children’s lives. Other parents (the one more commonly portrayed in the media) can be overly involved, give too much advice (and too strong of advice, not allowing for differing views) and essentially are experienced as being intrusive. [We discussed ways to manage this tension — which you were there!]

Another interesting (to me) point was that one of the main things parents of adult children desire from their children and other family members is — companionship. Sometimes we just like being together, hanging out, and being a part of our kids’ lives. Why? Revisit the list above of the responsibilities we carried for a number of years. We have invested a lot in our kids — time, energy, (and yes, money). And our kids have been a major part of our lives. Often, we like them and enjoy their company. Many young adults who are in their own life stage of finding their own identity and independence, forget about the situation from their parents’ point of view. So a hint to young adults and older “children” — a relatively low-cost gift to your folks is to choose to spend some time with them.

We need to look at fathers from one other perspective — from those who are either fatherless, or essentially fatherless — their fathers aren’t involved in their lives. Unfortunately, this is not uncommon in our culture. The number of children who are raised in homes without a father present is astounding. Add the number of fathers who are in the home but really not present because of work or other activities, or who are not emotionally or relationally present — and the percentage is frightening. Why? Because fathers provide important messages to their children — that they are special and loved, that they are valuable and worth one’s time and energy, and that we believe in you. (Mothers obviously communicate these messages as well, but dad’s do it in a different way.)

So if you are a guy, when (not if, but when) you are around those whose father is not present, spend a little extra time with them. Give them some time and encouragement. Let them know they are neat. Share some wisdom with them, or teach them a skill. It could be a small gift that goes a long ways to impact a child’s life.

Yes, dad’s can be annoying. But we can be cool, too (sort of). If your dad is still around, let him know something you appreciate about him or what he did for you while you were growing up. It will warm his heart.

The Saturday morning before I went to the meet to watch a friend run in the sprinting events (100 meter, 200 meter, 4 x 100 meter relay), I went for a jog by my house — which meant I was running on a dirt road with pot holes and “washboard” on the road. In the evenings, my wife and I often take walks together down the road, as well.

And I started thinking about the differences between walking, jogging and sprinting — both physically, but also in life.

Sprinting. Sprinting is cool. It is flashy. In track, the sprint events are the high profile events. At the highest level of competition, the winner of the 100 meter dash is known as “the fastest man in the world”. And man, these guys and gals can fly. They are smooth and they move with beauty.

But the events only last 10 to 50 seconds, depending on the event. “Crack”, goes the starting pistol. The athletes fly down the track. And then it is over. Someone often gets hurt — falling at the finish line, or pulling up gimpy with a pulled muscle.

Jogging. Jogging — or in track, the long distance races (1600 meters [the metric equivalent of a mile], 3200 meters or the 4 x 800 relay) — are less flashy. For some, they are boring. Young women and men steadily running around the track several times. There is a little excitement and jostling for position at the beginning of the race. Many times there is an exciting finish between two runners sprinting for the finish. (And many times there is no excitement, given the large distance between the runners.) The runners are exhausted at the end and require quite a bit of time to recover from the race.

Walking. In most track meets, there are no walking races. At longer running events (2 mile races, 10K races) they may have a two mile walking race, but they aren’t very common. Walking just isn’t much of a sporting event for most people. It is boring to watch for very long. It isn’t as physically demanding for the individual — so most athletes pursue other events.

Let’s discuss some observations and lessons for daily life that can be derived from the characteristics and differences between walking, jogging and sprinting.

Sprinting is flashy, takes a lot of talent and preparation but isn’t used much in daily life. I don’t know about you, but I don’t have the need to sprint (literally, to run as fast as I can for a short distance) very often. Jogging is more for trying to keep in shape. But mostly, I walk.

In life, there are people I see from a distance or occasionally meet who seem incredibly cool. They are mega-talented, have a lot of style, and they seem to have the world by the tail. They go at a fast pace and are high profile.

