Is karma real and should you be worried about it?

I detest loose ends.  I’m not talking about stray threads on hems or flyaway strands in my hairdo.  I refer to tasks that are not complete and have been languishing on my to-do list for days, weeks or even months.  I am tortured by un-purchased birthday presents, unpaid bills and unrealized dreams.

I walk around with an ever-present to-do list – in my notebook and in my head – constantly shedding and adding tasks but never decreasing in length.  Some items get carried over from month to month (stain threshold at back door) and others spend only hours on the list (find son’s hockey helmet).   Still others never seem to see the light of day (learn Mandarin) and exist only in my mind hoping to be transferred onto “the list” once some space frees up.

I can connect my general anxiety level to the amount of loose ends I have following me around and keeping me up at night.  When I strike my pen through a completed item, I experience a physical jolt of satisfaction.  The fewer things on my list, the happier I am and I hold to the belief that if I ever reach a zero balance on my to-do list I will experience a level of nirvana that I can only dream of.  When I explain this to people who do not worry about to-do lists, they think I'm crazy but the world needs all of us.

My obsession with loose ends makes it easy for me to believe in karma. Karma is one of those concepts that everyone kind of understands, like global warming or calculus, but can’t quite explain.  Spiritualists would say it’s an ancient universal balancing system while scientists claim it’s nothing more than basic cause and effect.  It is evident in many religious teachings, modern-day proverbs and motivational teachings: you reap what you sow, you get out of life what you put into it, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and so on.

Cause and effect is easy to quantify – neglect your diet and you gain weight – but the more spiritual side is harder to pin down.  Can it really be true that if you go through the world spreading misery, a universal force will see to it that you get what’s coming to you?  And on the flip side, if you treat everyone with kindness and respect, are you guaranteed a life free of pain?  We know it’s not that simple.  We all know horrible people who seem to carry on, get promotions and accumulate riches while others who behave like angels get more than their fair share of bad luck.

When I have knowingly done something unkind to someone, I feel crappy almost immediately and look for ways to “balance my karma” by doing something good.  The bad karma I’ve created for myself gnaws at me until I even it out.  Sometimes, I don’t have to try very hard and the universe takes care of it for me in the form of a parking ticket, plant that dies or skirt that’s suddenly too tight.   

So, to bring this back to my loose end theory, unbalanced karmic experiences are loose ends, rights that need to be wronged and wrongs that need to be righted so that I’m back on an even keel, with a blank slate and a promise to “only do good from now on”.

I realize that I’m oversimplifying a complicated concept, or maybe overcomplicating a simple concept, but I think I’m a believer in karma. I realize that it’s impossible to go through life without suffering, but my day-to-day life seems to be better when my outlook is positive and empathetic.

What are your thoughts about karma?  Universal law or new age mumbo jumbo?

Why small business owners should just say no to gurus

When you own a small business, people (clients, employees, accountants, relatives and neighbours) are quick to tell you what you can do better. Some of these ideas have merit but most of them don’t. This doesn’t mean that the people sharing them are not bright or capable; it simply means that they don’t have enough context or perspective on your situation to present viable solutions for your business. They are familiar with the part of the business that they touch, but they don’t know your monthly overhead, the reason you’re keeping that problematic employee, why you walked away from a lucrative client, or the major development you’re working on behind closed doors but can’t yet disclose.

Many of the advice-givers are not small business owners themselves, never have been and likely never will be. They don’t know what it’s like to walk away from relative job security to start something fresh. It’s inconceivable to them that for the first few years, you will not take home the same salary you made as an employee because all of your profits will be reinvested in the company. They can’t imagine the agony of staying awake all night the first time you have to fire an employee or how many hoops you had to jump through to keep paycheques flowing in a recession.

While their advice is unsolicited and maybe annoying, all of these would-be sages can be shrugged off. Their intentions are good and, even if they’re not, they’re harmless.

Less harmless are professional “business gurus”, highly paid experts who rake in a lot of money telling others how to succeed. Their bestselling books promise to take your business to new heights, teach you how to swim with piranhas and show you how to get rich working only a few hours a week. They also take their winning formulas on tour, keynoting conferences and adding their voice to business columns. For the most part, they are well-educated, intelligent, articulate and authoritative and have achieved success in their field. I’m just not sure that qualifies them to give advice to small business owners.

Take Jack Welch for example. He joined GE, already a huge corporation, when he was 25 and worked his way up the ranks till he retired at 65. He was Chairman and CEO for 20 years, during which time, the company’s value rose 4,000 per cent. His personal net worth is estimated at $720 million. He has written countless bestsellers on his management style and is an inspiration to many.

Obviously, he is accomplished.  I’m not disputing his abilities but I do wonder what a small business owner can learn from a person who spent his entire career at one company.  Is a corporate hero qualified to give advice to someone running a small ad agency in Toronto or a metal fabrication shop in Dallas?

Guru is a Sanskrit word meaning teacher or imparter of knowledge. In ancient times, a guru was someone who ‘dispelled the darkness of ignorance’. But what if you’re not ignorant? What if you know what’s best for you and your business? What if you can trust your instincts?

A familiar suggestion from the business gurus is to “get out of your comfort zone”. The underlying premise is that your complacency and resistance to change is holding back your business. This is sound advice for corporate dinosaurs clinging to their glory days but I think it’s flawed advice for small businesses. What’s wrong with your comfort zone? It gave you the courage to strike out on your own, guided you into the right business niche and helped you assemble a team that works well together. The one time I followed this advice and ignored my instincts, the results were disastrous.

I’m not saying that no one has useful advice or that you can’t benefit from discussing business problems with a mentor. I just think you'll learn more from a retired restaurant owner than from someone who rode a corporate wave to fame.

In closing I’ll leave you with this wonderful quote about social media gurus from Olivier Blanchard, chief economist at the International Monetary Fund and one of the most cited economists in the world: “A social media guru is a term used to assign imaginary expertise in a nascent communications field to an individual with little to no real world business experience”.

Life is better when you know what to expect

Twenty years ago, I landed an amazing job at Canada’s largest public school board.  Reporting to a fabulous communications director, my role was to help our 200 schools better communicate with parents and the school community.   Two weeks in, my boss asked me to meet with one of our elementary school principals to chat about public relations tactics.  It was my first opportunity to actually counsel someone.  I was nervous but I prepared copious notes and took comfort in the knowledge that an informal discussion would be a trial run for more structured presentations in the future. 

When I arrived at the school and told the secretary I was from the communications department, she immediately picked up the microphone for the school’s PA system and announced “Will all staff please report to the lounge for the public relations presentation”.  