But as I watch them over the long haul, many of them don’t really have staying power. They are a “flash in the pan” — bright lights & a lot of energy — but they are gone tomorrow. And often, their careers are short.

If I get in the mode of trying to sprint at work — moving real fast, making quick decisions, trying to impress others, and being primarily focused on image — I burn out fast. I don’t really get that much done. And I burn a lot of resources that require substantial time to recover. And often, I make mistakes.

Jogging takes a fair amount of effort and the distance people can jog varies greatly. Some people are in better shape than others (obviously). But even among runners, their stamina differs greatly — and you can’t necessarily tell by just looking at them.

In life, individuals differ significantly in how much emotional, mental and relational energy they have. And people’s level of personal discipline varies significantly, too. There are a lot of people who don’t have a boat-load of talent, but through commitment to get good training and daily personal discipline of doing what they need to day-in and day-out, they get a lot of work done (or develop stamina to run long distances.)

But jogging, and working consistently at a fast pace, takes energy and commitment. It is easier to walk (or not do anything), and in life, it is easier to “hang out”, do leisure activities, and not pursue goals. That is why — both for those who run long distances and those who get tasks done — joggers usually have a goal and work a disciplined plan to get there.

Most of life involves walking and walking allows for other things to be done at the same time. The majority of our life involves walking — around the house, at work, while shopping, etc. And we know walking is good for us physically. By definition, walking means you are going somewhere (versus being stagnant and passive.) In career development, I tell my coaching clients one of the major mistakes people make is to “not be going anywhere” — they are passive and waiting for something to happen.

One of things I like about walking is that I am able to do something else at the same time — think and reflect, pray, talk with Kathy, or just enjoy nature around me. When I jog (or on the rare occasion I may sprint for a short distance), my focus is on the physical activity. I am not thinking about much else.

The same is true at work or in life. If I am going at a normal walking pace, I am able to think and reflect, interact with others and enjoy the world around me while I am working. I get things done but I am not exhausted at the end of the day and I have energy left to do other things. And yes, it seems like it takes longer to get tasks done at this pace versus when I am rushing, but like the hare and the tortoise, I probably come out “ahead” at the end.

Steve Prefontaine, one of the preeminent long distance runners in the 1970’s said:

“Life’s battles don’t always go to the strongest or fastest man, but sooner or later the man who wins is the fellow who thinks he can.”

What are other lessons we can learn from these three activities? Think about it this week as you are walking.

Integrating Business Ownership Succession, Business Management Succession, and Personal Estate Planning. Most people don’t distinguish between ownership succession planning and management succession. This creates significant problems — especially when the owner wants to sell but the company doesn’t have the management ready to take over the company. Often we have to work to develop a “bridge plan” for getting an interim management team, so the sale can occur.

A second common problem is when the owners’ personal financial estate planning isn’t integrated with business succession planning. Business owners want to get their financial investment out of the company when they sell it, but if not done correctly, they can pay excessive capital gains taxes.

How will the sale of the business affect your family? The sale of a family business significantly impacts the whole family. This includes family members who work in the business and those who do not work in the business. There can be issues of “fairness” within the family — those who work in the business may lose their jobs (or the perks previously associated with ownership). But if they own some of the business, they can reap a large financial benefit while non-owning family members get nothing.

A secondary, but significant issue, can be the impact of the sale on the career development for succeeding generations. If the family has a large influx of money from the sale, this can create challenges (and disincentives) for career development for younger family members. How the sale is structured — and how things are communicated to the family — can help avoid these issues.

How do you decide how much money to give to family members? Key questions we work to answer are: How much is enough? How much is too much? In reality, we have learned these are not the most important questions. Rather, we have identified the key factors that avoid destroying family members with money.

What plans do you have to keep the family together in the coming years? Often families in business communicate primarily about the business when they get together. When the business goes away, many families struggle to stay together — they have no history or tradition for family gatherings outside of the business. So they need to answer questions like: What will be the basis for family interactions and gatherings? What type of communication process will be in place? How will you keep the extended family connected?

The most common “big impact” mistakes owners make when selling their business:
-Not involving their spouse in the process.
-Not preparing their children for managing the wealth they will be receiving.
-Not involving children’s spouses in the process.
-Not integrating the sale of the business with their personal / family estate planning, and paying unnecessary taxes.
-Not developing an adequate plan to finance buy-sell agreements
(between family members, or in the case of death).

The reality is: Most business owners and families need help both “thinking through” and “working out” a business succession plan. My advice to business owners: Don’t risk losing two of your most valuable assets you have spent years building (your business and your family) by making un-informed decisions. A little “pre-work” with a family coach can go a long way to saving a lot of heartache later on.

In the past, I have written on the psychology of investing and also the kinds of errors investors make (for example, pulling out your money after the stock market has dropped, and putting it back in after the stock market has already rebounded significantly — sounds like the fall of 2008 and spring of 2010).

Recently, Dan Ariely, a psychologist and behavioral economist at Duke University has been in the news. He has written a new book, The Upside of Irrationality and it was recently previewed in Forbes.

I have his previous book, Predictably Irrational, and thought I’d share a few of his observations and conclusions which I think are quite applicable in our daily lives.

Just to whet your appetite, here are some of the chapter titles:

The Fallacy of Supply and Demand
The Power of a Free Cookie
The Power of Price
The Cost of Social Norms.

The premise of the book is that people do not make rational decisions — especially with regards to money (spending, buying, saving, investing). And further, that we are predictably irrational — there are patterns that we follow.

Let me share from the section entitled, The Truth about Relativity. The main point is that “humans rarely choose things in absolute terms. . . Rather, we focus on the relative advantage of one thing over another. . . We are always looking at the things around us in relation to others. We can’t help it. . . (w)e not only tend to compare things with one another but also tend to focus on comparing things that are easily comparable — and avoid comparing things that cannot be compared easily. . . We like to make decisions based on comparisons.”

Ariel then cites a series of experiments that show a number of principles:

1. People like to make decisions by means of comparing choices (what clothes washing machine to buy, what job offer to take, who to date).

2. If a person does not have an alternative to compare to, they very likely will “pass” and decide “no”.

3. When there are multiple alternatives, people usually (not always, there are some other factors that can intervene) choose the “middle” option. They don’t want the most expensive and they don’t want the cheapest (items on a restaurant menu, clothing, professional services).

4. The downside to comparing, is that we often feel unsatisfied with what we have when comparing to those around us (feeling others have a better job than we do, a better car, took a better vacation, etc.) So comparing usually leads to dissatisfaction.

So here are some of my observations and applications.

a) Although it is good to differentiate yourself in the marketplace from your competitors, if you are too different, potential customers can’t compare you to the competition and they will not choose to use you.

b) When marketing goods or services, know who your competition is and what their price points are. Try to fall in the middle price range (but offer more value).

c) If you are offering a new or unique product or service, provide at least two options (a more expensive one and the one you really want to sell) so customers have a “choice”. [Ariely actually cited a study that demonstrated this application.]

d) If you want to limit your spending, surround yourself with individuals whose lifestyle is lower than yours — not higher. When you compare yourself to what car they drive, where they buy their clothes, and where they go on vacation, you will feel less pull to “trade up” and spend more.

e) When you are shopping, be aware that marketing departments of stores know about the tendency of people to choose the middle price option — often the lower price is actually a better deal.

Have a great week — and watch that irrational behavior!

But I cannot hold my tongue any longer. Just today I received notice about a major study that came out this spring - a meta-analysis of 130 research studies with over 130,000 youth studied. The finding?

Violent video games make youth (both male and female) more likely to engage in personal aggression themselves. Surprise, surprise. Do you mean to tell me that watching and participating in repeated fantasy action of shooting, stabbing, hitting, and murdering others — done for hours and hours, over days, weeks, months and years — actually impacts a person’s behavior? I’m shocked.