My heart started to race when I heard the word ‘presentation’.  I didn’t have a presentation.  I didn't even have handouts.  I wasn’t prepared to impress anyone.  It was supposed to be just a chat, a CHAT! Panicked, I weighed the options available to me.  I could race back to the parking lot, get in my car and flee.  Sure, I’d probably get fired, but I wouldn’t have to suffer the indignity of being unprepared for a presentation.  I could pretend that I’d fallen ill and the meeting would have to be postponed to a later date.  This wasn’t totally inconceivable given that I already felt sick to my stomach.  In the end, I stayed, plastered a smile on my face, thanked everyone for giving up their lunch to listen to me and spoke with minimal authority from the notes I had written for what was supposed to be an informal chat between two people.  It wasn’t my finest hour but I learned a valuable lesson that served me well for the rest of my career – always confirm what is expected of you in any business meeting.

Being clear about your expectations is a vital part of business etiquette.  The purpose of etiquette is to enhance the comfort of the people around you and what’s more uncomfortable than arriving at a meeting, only to find that you’re in a pink sundress and everyone else is wearing a navy blue suit.  If you’re hosting a meeting, whether it’s a conference, social gathering, new business presentation or staff BBQ, it’s your role to tell people what they can expect and what is expected of them.  Here are some tips to help you:

Be crystal-clear about dress code – Let people know how you’ll be dressed or what is expected and refrain from using ambiguous terms like smart-casual or relaxed black-tie.  Rather than fall back on confusing terminology, I usually try to spell it out in a way that leaves no room for interpretation (e.g. Our office has casual Fridays so we’ll be wearing golf shirts and khakis to the meeting and you can feel free to do the same).

Set them up for success – If someone will have a speaking role at the meeting, explain the parameters.  Let them know that you’re looking forward to hearing their presentation, that you’ve allotted 20 minutes and that you will have an LCD display ready for them.  Let them know who else will be in the meeting, who else is presenting and who, if anyone will introduce them. 

Have an agenda – If possible, distribute the agenda by e-mail before the actual meeting but at the very least, distribute it at the start.  That way, if someone has come unprepared, they’ll at least have a few minutes to collect themselves, and their thoughts.

Establish meeting rules – If the meeting starts at 4 p.m. and you have a hard stop at 5 p.m., let everyone know they should stick to their allotted time to ensure everyone has a chance to speak.  If you are chairing the meeting (and every meeting needs a chair), keep everyone on track.

Manage technology – Most people are not so important that they can’t go one hour without responding to e-mails but I regularly see people tapping away while others are talking.  If you’re the meeting host, let people know ahead of time what your expectations are regarding smart phones and IPads.  If the meeting is two hours or longer, tell them you’ll have a 5-minute break during which, they can check e-mails but you’re looking forward to receiving their full attention when the meeting is in session. (Note: as a former agency person, I realize you can’t say this to clients who check their emails while you’re pitching your little heart out).   

Share follow-up plans – If there are follow-up items, share the process with meeting attendees.  Let them know when they can expect to hear back from you and, if a decision is to be made (as in the case of an RFP), tell them how much time you will need to make it.

You're never too senior to carry boxes in PR

 Your first job promotion is a mixed blessing.  When you hear the news that you're moving up the ladder, you feel great.  You've proven yourself worthy of more responsibility, you have a more important-sounding title and hopefully, a pay increase. But the initial elation wears off when you realize that colleagues who were friends last week now report to you, HR has been added to your job description and you don't actually get to ditch all the things you disliked about your former role.  In fact, a promotion often means you will do your former job, as well as a new one.

In 20 years experiencing my own, often stumbling, movements through the management ranks and witnessing the behaviour of my own team members once they've been promoted, I've noticed one constant - delegation is not what it's cracked up to be.  In fact, it's much less fun than anyone ever imagines.

While a junior role requires you to draft a news release and submit it for review, your shiny new senior role has a lot more steps.  You have to receive the assignment from your manager, choose a team member to handle it, meet with them to discuss it, set expectations and deadlines, follow up if the deadline is looming and you haven't seen anything, review the draft, meet with the staff member to share your feedback and provide suggestions for improvement, set another deadline for the revised draft, and then go through the process all over again.  And when you do finally have a workable document, you must resist the urge to rewrite the whole thing and accept that just because it's not "the way you would do it" doesn't mean it isn't good quality.  

In a management role, even if you only have one direct report, this scenario repeats itself all day everyday and due to the frantic, often last-minute nature of public relations, many assignments don't have the luxury of time for training and mentorship so you do them yourself anyway and at events, you'll often find yourself carrying boxes, fetching water for speakers, tracking down A/V people and other tasks you thought you had left behind when you were promoted. No such luck.

When I finally became a vice president at a PR agency, I thought, "This is it.  I've arrived.  No more schlepping boxes for me."  Only, it didn't work out that way.  While there was certainly a delineation between my role, the most junior person in the office, and everyone in between, I still found myself carrying boxes of press kits, straightening signage, picking up lunch for demanding celebrity spokespersons and, on one occasion, doing a midnight Wal-Mart run because, after setting up for an early morning event, a client was unsatisfied with the particular shade of purple on the tablecloths. I could have delegated the task but I was the only person who owned a car, I lived closest to the store and my staff, who had been on their feet for 18 hours, were exhausted.  It was not the time for a power play.

When I kvetched about this to a mentor of mine who is president of a large global agency based in Atlanta, he said, "You have to realize that, in PR, no matter how high up the chain you are, you will never stop carrying boxes."  While I was immediately gratified to find out I wasn't alone, I was distressed to realize that if even he was admitting this, then it must be true.

He went on to explain that while everyone in an agency has a different role and each step involves the shedding of old duties and the responsibility for new ones, everyone on a team is responsible for the final product whether it's a perfectly executed communications plan, a spectacular launch event or successfully shepherding the organization through a crisis.  He also reminded me that event management is a big part of PR agency life and no matter how far ahead you plan and how many times you confirm the details, things will go wrong.  Speakers cancel, planes are delayed, product is stopped at the border, A/V systems malfunction, taxi drivers get lost, flowers wilt, employees get ill, there aren't enough coat hangers, client approval is late, and so on.  But the show must go on and at that point, it's all hands on deck to make it happen. While someone has to take charge and direct traffic, there's no reason that person can't also carry boxes, if that's what's required to make it happen.  

In his book, The 48 Laws of Power, which I recommend as a fascinating insight into how people operate, author Robert Greene suggests that to attain true power, you must "Keep Your Hands Clean" and avoid doing the dirty work.  He would suggest that, at a big business event, the true leader arrives at the last minute looking fresh and professional wearing a clean suit and carrying nothing.  This will set him or her apart from the "workers" who have only a few minutes to wipe the dust off their clothes, throw on their event shoes, slick on some lip gloss and squirt Visine into tired eyes before the lights go up.  

I'm sure Greene would disagree with my mentor's assertion that you'll always carry boxes in PR, at least in the sense of establishing your credibility as a powerful leader.  Others leadership gurus would say you need to roll up your sleeves to gain the support of your team. 

What do you think about carrying boxes?  Good or bad leadership strategy?

Why We Need An Undo-Send Button

I'm old enough to remember when there was no e-mail and I have no doubt that it has revolutionized the way we do business and coupled with smart phones, it enables us to work from any place at any time. This is good if you'd rather handle correspondence from your Muskoka dock, but bad if you're expected to respond to e-mails during your daughter's dance recital.