Let’s look at some of the other negative characteristics typical of most video game playing:

Video games are primarily self-focused.
I know you can play games with others (either in person or on-line), but who really plays video games for the purpose of serving others? (Except the occasional parent who dislikes them.) It’s true, they can be a form of entertainment — used for relaxing and leisure time, for chilling. But how many of you have noticed that your children (or husband) become more self-focused, agitated, irritable and less willing to do their responsibilities after they have played for two or three hours? It is about them and what they are doing — how dare you interrupt their game and ask them to study, mow the lawn or clear the table?

Video games and the skills they build have virtually no transferability to real life. How many jobs are there that require superfast hand/eye coordination and decision-making? I used to say there were no careers for which video games prepared you for. I was corrected during a lecture — these skills are useful in the military for those who pilot drones and bombs to their destinations. I stand corrected. Now how many of those jobs are there? And how many people grow up with that career dream? That leaves about 75+ million American youth and young adults under 30.

Video games steal time and mental energy from tasks that could be truly productive and/or skill building. In business, this is known as “opportunity cost” — you only have so much time and energy. And if you spend that time and energy on Halo or World of Warcraft, then that time and energy can’t be spent on physical exercise, studying, learning to play an instrument, or working a part-time job. We are literally wasting hundreds of millions of hours of potentially productive time with our youth and young adults.

Video games create a false sense of competency. I am convinced that one of the draws of video games — especially for those students who struggle in school — is that it gives them a sense of competency. They are able to beat an adversary, win at a certain level of difficulty, or obtain virtual rewards and treasures. The problem is — the competency isn’t real; what good does it do them away from the virtual world? One time I had a significantly overweight 10 year old boy tell me he was really good at tennis. After further inquiry, I found out he was good at tennis on the Wii, but he actually believed he was good at playing tennis. We need to help our children build self-confidence but through tasks which they will use in real life.

Video games can become highly addictive, especially to individuals with ADD/ADHD. It is well-known among those who work on college campuses that many young men (primarily) spend 3 or more hours a day playing videogames. And it is documented that at least 10% demonstrated addictive behaviors — not being able to quit even if they want to, losing weight because they do not stop to eat, and probably the most common — disruptions of sleep due to playing patterns. [I recently had parents report that their 12 year old was getting up in the middle of the night after his parents had gone to sleep and was gaming for hours — they finally realized why he was always so tired.] Neuroscientists are now finding associations between the adrenaline-rush and addictive behaviors that are associated with high-stimulation video games.

(I am aware that there are exceptions to each of the above-raised points, but these are common characteristics of those children, teens, young adults and adults who play a lot of video games.)

So that I don’t just criticize and run, let me give parents some practical suggestions for dealing with the challenges associated with the video game craze in our culture.

1. Don’t accept the “everybody does it” excuse. Oh, yea. That’s a good one — right up there with smoking, under-age drinking, casual sex, smoking pot and every other generational foolish decision young people have argued with their parents about. But the problem is: almost everyone else is doing it. So parents, show some backbone. Set rules and guidelines. Fight the battle. Be “mean”. And stick to what you know is right.

2. Set limits. Take the power cords. Lock up the controls. Set on-line limits. Require that schoolwork and/or chores are done prior to any time playing games. And limit the time — 30-60 minutes on weekdays (preferably none, if you can get away with it), and 1-2 hours per day on weekends. More than that, and you can’t really monitor the limits.

3. Use the “real life” rule. Ask yourself, your husband (husbands are often part of the problem), and your children: “Would we encourage this behavior in real life?” Do I want my kids to steal cars, mug people, shoot and murder others? “Oh, it is just a game”, it is argued. Ok, then why don’t we encourage games that have your teenager rape others and burn houses down with people still in them? Give me a break — why do we need research to show us that repetitive thoughts and fantasy actions increase the probability of those actions actually occurring in real life?