But e-mail's greatest benefit - quick and easy communication - is also its biggest downfall because it doesn't account for the limitations of the human brain. While some of us can manage multiple tasks at once, research has shown that none of us do it well, and with the same kind of attention to detail we would apply to single tasks. And with many people juggling multiple email accounts, Twitter handles, Facebook pages and Blackberry messenger contacts, it's inevitable that eventually, a mistake will be made and the wrong message will be sent to the wrong person. If you have done this, you know that it creates an extremely uncomfortable situation, for both the sender and the recipient.

I had my own e-mail mishap several years ago. A situation had been annoying me for a while and rather than dealing with it in a mature and forthright way, I chose to kvetch to someone else by e-mail, only I accidentally sent it to the subject of my aggravation. While the message was more factual than gossippy it was still derogatory and was the kind of content that belonged in a private conversation, not an electronic missive. I realized my gaffe about a nanosecond after I hit Send and the ensuing physical reaction was quite remarkable. Within two minutes, my heart was pounding, my palms were sweaty, a hive-like crimson flush was breaking out across my face and an unprintable string of profanity was coming out of my mouth. I believe it was the modern-day equivalent of the fight or flight response our neanderthal ancestors experienced when confronted by a hungry sabre-tooth tiger. Our bodies send out a shot of adrenaline to help us deal with a perceived danger but while the caveman used the adrenaline to hurl a spear at the tiger or high-tail it out of there, my adrenaline just collected and pooled in the pit of my stomach until I felt quite sick.

In my panic, I immediately sent a quickly-crafted apology email which acknowledged my guilt but didn't do anything to repair the damage or address the underlying issues. At the time, I had just finished reading The FourAgreements by Don Miguel Ruiz. If you haven't read this book, I recommend it. It's a quick, light read and helps you put life's ups and downs in perspective. In short, the four agreements are 1. Be impeccable with your word, 2. Don't take anything personally, 3. Don't make assumptions and 4. Always do your best.

Since the text was fresh in my mind, I decided to apply it to the matter at hand. Obviously I had failed miserably at Agreement #1 as I had used my words carelessly but I was determined to rectify the situation in a more appropriate way. Ruiz spends almost an entire chapter on apologies and the fact that humans are the only species who relive a mistake over and over. His advice, (which is infinitely easier said than done) is to apologize quickly and sincerely and then let it go. The rest is up to the other person. So, tail between my legs, I went to see the recipient of my misfired e-mail and apologized, in person. While she accepted my apology with grace, it took a while for us to rebuild our relationship and it actually took a similar mistake on her part for it to return to normal, our mutual errors having cancelled each other out to the point that neither existed anymore and the air was finally cleared.

There are many lessons here - address issues before they get out of hand, don't use e-mail to deliver sensitive information, always double-check the To and CC boxes before you send but in my experience, most people only make a mistake like this once. The experience is too traumatic to be repeated.

Do you need to go on an information diet?

Do you use your smart phone as an alarm clock and then immediately start checking e-mails?

If so, you might want to think about embarking on an information diet. Clay Johnson, the man behind Barack Obama’s social media strategy, shared highlights from his book, The Information Diet, at this year’s MESH conference

According to Johnson, when we search on the Internet, we are often looking for validation of our existing opinions rather than information that will help us become informed. We already have our biases and so if we want the details of a specific news story, we tend to search the websites of the media outlets which most conform to our own point of view, whether that’s TMZ, Fox News or the Toronto Star. If we are annoyed with our spouse, worried about our kids or concerned about our appearance, we search for others who are experiencing the same things and who react the same way, rather than seeking out different opinions.

Johnson believes many North Americans are over-consuming useless information because it’s readily available. To prove his point, he asked the audience to name Kim Kardashian’s ex-husband. Many people yelled out the answer. He then asked if anyone knew the child poverty rate in Toronto and the room went silent.

In his book, The Information Diet, Johnson recommends we take the following steps to trim our information waistline:

1. Become a conscious consumer of information – Every time you visit a website, ask yourself if it’s vital to what you are trying to achieve in life. Rather than mindlessly consuming information all day, schedule time for different types of Internet use.

2. Seek whole news – Johnson says the life cycle of an event starts as actual truth, becomes reworded truth, turns into processed truth, is reported in the media and ends up on TV, where it’s furthest from the truth. While it’s not always possible to find out the truth, get information from multiple news sources and points of view.

3. Be a producer more than a consumer – If you check emails and news sites before breakfast, you’re starting your day as a consumer of other people’s thoughts and opinions. Try to start your day as a producer of your own content, through your blog, Twitter stream or website. Johnson recommends writing 500 words before 8 a.m.

4. Subtract junk from your daily intake – Remember that your clicks have consequences and, because the Internet stores information about you, your reading patterns affect everyone in your demographic. Remember that the next time you stop by Perez Hilton.

5. Content is not a commodity – Until we are comfortable with the concept of paying for filtered, fact-checked, responsible content, we will continue to be spoon-fed a steady diet of misinformation.

6,000 people have already taken the pledge to go on an information diet. To learn more, visitwww.informationdiet.com

---

5 Lessons I've Learned About Freelancing So Far

Snazzy new logo? Check.  Website? Check.  Solid business plan? Well, sort of.

Just over six months ago, I started a freelance communications business.  With two decades of industry experience under my belt, including 7 years owning an agency, I was ready to truly work on my own.  When I shared my plans to go solo with acquaintances, the response ran the gamut from, “You’ll be surprised how hard it is to make a go of it” to “They’ll be lining up to pay for your services as soon as you hang out a shingle”.  The advice was well-intentioned but not particularly helpful as the people who provided it were speaking from their personal experiences which were informed by the economic environment in which their own freelance endeavours had flourished or floundered.   

I didn’t prepare a formal business plan when I started and it would have been a waste of time if I had because the ups and downs of these two quarters have helped me clarify the kind of work I truly enjoy, the emerging trends I need to focus on and the amount of hours I want to spend building my business and more importantly, my personal brand.  I also know that meaningful freelance work will always be a part of my life, even if I choose to become an employee or take a contract somewhere.

As I completed my own mid-year review, I challenged myself to write the five most valuable lessons I’ve learned so far.  Here they are:

1. Flex time isn’t free time – As a freelancer, you need to be hyper-vigilant about carving out, organizing and protecting your work time.  Sure, you can do your grocery shopping on a Wednesday morning but in order to meet client deadlines, you’ll probably spend a sunny Saturday afternoon holed up in front of your computer.  The ability to work when and where you want is a selling feature of the freelance life but if you’re easily distracted, it’s probably not the life for you.

2. Do what you do best – When you freelance, there is no workforce, team or department to share your mistakes, absorb your poor judgement or fix your mediocre work.  It’s just you and while it’s tempting to be a jack of all trades, you need to zero in on your strengths and build your business around them.  Work only with clients who are a good fit with your skills, approach and expertise and only accept assignments you know you can excel at.