4. If your children are still young, delay getting games as long as possible. The battle is harder to fight when the games are in the house. Don’t worry. They won’t be deprived — they will still play at their friends’ houses. Wait. Wait. Wait. If you want to, get them a Wii. Do the educational games. But lay off all the Gameboys, X-boxes, Playstations, Internet-based games — you and they will be better off. (I could tell you a personal story about my four kids — now ages 19 to 27, but you wouldn’t believe me.)

I know this entry has a bit of an edge and angry tone. Sorry (sort of). I wish I could communicate what I want without the irritability, but sometimes there are things worth getting angry about.

For those of you with students in school, think about how you are going to manage this summer — they are off school, have lots of free time, and you will be at work. Do you want your kids playing 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 hours of video games a day? (Ten to twelve hours isn’t unrealistic.) If not, what are you going to do about it now?

It is not an exhaustive list but here are some of my observations:

Each of us has a unique combination of strengths, abilities, personal history, education and training, personality, family background and values. It would seem this should go without saying, but most of us compare ourselves to those around us — and come up “short”. There is almost always somebody better than we are — even in our strength areas. And this is true in families as well. Children need to find their own unique combination of strengths and talents (one of their siblings may be better in a specific area). And this is
especially true for individuals whose skills differ significantly from the rest of the family (e.g. artists in a family of entrepreneurs).

How we reach a certain goal or approach tasks is often more informative than whether we succeed or fail. One of the fascinating aspects of my job while testing is to observe how an individual completes a task (or tries to). There are lots of ways to correctly solve a problem — and there are lots of different ways to make errors. How we approach a task, and what we do in response to barriers or confusion ultimately says a lot about a person — and how they will deal with challenges in daily life (persevere, give up quickly, ask for help, use trial & error, use logic to problem solve).

Culture emphasizes different skills and abilities over different time periods. Part of “success” in life has to do with the match between an individual’s unique skill set and what the culture is currently emphasizing. I often tell parents (usually of students who do not have good reading or writing skills) that I am thankful I wasn’t born on a farm in the 1800’s — because I would have been relegated to a ditch digger or to slopping the hogs (feeding them, to you urbanites). I have virtually NO mechanical skills or problem-solving ability — and that is what was needed to be successful in that setting.

Parents who have successful children strive to understand their children, provide support and resources to build their strengths (and overcome their deficits). One of the more frustrating experiences is to interact with a parent who has a very narrow definition of what “success” is (e.g. good grades in school; being athletic) and their child doesn’t have the natural abilities to do well in the desired area. Wise parents observe and discover the strength areas of their children and help those skills develop — even if it is not a strength (or area of interest) of the parent. These are the youth who struggle in reading and writing who go on to become successful in business, the military, or just great all around people — excellent husbands, wives and parents.

Early, easy success in life often hinders more sustainable long-term success later in life. A pattern I have seen repeatedly is a highly talented child — bright, athletic, good-looking, socially skilled, musical — they seem to have it all. And they are “stars” early in life — especially grade school, possibly all the way through high school (sometimes, college). But at some point, “the wheels fall off”. The student hits challenges they do not have the habits, disciplines and emotional chutzpa to overcome. Extremely bright and talented students often do not have the opportunity to learn good study skills, perseverance or handling failure during the early stages of their lives. Conversely, individuals who grow into self-responsible and contributing members of their community: a) understand and accept their weaknesses; b) respond to (and do not resent) the demands of daily life, and c) find ways to gradually move forward in their life and career paths. Most successful individual aren’t “stars” or people who “hit it big” — they are individuals who consistently and repeatedly try to make good choices.

Successful parents (and individuals) focus on behaviors and habits that lead to success (daily discipline, perseverance, practice, learning building block skills, doing a job well done, learning how to problem-solve). Wise parents understand that there are behaviors, choices and attitudes that lead to positive results. Although they may use grades or achievement as measuring sticks of progress, they do not emphasize the symbols of success as much as the behaviors which lead to success. Conversely, parents whose children struggle later in life (high school, college and beyond) are overly concerned with “looking successful” — good grades, high test scores, winning in sports. Often this leads to patterns of excessive help by the parents, and cheating by the students. Ultimately, their lack of skill or knowledge becomes apparent.