3. Build your brand relentlessly - If a potential client Googles you, what will they find? If you’re a freelance communicator, their search should reveal a current website, a showcase of your content in the form of a blog or newsletter, a professional presence on Twitter and Linked In, examples of how you give back to the industry through volunteering or mentorship.  You need to make time to cultivate a professional reputation that goes beyond your paid work.

4. Network strategically – As a sole practitioner, you can spend your life in coffee meetings.  A few will yield paid work eventually.  Others will spark new friendships.  Some will frankly be a waste of time – time that could have been spent meeting deadlines, building your brand or learning something new.  Networking is imperative to your success but decide how many hours you will devote to it and be judicious about how you approach it.

5. Learn to say no – The word “no” is a freelancer's best friend so learn to use it and use it with conviction.  Say “no” to people who want you to work for free, family members who need you to pick up dry-cleaning, work that doesn’t fit your abilities, and endless, drawn-out RFP processes with minimal chance of success.  Learning how to effectively say “no” will enable you to say “yes” to more of the things that will make you happy.

8 Questions to Ask Yourself Before Burning A Bridge

To my knowledge, I have burned four bridges in my career.  It's possible that I have unknowingly and unwittingly burned more and that other people have burned bridges with me (with or without my knowledge).  But, there have only been four times in two decades (one every five years or so) that I have deliberately and willingly decided to end a business relationship in a way that clearly demonstrates there is no possibility of ever working with that person again.

Burning a bridge is a bold career move that is sometimes necessary and often misguided but it always feels great, if only fleetingly.  Many dysfunctional business relationships can come to a natural end without the need to torch anything.  People are fired and laid off everyday without the need for drama and business partners, clients and consultants often realize that they are not a good match and go their separate ways with a handshake and an assurance that they will be civil if they bump into each other on the street.

Burning a bridge usually means you leave a business relationship by telling your boss/colleagues/partner/client exactly what you think of them and their methods in no uncertain terms.  You might even channel your inner Scarlett O'Hara and declare that "as God is your witness, you will never cross paths with them again".  Highly unlikely if you work in the same industry but full of impact nonetheless.  Others burn bridges in more passive ways, simply disappearing, not showing up for work, refusing to answer phone calls, etc.  In this case, their silence speaks volumes.

It's hard to have a successful career without lighting a few flames but you should do so judiciously and ask yourself the following questions before you pour the gasoline:

1. Was this person's behaviour truly abusive, egregious or unethical? 
There's a big difference between someone who is incompetent or a bad fit and someone who is abusive.  We have all had our share of crappy bosses and catty coworkers but unless their behaviour can truly be described as abusive, just move on and chalk it up to a learning experience.

2. Do I plan to continue working in this industry?
If the answer is yes, then think twice.  It's a small world and you'll likely encounter the person again. I once purposely burned a bridge with someone I considered unethical and years later, he showed up as a valued partner in a piece of business I wanted to win.  When I found out he was involved, I backed out, but it was lost revenue nonetheless.

3. Is my reputation strong enough to withstand this? 
Have you spent years helping others,  building your reputation, growing your network and collecting a portfolio of good work?  If so, you can probably survive any mudslinging that arises as a result of this situation but if you're just starting out or your reputation is already on shaky ground, walk away quietly and regroup.

4. Do I need this person for a reference?
No matter how much you may dislike someone, unless you already have three solid references to present at future job interviews, don't burn the bridge.  I've been shocked to see some people dramatically burn a bridge in writing at their very first real job and then actually ask that person for a reference later.

5. Can I burn a bridge in a dignified manner?
Don't just explode in a hail of profanity. That's all that will be remembered. If you're going to have this conversation with someone, do it with as much class as you can muster.  Plan your departure in advance and choose your words carefully.  Leave out personal insults and petty grievances.  They'll only weaken your case.

6. Is it really necessary to put it in writing?
So you've decided to burn a bridge.  Why create an everlasting archive by putting it in an email or letter?  Simply meet with the person in question and explain why you will no longer do business with them.  I know some disgruntled employees have received front-page coverage with spectacular public resignation letters  but that just paints you as an attention-seeking troublemaker, not an ideal future employee.

7. Did I play a role in the breakdown of this relationship?
Is this a case where you did your very best, worked hard, followed through and acted professionally but were still treated poorly?  If so, get out the propane torch.  But think seriously about your role, if any, in how things went awry.  Unless you come out squeaky clean, it might not be worth it to play the blame game.

8. Do you have the stomach to handle the potential outcomes?
You just want to say your piece and move on to greener pastures but the object of your wrath might not cooperate.  They might fight back, take it public or launch a smear campaign against you.  Are you okay with that?  If not, you may not have the stomach to handle burning bridges.  Better to take the high road and focus on more positive things.

She'd be great, if only I could motivate her

If only I could have more autonomy...

When I ran a business, the realization that it was my job to motivate staff hit me like a ton of bricks.  I had just assumed that everyone was motivated by the same things and at first, took a fairly formulaic approach to motivation.  When this didn't work, a mentor suggested that you can't actually motivate another human but you can find out what motivates them and use that to your advantage.  So, how do you find out what motivates someone?  You can ask them outright but you won't always get an entirely truthful answer.  For example, some younger workers claim to be motivated only by meaningful opportunities but my negotiations with them usually revolved around higher salaries and fancier titles.

So, in my lifelong quest to understand how to bring out the best in people (myself included), I was excited to read DRIVE: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, a New York Times bestseller from author Daniel Pink.  According to Pink, the old carrot and stick approach to motivating employees with external rewards like money is a relic of the 20th century that needs to be scrapped.  He asserts that the secret to high performance and satisfaction is the "deeply human need to direct our own lives, to learn and create new things and to do better by ourselves and our world" and to implement this, we need to let people experience autonomy, mastery and purpose at work.  Pink encourages modern workplaces to abandon motivation 2.0 (assume that if you give employees total autonomy they will shirk their duties) and embrace motivation 3.0 (assume that everyone is ready to work hard and do a good job in the right setting).

Pink asserts that people are happiest and most productive when they're in "flow", that magical time when we lose ourselves in our work, becoming deeply engaged in achieving our goals, challenging ourselves and learning new things.  I completely understand this concept and I have experienced it often but if I'm perfectly honest, I'm more inclined to experience "flow" when I'm reading a book on a beach or tending to my garden, in other words, things that are not attached to how I pay the bills.  Pink believes this Zen-like state is also achievable in an office setting and provides many ideas and examples of how to make it happen, including:  

Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) - Focus on results and nothing else, let people work whenever and wherever they want and don't waste time judging how people get the job done.  I love this idea and I can see it working with highly-disciplined individuals in certain environments. However, although Pink touches on autonomy versus accountability, he doesn't really offer any solutions for how to deal with employees who are allowed to work from home at midnight and still don't meet their deadlines.

Remove financial incentives and just pay everyone a healthy flat salary - Sounds good, but what's healthy? Is it the going rate in the industry or a few thousand more?  Is it what you think the employee deserves or what they believe they've earned? Pink argues that commissions, bonuses and even billable hours don't work and just force people to get creative when filling out forms and I can't say I disagree.  But human nature suggests that that there will always be people who think they're working harder or contributing more than their peers and who will expect external rewards, whether it's in the form of more money, extra vacation time or public recognition.

Let employees run free for a few hours - Informed by the reality that even the most creative person can get crushed under the weight of a deadline, Pink shares stories of companies which carve out time each month for employees to work on something completely unrelated to the business and not connected to compensation at all.  In this free time, liberated from client demands or management constraints, employees can really get their minds working and come up with their best work.  According to Pink, this is how Google News was conceived and scientists at one organization even won a Nobel Prize for Physics for something they developed in their non-work time. I can get behind this.  Many marketing types would say that the work they do for fun is much more creative than what they're "allowed" to do for clients. But when every single day is packed with new deadlines and fresh crises, how would a consulting firm find the time?

The book is well researched and Pink backs up his claims with reams of scientific data, study results and real-life examples although most of the workplaces he mentions are large tech companies and the scenarios don't always translate to an advertising agency or a retail outlet. I enjoyed the book, would recommend it, and I agree with Pink that the old models of motivation and reward are not working and are no longer applicable.  I would even say that this approach, or a form of it, is worth a try.

But I'm still skeptical about his belief that inside every seemingly lazy, disaffected worker is a hard-working Einstein just waiting to burst out if only the workplace culture is revolutionized.  It doesn't take into account the many personality traits and innate differences that shape humanity.  In my experience as an employer, wife, friend and mother, I know that some people genuinely want to do a good job at everything they touch and will respond to any kind of motivation.  Others can only excel if they're passionate about the subject matter.  Still others are purely transactional, will work for money, do no more than what's required and don't care what you think of them. Some thrive in a structured environment where they're monitored closely and there's little room for distraction and others can be trusted to work at home and not spend the day watching Tom and Jerry reruns.

What do you think?  Are you ready to embrace motivation 3.0?

How About Some RFP Etiquette?

So, did we win?

The Request for Proposal (RFP) is popular these days.  With shrinking budgets and increased pressure to demonstrate due diligence, more organizations are issuing RFPs to ensure they choose the right external partner, or at least create the perception of doing so.  When consultants choose to participate in an RFP process, they do so knowing that they may not win and even if they do, they will probably never recoup the hours of unpaid time they spent responding to the proposal.  When the search ends, there will be one winner and multiple losers but all candidates should be treated with respect, honesty and professionalism.  If organizations insist on using RFPs, I'd like to see them adopt these etiquette guidelines for issuing, managing and closing the process:

1. Be honest - I recently reviewed an RFP that painted a rosy picture of a company but a quick Google search revealed the organization was in a shambles. Why hide this?  No one can prepare a thorough, appropriate response if they don't have the necessary background and context.

2. Share your process - RFPs are a ton of work so help people decide if it's worth participating. Share your plans for decision-making - the deadline for proposal submission, what should be included, when the shortlist will be announced, what is involved in phase 2, when you will make your final decision and how you will inform participants.  If an incumbent has been invited to participate, be honest about that.  It's important.


3. Don't kick tires - Most of the research, writing and collation of RFPs is done after hours and on top of an existing work load.  Don't issue an RFP unless you have the budget and the intention of hiring an external partner. Nothing is more frustrating than putting hours of unpaid time into a proposal only to find out that you've decided to manage your campaign "in house".

4. Answer questions thoroughly - If candidates have questions for clarification, take the time to provide proper answers.  The best approach is to collect all of the questions and combine both questions and answers in one document.  One-word answers or responses like "whatever you think is best", "anything goes" or "wow us" are unacceptable.

5. Don't ask for ideas - It's unrealistic to expect anyone to provide creative, feasible ideas based on a couple of paragraphs in your RFP.  Phase 1 is about qualifying candidates, and looking for expertise, experience, case studies, references, etc.  If you narrow the pool to a shortlist, meet with them to provide the information they need to develop workable ideas. Better yet, wait until you've actually hired someone.


6. Remove the guessing game - If you have a budget (and you should if you're serious), share it, or at least include a range. If consultants have no idea what they're working with, it's impossible to provide the best case studies and references and brainstorm appropriate ideas.  


7. Avoid the revolving door - It's efficient to book several presentations on one day but try to hold them in a room with two doors or leave time between visits.  It's awkward for everyone when candidates meet each other in the hallway.

8. Practice proper follow-up - No one should ever find out they didn't win an RFP in AdNews.  Acknowledge receipt of all proposals and honour the dates in your initial process. If you are delayed for some reason, let people know when they can expect to hear from you again.  When you choose a winner, inform the unsuccessful parties before making any announcements.

9. Use only what you pay for - I recently participated in an RFP which stated that all submitted ideas, even from consultants who didn't win the business, would automatically become the property of the issuing company.  Why should they?  If you choose a partner and start to pay them, you can use their ideas but it's unethical to use creative ideas from an agency you didn't select.

10. Give feedback - If someone has spent hours of unpaid time responding to your RFP, they deserve more than a cursory dismissal.  Let unsuccessful candidates know where they fell short and provide candid feedback to help them with future proposals. If you have been honest and professional about your RFP process, you should have no problem articulating how you made your final decision and what they could have done better.

Why the World Needs More Introverts

Ponder these questions:
1. Do you prefer one-on-one conversations over group activities?
2. Do you like to express yourself in writing?
3. Do you tend to think before you speak?

If you answered yes to all of these questions, you just might be an introvert.  Maybe you already suspected this.  Maybe you know it but have spent a lifetime trying to pretend you're more extroverted than you actually feel.

Why would you do that?  Maybe it's because North American society dramatically undervalues introverts and as you traversed from elementary school to college to your first job, you might have learned that your introverted tendencies were something you needed to hide, fix or deny.

I've always known I'm an introvert but thanks to Quiet: The Power of Introverts in A World That Can't Stop Talking by Susan Cain, a New York Times bestseller, I now have a better understanding of what that actually means.  Many people assume that introverts are shy, withdrawn and even antisocial while extroverts are loud, friendly and gregarious.  While these things may be true of some people, the truth is more complex.

For example, one of the main differences between introverts and extroverts is simply that extroverts can handle more sensory stimulation.  Loud music, roller-coasters, crowded streets or an animated group discussion don't bother the extrovert and in fact, they energize him.  If an introvert is exposed to these same things, she is thrown off-balance and, after a period of time, she feels over-stimulated, begins to shut down and is desperate to escape to quiet surroundings.

Consider public speaking.  Most introverts are terrified of speaking in public and experience a variety of mental and physical reactions to it.  These include sleepless nights, elevated heart rate, excessive sweating, shaking, vomiting and even fainting on the way to the podium.  But, because so many careers require public speaking, many have trained themselves to do it by only accepting engagements on topics where they have expertise, spending weeks planning, and practicing breathing exercises, etc. beforehand.  When it's over, even if it was a huge success, the introvert is completely depleted and needs to immediately retreat to solitude to recover.  While extroverts may also get butterflies before giving a speech, they don't put so much pressure on themselves to succeed, spend less time planning, wing it more.  If the speech is a success and the audience is pleased, the extrovert feeds off that and sticks around for the backslapping.