If you are a parent, remember that parenting is a marathon. Keep the long-term goal in mind. Don’t settle for the easy, short symbols of success. Let your child struggle — how else will they become stronger?

If you are a grandparent, teacher, or principal — or you just know someone who may benefit from these observations, consider sharing them with someone you know.

Have a great weekend.

“Conscience is good for society and civilization whether it is taught or whether it is instinctive. . . It is important to look at conscience as if it were a muscle or a nerve. The more you exercise it and the more you sensitize it, the more effective it is going to be.”

Tielman uses the term, “enlightened conservatism”, but do not think that he is talking about political conservatism — otherwise your assumptions and associations will lead you astray. “Enlightened conservatism, as a concept, is well described as trying create an environment in which ethical actions of character can best be performed. . . the character of choice of conscience and concern for others prevails over-self-interest.”

He goes on to contrast decisions made through convenience versus decisions made through conscience. “(D)isciples of conscience look to the future and their children to build a greater society. The disciples of convenience look more to their gains at the present. . . Leaders of convenience often have to step on teh people below them and pull down the people above them. Their weapons are personal attacks, distraction, and the negative emotions. Leaders of conscience use constructive leadership to help others move forward positively. . . Their weapons have to be integrity of purpose and devotion to common goals.”

“In order to achieve the common good, the world’s people must reach the point of saying, ‘What do I think about that?’ rather than just ‘How do I feel about that?’ . . It is in reasoning together in toleration and in appreciation of common values and common moral codes that one can seek the common good by looking beyond personal self-interest and past historical prejudices.”

Note that the book is actually a compilation of papers written and lectures given from the 1970s to early part of the twenty-first century. Tielman shows an amazing foresight on a number of issues:

“I do not see the future as being dominated so much by clashes of great ideologies such as capitalism vs. communism, as by more subtle but extremely potent influences on the culture that determines civilization’s direction. The new subtle concept is victimization and victimhood. It argues that society owes more than basic rights and that government should grow in order to fill those rights.”

“The right question is not whether you want big government or small government. The right question is what should be the role of government as the expression of the combined will of the people in regard not just to the protection of individual rights and dignity, but to the granting of economic benefits on the concept of victimization vs. individual responsibility.

“Character is the acceptance of individual responsibility. . . You cannot build character and courage by taking away initiative and independence, and you cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they can and should do for themselves.”

He then quotes Theodore Roosevelt: “The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, and love of soft living and the get-rich-quick theory of life.” Wow. And that was state over 100 years ago.

He later comments on the Internet. “One of the Internet’s great benefits is that it will make information readily available to an enormous quantity of people on an individual basis. But, it is a double-edged sword since one benefit and detriment of the Internet is that it will provide information easily available to an enormous quantity of people on an immediate basis. With quick availability to information, people will feel less of a need to read books and to think about the concepts that help them remember those individual parcels of date and weave them together. Without the knowledge that is gained from in-depth thought, it is difficult to gain the wisdom of how to use the ever-increasing amounts of data.”

“it will likely occur in an information age that will have two parts — an age of knowledge that expands rapidly with the dissemination of information. And than an age of wisdom necessary to process the excess of information where trust and experience are very valued and character re-emerges. . . Wisdom requires a perspective, a very basic position from which to make judgments. It is at this point that leadership becomes particularly critical in providing guidance and direction. Leadership defines culture and thereby defines civilization, and whether those leaders are directed by conscience or merely by their own convenience will determine the direction that civilization will take. . . The contrast of the Renaissance and the Dark Ages shows that leadership can move culture both ways.”

There is much more thought-provoking (to me) content — and incredible foresight on issues regarding China, the movement of politics in the U.S., and the increasing role of non-profit organizations in our culture. I would highly recommend this book to others who are trying to make sense of the macro-economic, cultural and political confusion which seems to exist.

[A final side-note: This book has been translated into Chinese and reportedly is one of the few Western books used as a text in Chinese universities.]