One of Cain's most interesting claims is the notion that extroverts react while introverts inspect. If an introvert and an extrovert both go to the same sales pitch, the extrovert is more likely to react instantly to what is being shared, to be wowed by high-pressure tactics and to be excited about the possibilities.  Inherently suspicious, the introvert will probably experience none of these things.  He'll need to go back to the office, think about what he heard, digest it, maybe do his own research and then come back with a host of questions.

When the extroverted tendency to jump in and see what happens is combined with the introverted need to inquire and make informed decisions, great things can happen.  Business partnerships, boards and senior management teams which value and include an equal distribution of both dispositions, have the perfect combination of fearlessness and risk aversion.

But this rarely happens.  Because our society values speaking up, sharing your opinion and excelling at teamwork, introverts rarely make it to the top and when they do, their cautious approach to change is often viewed as a hindrance.  Introverts dislike teamwork even though, fastidious about details, they often do the bulk of the work and demand little of the glory.  They are also less interested in wealth, fame and status than extroverts, which knocks many of them off the corporate ladder early on.

Cain believes that we live in a culture which admires risk-takers but a time which needs more heed-takers.  Some people have gone so far as to blame the 2008 economic meltdown on a lack of introverts in high finance, positing that, if only there had been more cautious, quiet, inquisitive people at the top, it never would have happened.  I'm not sure if that's true.  Perhaps they were there and no one listened.  Perhaps they don't have the chutzpah to make it in such a high-octane business and so there's a dearth of them at the top.

Reading the book has been therapeutic for me in the sense that I feel more comfortable with my introversion and realize that there's nothing wrong with my preference for working in solitude and my desire to always leave parties early, if I go at all. As the parent of a classic introvert, I'm also determined to let him be who he is and resist the temptation to "bring him out of his shell".

If you think you might be an introvert, you can take Susan Cain's quiz here   You might just be surprised.

Why our elected officials should apologize more

A couple of years ago, I wrote a blog post on the importance of saying "sorry" when you're in the wrong.  The need to apologize exists whether you are totally responsible for a debacle, or if you own only a small part of it.  Some jurisdictions have even instituted apology legislation, which means saying sorry cannot be used as a confession in legal situations.  This accommodates the human need to see an appropriate level of atonement and accountability in order to start the healing process, rebuild trust and move forward after a disaster.


I realize that finding politicians who don't take responsibility for their actions is like shooting fish in a barrel but there's a situation unfolding in Ontario right now which has truly taken blame-slinging to a disgusting new low.  In short, the Toronto Star recently revealed outrageous spending irregularities at ORNGE, the province's publicly-funded air ambulance service and the ensuing investigation has unearthed a laundry list of questionable practices including the use of taxpayer dollars to renovate a high-end office building, establish a complex web of shell companies to shield itself from government scrutiny, send executives to foreign schools for expensive MBAs, loan the CEO $1.2 million for a house purchase and much more.  After a forensic audit, $25 million of taxpayer funds is still unaccounted for so the Ontario Provincial Police has been called in to investigate.


It's painfully clear that the Ministry of Health, which oversees ORNGE, was asleep at the switch and even when warned about potential problems, chose to ignore the evidence.  Now that the truth is out and the police are involved, many are calling for the Minister of Health, Deb Matthews, to resign.  She has refused which is typical, but more astoundingly, has yet to take even a shred of accountability for letting this happen on her watch.  Consider her statements:


"There's lots of blame to go around"
"People who chose to take money out of the pockets of taxpayers"
"You can't legislate trust"
"We were misled"
"I am sickened when I see people who were in a position of trust, abuse that trust"


If she was using these statements to talk about her role, however detached, in the debacle, the words would be appropriate but sadly, she is not.  She has used them, and countless others, to deflect blame away from herself and her team. In a rare turn for a politician, she has also claimed that she inherited the mess from her predecessor, a fellow Liberal who actually set up the controversial air ambulance service.  When confronted with this, his refusal to take accountability was even more profound.  Among his quotations:


"I feel like I have been scapegoated"
"It's just too convenient to lay the blame at the feet of politicians"
"the system is always set up to throw politicians under the bus"


While it's true that the Ministry of Health is huge, has thousands of employees and myriad sub-committees and spin-offs, the reality is, the buck stops with the person in charge. I ran a business for ten years and even though it was much smaller than our Ministry of Health with its thousands of employees and myriad spin-offs, I was not always able to oversee every decision.  As a result, sometimes mistakes were made and clients were disappointed.  But, as an owner of the company, I understood that ultimately I was in charge and it was my role to apologize, even if the entire transgression had gone on without my knowledge.  While you can choose to privately reprimand employees who breach organizational ethics or just plain screw up, it's unacceptable to publicly blame someone else when a program you are responsible for, goes awry.


No one expects perfection from elected officials but everyone expects at least a show of contrition.  That provides a starting point for moving forward and rebuilding trust.


If Deb Matthews hopes to emerge from this relatively unscathed (and it may be too late), she needs to make a simple statement along the lines of, "While I cannot oversee every single thing that happens in my portfolio, I'm sorry for the role I played in this and I hope you'll have faith in me as we work to clean up this mess."  Is that so impossible to consider?


I have never been involved in politics, I'm not affiliated with any of our political parties and this blog post is not an attack on the Liberal party.  So, I'm not aware of the popular theory on how these scandals should be handled but I'm wondering if there's a "never apologize under any conditions" ethos that exists among political advisers and if so, it needs to go.

Should parents make their adult children send thank you cards?

I'm still waiting...


If you read this blog or follow my tweets, you'll know I'm a big believer in thank you cards, the old-fashioned handwritten ones, not the e-mail versions that are so popular nowadays.  But, as I'm not a complete Luddite, I realize that many people don't write cards any more and I'll take an electronic thank you over nothing at all, which is also sadly becoming commonplace.

A while ago I wrote a blog post about five occasions that require a thank-you card so I won't list them here but suffice to say, a proper thank you is required anytime someone gives you a gift.  As a mother of young children, I consider it my responsibility to ensure that my sons write cards of gratitude for most gifts they receive.  If five friends come to their birthday party and leave with loot bags, the thank-yous are said when the gift is received and I don't feel a more formal follow-up is required.  However, if grandma or another friend or relative takes the time to give them something special, and especially if the gift is sent through the mail, thank-you cards are mandatory.

When There's Bad News, A Little Accountability Goes A Long Way

Don't be afraid to face the music...

There's a situation happening in my kids' school.  We live in a high-growth area and we've been informed that plans are afoot to build a new school and move some of the children there in 2014.  Depending on how invested parents are in a particular school, news like this prompts various degrees of panic and within a few weeks, the rumours were flying.  To allay their fears, some school board officials offered to meet with parents and answer questions.  An email distribution list was created, parents shared their questions and concerns and, since we were no longer officially in a communications vacuum, the rumours died down.  To make things easier for the school officials, we even sent them our questions ahead of time.

Alas, the meeting was cancelled for no reason (at least none that was shared) and postponed for at least eight months.  Follow-up emails were not answered. 

Without the benefit of an explanation for their sudden change of heart, speculation ran rampant and most people concluded that the school board officials had "chickened out" once they saw the questions.  This could be true.  Or it could be something else much less damning but we don't know because we weren't told.  While chatting with a fellow parent, I suggested that no one can get upset with you when you are sharing information in a kind way.  It's a bit of a throwaway line but what I mean is, any time you're in a situation where you have to tell people things they don't want to hear, the medium is almost as important as the message.

I have had many opportunities to share disappointing, unwelcome or just plain "bad" news in my life and I know without a doubt, that it is always better to face the music, stand in front of people, and tell them what you know.  Even if you know nothing, even if you can't answer a single question, you need to stand there, listen to your stakeholders, acknowledge their fears, address what you can, promise to follow up on things and apologize where necessary.  And, where there's an issue of importance to a group of people to whom you're accountable, don't cancel a scheduled meeting.  Even if you think your presence will not be beneficial, be honest and let them decide if they still want to meet with you.  They probably will and if they don't, they'll appreciate your honesty. 

When You Can't Fix the Big Things, Fix the Small Things

Always communicate!


Is there anything more frustrating than a slow-moving airport check-in line? I found myself in one of those the other day, the old-fashioned kind where there are no self-serve kiosks and the whole transaction must be completed in person with an airline staffer and a computer.  I had two colleagues to keep me company but we were all tired, famished, and somewhat cranky.

The line's progress was glacial, there were only two airline employees and each time someone reached the front, it took an inordinate amount of time for them to complete the process.  There was much conferring with supervisors and phoning for assistance.

When it was finally our turn, the employee explained that they were having trouble with their computer system and apologized for the delay.  As the most cynical member of my small band of travelers, I thought this excuse smelled faintly of "the dog ate my homework" but my kinder companions accepted his apology with trust and grace.

But it would have been better to have that information while we were in line.  Periodically, one of the staff members needed to come into the line, explain the situation, offer apologies and go back to his post.  Instead, they were so caught up in trying to fix a big problem that they missed an opportunity to fix a small problem.  No one likes to be inconvenienced but why compound it with a lack of communication?  Yes, you might have to put up with a few grumbles and eyerolls, but by communicating, you are showing your clients that you care about them.

If something is wrong, just tell people.  They'll still be upset but at least they can't accuse you of lack of communication.

Is Profanity Really As Bad As All That?

Bleep, bleep...


I ventured to a clearance outlet store yesterday.  I usually try to avoid these places, not out of snobbery, but because I hate the long lineups that seem to be a fixture in any retail outlet that promises to save, save, save you money.  But, I needed something that is out of season and therefore, unavailable in "normal" stores.  I found what I was looking for quickly and joined a line of about 20 people waiting to be served by one cashier.  The wait was unpleasant, the surroundings were unattractive and the temperature was stifling but since I anticipated as much ahead of time, I settled in and read the news on my Blackberry to pass the time.  Aside: what did people do to alleviate boredom before smartphones?

When I was second from the front, a customer arrived out of nowhere laden down with purchases and promptly walked up to the cashier.  The man in front of me, with a heavily pregnant wife in tow, told her loudly that there was a line and she belonged at the back of it.  She looked around and murmured sweetly that she didn't notice there was a line.  Personally, I think she was faking it and taking her chances but no matter, she shuffled to the back, professing her innocence all the way.

When it was his turn to go to the cash, the loud man seemed agitated and jumpy.  From what I could see, he was trying to negotiate a transaction that was either outside of the store's policies or that the cashier was unable or unwilling to complete.  In the meantime, a second cashier arrived back from her lunch break so I was served immediately.  As I was paying for my purchase, I could sense that things were getting quite heated over at the other cash station as the man's irritation bubbled over and a few seconds later, he yelled, "Bleep this.  I'm so sick of this bleeping bullshit.  This is the reason I waited in the bleeping line for so bleeping long" and marched out of the store.

For a rare moment, everyone was silent - the employees, the people in the lineup and the other shoppers milling around the store - and just stared slack-jawed at the man, unsure if their ears had deceived them.  Somewhat unwisely, the cashier left her post to chase after him yelling, "Swearing is not tolerated in our store under any circumstances.  You can't treat me like that".  While the people still in line seemed sympathetic, I don't think they appreciated having to wait even longer while she attempted to avenge the injustice.

My own cashier was quite taken aback and I had to wait a few minutes while she composed herself.  With my Scottish background, I'm used to profanity-laden outbursts, fueled sometimes, but not always, by an excessive intake of alcohol. I told her that the guy probably just had a bad day and this might have been the final straw and we can never take these kinds of things personally.  She responded with conviction, "A grown man needs to be able to handle himself without using those words."  Anxious to move along, I nodded my head but the thing is, while I care about etiquette and civility, I actually don't find profanity that offensive. I'm not saying we should all give up on polite conversation and start tossing around swear words in every conversation, it doesn't shock or bother me that people resort to it when they're pushed to the limit.  To me, they are just words and they're incredibly uninspired ones at that.  I've known enough amazing wordsmiths in my life who can cut people down to size in a much harsher way without a single four-letter word.  For a great example of this, catch Maggie Smith's portrayal of the Dowager Countess in Downton Abbey.

When people reach this level of anger, they're usually dealing with a bunch of their own stuff and the circumstances that finally send them off the deep end are just the final straw.  The person on the receiving end usually just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Maybe I'm cutting the guy some slack because I have had my fair share of awful customer service experiences where I too, have felt so belittled and stepped upon that I wondered if swearing like a drunken sailor could be the only thing that gets through to an uncaring store employee.  My husband, who is often on construction sites where handling problems with profanity is the norm, says it's liberating not to have to dance around issues with political correctness and politeness when you can take care of it swiftly with a few choice swear words and move on.

I'm not advocating that workplaces everywhere should adopt an anything goes approach to coarse language.  But, I guess for me, actions speak louder than words.  What's your take?  Are the words important or the fact that someone has been made so angry that they felt they had no choice but to use them?

If you're going to give someone the finger, make sure it's for a good reason

(AP Photo/NBC)

This is the perfect place for me to express my discontent with the world...

This morning I was crossing a busy street shortly after rush hour. Although I had the right of way, my presence on the road was holding up several motorists eager to make a left turn before the light changed. The driver of the first car in the queue was so impatient that she executed the turn as far as she could go without actually running me over and when I finally cleared her car, I swear I felt her bumper brush the bottom of my coat as she sped away. I immediately felt a tingling sensation in my right hand and I recognized it right away. I wanted to give her the finger. My body was telling me to do something that my mind knows is obscene, especially for someone who cares about etiquette. But I understood the impulse. In situations where you don't get a chance to voice your discontent to an anonymous jerk, it is a handy solution. By simply raising our hand and extending the middle finger, we are saying, "I see what you're doing and I can't stop you but I'm here to tell you that I am a human being. I deserve to be treated with some respect and I'm not going to tolerate your actions."  