I’ve made some observations as well as pulled some information from other sources, about what needs to happen for a team of “All Stars” to be successful as a team.

Characteristics of Successful Individuals

First, let’s look at some of the characteristics of highly successful individuals. Successful people:

*Know how to accomplish tasks. They get things done. And typically, they have found ways of doing things that work for them. (With a team, they may have a hard time approaching a task differently from their personal strategy.)

*Are confident in their abilities. Since they have had success, they have developed confidence in their abilities and their approach. They believe their way works (and sometimes believe that their way will work for everyone.)

*Are proactive. They take initiative, develop action plans, and act on the plans made. (In a team context, they sometimes can act before coordinating with other team members.)

*Persevere. Persevering, “stick-to-it-tiveness” is generally a positive personality characteristic. (But perseverance can translate into stubbornness, if the individual is unwilling to accept and adapt to reality-based feedback – that this strategy just isn’t working in this context.)

*Have high energy. Most successful individuals have a lot of energy – mental, emotional and physical. They often run at a fast pace. (But in the context of working with others, they can have difficulty waiting, and sometimes can “act” before they should.”

Characteristics of Successful Teams with Highly Talented Individuals

Although working with a team of very talented, capable and successful professionals can be challenging, there are ways that these “All Star” teams can become incredibly impactful. There are many areas of life from which examples can be taken: music groups, sports teams, legal and political teams, strategic business partnerships. (And unfortunately, there are probably more examples of “Super Teams” that failed.) What seems to be necessary?

*Team members voluntarily submit to a selected leader. There has to be a clear, designated leader. And the team members must consistently follow their leadership, even when they disagree with the leader (and they will).

*Individuals “hold back” in fully using all of their talents and focus their efforts on what is needed for team success. In a team setting, individual stars don’t “shine” and do everything they do as individual stars. They have to pull back and figure out how to mesh with the other team members.

*Team members value and appreciate the role and contributions of other team members. Not only do team members constrain their performance, they also truly value the strengths of others and the strengths their teammates bring to the team effort. There is usually a genuine mutual respect among the teammates.

*The approach or strategies used by the team to reach success may be different than previous successful strategies used by the individual team members. Certain strategies work well for individual tasks, but frequently different approaches are needed for cooperative ventures. Deference to the team leader and accepting their approach for the team is critical in this area for the team to be successful.

*There is a disciplined, strategic approach to reach the team goal that the team members are willing to submit to. This may seem redundant, but the issue is that many times “All Star” teams are put together for a specific project or limited time. Otherwise, most successful professionals would not be willing to participate in a cooperative project – because it would interfere with their personal career and requires them to perform in ways they are not typically used to.

Lessons from The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

(by Patrick Lencioni).

Finally, let’s look at lessons shared by Patrick Lencioni in his best-selling book. These principals dovetail nicely with the observations described above.

Issues That Lead to Problems on a Team

*Absence of Trust (resulting from a lack of vulnerability among team members)

*Fear of Conflict (which can lead to artificial harmony). Team members need to be able to engage in passionate debate about ideas.

*Lack of Commitment (by keeping goals and plans ambiguous). Lack of true “buy in” by all team members leads to poor execution and implementation.

*Avoidance of Accountability (which keeps performance at low standards of acceptability). Team members must be willing to confront off-task or counterproductive actions and behaviors of other team members.

*Inattention to Results (stemming from a focus on individual needs such as status, ego and recognition). It is critical for team members to agree on the categories of results to be tracked to assess success for the team as a whole.

Five Aspects of Functional Teams

1. They trust one another. (The confidence that their team members’ intentions are good.)

2. They engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas.

3. They commit to decisions and plans of actions.

4. They hold one another accountable for delivering against those plans.

5. They focus on the achievement of collective results.

So take a look at yourself and the teams on which you are functioning. See which of these issues are strengths and areas which need to be strengthened. It is pretty fun to be on a successful team, especially when the other team members are really talented!