So, is that what British rapper M.I.A was thinking when she decided to use a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to perform live at the Superbowl to give the audience the finger while proclaiming, "I don't give a shit"?  Probably not.  Like Janet Jackson's notorious 2004 wardrobe malfunction, the incident has been grossly blown out of proportion by U.S. media. Superbowl broadcaster NBC has apologized to viewers for its lateness in obscuring the gesture and in a statement, NFL spokesperson Brian McCarthy said, "The obscene gesture in the performance was completely inappropriate, very disappointing, and we apologize to our fans." I think what gets our southern neighbours so riled up in these situations is not so much the gesture itself but the perceived insult to football, a sacred part of American life whose importance borders on religion for many fans.

Do I think that a musician known for controversial behaviour giving a billion viewers the finger is shocking? Not really. M.I.A. is very outspoken about her causes and has been called both a 'refugee icon' and a 'terrorist sympathizer". I am however, annoyed by the forum she chose to make the statement. If you're really that against the world and corporations and everything they represent, is the Superbowl - a highly-commercialized event broad-casted to a billion global viewers - the best place to express it? I assume she received a big paycheque for her few minutes on stage and would have been well aware of what is and isn't considered appropriate and the restrictions placed on artistic 'creativity'.  At one time, most of us have dumbed down campaigns, presented plans that didn't represent our best work and resorted to what's safe rather than what's exciting.  We do it because the people who are paying us want it that way.  Like it or not, when we accept cheques from clients, we need to respect their brand, abide by their notions of what is and isn't appropriate and try not to embarrass them in public.

So, back to my desire to flip the bird to that driver this morning. I truly believe that our society functions better when we're all behaving ourselves but there are so many cases in life when anonymous people disrespect our boundaries, take what isn't ours, treat us like crap and then move on before we have a chance to protest.  So, I'm not going to say on an etiquette blog that it's ever appropriate but I understand the impulse and won't judge you if you fall victim to your baser instincts. Just make sure there are no cameras around.  You don't want your anonymous gesture to come back to haunt you.

Whatever happened to good old-fashioned shame?

I'm so embarrassed...

About fifteen years ago I had a job that was very important in terms of my career development.  I wasn't 100 per cent qualified according to the job description but my boss saw some hidden potential in me and took a chance on my future success.  He turned out to be a great leader and I have a tremendous amount of respect for this person and for his commitment to the role, which he still holds today.  I desperately wanted to impress him and to prove that hiring me was the right decision. But I wasn't perfect, and like everyone else, I screwed up from time to time.  When this happened, and especially if it was due to negligence, laziness or carelessness on my part, I was mortified, apologized for my role in the mix-up and asked what I could do to fix things.  Later, in the privacy of my own home, I would watch TV in bed, eat most of a medium pizza, down a bottle of wine and go to sleep feeling miserable. This was how I coped with the shame of letting down not only my boss but also myself. The next day I would clean myself up, dust myself off and start all over again, vowing never again to make the same mistake and keeping a somewhat low profile until I had "proven" myself again.  In this case, shame was a case of short-term pain, long-term gain.  It was a powerful motivator to be more aware, try harder and do better.

This kind of shame is not something I consciously set out to experience.  Thanks to a combination of innate personality and strict upbringing, I'm somewhat hardwired to feel shame when I screw up and even now, when I forget to bring the dessert to a family potluck or my kids tell their dentist that they don't floss regularly, I feel the heat of shame and embarrassment rise from my neck to my forehead.

Imagine my surprise then in my first management role when I learned that some people are not ashamed when they screw up and worse still, most are not even embarrassed.  One of the toughest things for a manager is the realization that what motivated you to succeed is not necessarily the same thing that will motivate one of your employees and in fact, you need to learn what motivates each person in order to properly lead them.  For some it's public recognition, for others its money or a new title and there are some people who will only work hard in exchange for something tangible like the privilege of working from home.  I can accept this but up until then, I had been labouring under the misconception that the concept of shame was universal and could always be relied upon to help people improve.

Not so. But the concept of screwing up is universal and no one is immune to it.  It's human and in the fast-paced environment of a PR agency, it's probably inevitable.  So, the first time I called someone on the carpet for a screw-up caused by their failure to properly proofread, double-check details or use sound judgement, I expected that they would be appropriately shamed, would deal with it in whatever way worked for them (not everyone has to eat an entire pizza after all) and come back the next day with a renewed passion for excellence.  But the person just smiled, shrugged her shoulders and said, "These things happen".  I was so ill-equipped for this response that I reacted with stunned silence followed by yelling, which was not my intention at all.  While some of the people I've worked with have shared my proclivity for actually being embarrassed by their gaffes, it seems that nowadays, most don't, or if they do, they don't show it in any discernible way.

Shame has fallen out of fashion in the past few decades.  A major tool in the disciplinary arsenal of my parents' generation, it has been cast aside for more modern, humane methods like talking it out, boosting self-esteem and putting the blame elsewhere. There was some method to this madness.  A couple of decades of psychoanalysis revealed that carrying around shameful reminders of childhood transgressions was having a serious impact on many adults' ability to live a fulfilling, guilt-free life.   John Bradshaw, author of the New York Times bestselling book, Healing the Shame that Binds You, explains that there are two kinds of shame - healthy shame and toxic shame.  Healthy shame is what helps us get along with other people, prevents us from going through life as a total narcissist and, used properly, can be a force for positive growth. We need a little of this in our lives.

Toxic shame, on the other hand is often guilt-based and makes us feel bad about how we look or feel, where we were born, how we were raised, our religion, or our sexuality. When the baby boomers ushered in the self-esteem movement, they were right to try to rid society of toxic shame.  Whether it's imposed by others or self-imposed, it has no useful function and indeed, paralyzes many sufferers well into adulthood. The problem is, in attempting to rid ourselves of the pain of toxic shame, we threw the baby out with the bathwater and ditched healthy shame at the same time.  The pendulum has swung too far and we're now living in an age of self-revelation where doing anything in public is acceptable.  Rather than take accountability for their actions, criminals blame their childhood, their stress level, the economy, Wall Street.  Fame-hungry reality stars compete in lewd and degrading competitions desperate to extend their 15 minutes of infamy.  Teenagers videotape themselves or others behaving badly and then share it on Facebook for all to see.

I think it's time to embrace a return to healthy shame for the good of society.  Just imagine, in a world where people are shamed for their embarrassing behaviour, there would be no Keeping Up With the Kardashians, no Wall Street banking tycoons still holding jobs, no people having loud inane cell phone conversations in public and no politicians emailing photos of their genitalia to interns.  This is something I can get behind.