Thinking About What Is Not There (Creativity 101)

Think about what you are thinking about, and then think about what you are not thinking about.

When you are looking at something (or otherwise sensing), notice what is not there.

Watch people and notice what they do not do.

Make lists of things to remember that you normally forget.

In other words, deliberately and carefully think about what is not there.

 

An artist draws the spaces between things.

A market manager for a furniture wonders about product areas where customers have made no comment. She watches them using tables and notes that they leave the tables out when not using them. She invents a table that can be easily be folded and stored.

The psychology of thought is such that we are very good at seeing what is there, but not at all good at seeing what is not there. Thinking about what is not there compensates for this by deliberately forcing us to do what we do not naturally do.

 Ab amicis honesta petamus
"One should only ask from a friend what he is capable of." 

*T

Suicide rates vary widely from country to country

The motivating factors of suicide seem to be moving targets. It varies by age, race, gender, mental status, socioeconomical situations, number of friends, closeness to family, biology, and the list could go on and on. Determining what accounts for the variance in suicide rates between countries seems to be just as elusive as determining why they happen at all.

Some of the conclusions drawn from the research based on the discussion question are quite interesting, and some are mind-numbing at best.

Comer (2013) states that his book uses more ink on the subject of suicide based on a sociocultural model than any other particular subject he writes about. The textbook gives broad coverage to the subject, but seems to lack substantial depth.

One of the most interesting factors discovered while researching this topic was how age varies based on the economical development of the country (Girard, 1993). The suicide rates in men, in just about every country examined, increases with age. However, the fascinating issue in this area is the correlation of the age of the women and economic development. In wealthy nations, suicide rates among women peak in middle age. When looking at the poorer nations, suicide rates were higher for the elderly women. The most interesting fact came from the poorest nations. Among these nations you can find that the peak years of suicide shifts to the younger women. I had assumed, prior to reading that there would be a strong negative correlation, but it turned out quite different.

In another interesting finding Lester (1987) hypothesized about a biological correlation relating a cultures tendency toward suicide. He suggested, based on his research, that the higher the number of people having Type O correlated to lower suicide rates.

Finally, there seems to be some very interesting information regarding suicide, but the downside is that there is anything to write about in the first place.

The common thread that seems to run throughout the pages that discuss suicide, and throughout the lives ended by suicide, appears to be connected to hope. It is sad that the only option some people believe they have when hope seems lost is suicide. They need to know the love of God, and understand that God, “Now to Him Who, by (in consequence of) the [action of His] power that is at work within us, is able to [carry out His purpose and] do superabundantly, far over and above all that we [dare] ask or think [infinitely beyond our highest prayers, desires, thoughts, hopes, or dreams]” (Ephesians 3:20, AMP).

The Prophet Isaiah confirms this as well, “You will guard him and keep him in perfect and constant peace whose mind [both its inclination and its character] is stayed on You, because he commits himself to You, leans on You, and hopes confidently in You.

So trust in the Lord (commit yourself to Him, lean on Him, hope confidently in Him) forever; for the Lord God is an everlasting Rock [the Rock of Ages]” (Isaiah 26:3-4, AMP).

Could life ever be so tough for you that suicide might be considered an option?

  

References 

Comer, R. J. (2013). Abnormal Psychology (8th Edition). New York: Worth Publishers.

Girard C. Age, gender, and suicide. American Sociological Review, 58: 553-574, 1993.

Lester D. National distribution of blood groups, personal violence (suicide and homicide), and national character. Personality & Individual Differences, 8: 575-576, 1987.

How an organization’s mission, vision, and values relate to its strategy

The simple answer is that an organization’s mission, vision, and values are answers to the questions, “What business are we in?” and “Why are we in this business?” There is no reference that corresponds to my opening sentence because after more than 25 years of reading books from Tom Peters, Mark McCormick, Zig Ziglar, John Maxwell, Andy Stanley, Stephen Covey, Lee Iacocca, Peter Drucker, Jim Collins, Al Reis, Harvey McKay, Ken Blanchard, John Kotter, Dale Carnegie, and many, many others this concept is so ingrained in my mind I could not begin to know if it is a synthesis of many ideas or something one of these men have written. Mission statements are very often platitude-like ideas such as this one from American Standard Company, "Be the best in the eyes of our customers, employees and shareholders" (Fortune 500 Companies, 2012). This company needs to invest heavily in their strategy while trying to fulfill this mission. Strategy, in their case for sure, is something that will hopefully take them from saying they want to “Be the best,” to actually formulating priorities and determining how to address each one to make sure they reach their “Ideal.” When they write the mission statement and express their goal in terms of the big picture, it is strategy that will specify the general directions and priorities (Kaplan, 2001). There is a great contrast to American Standard that comes from the Walt Disney Corporation,

 “The mission of The Walt Disney Company is to be one of the world's leading producers and providers of entertainment and information. Using our portfolio of brands to differentiate our content, services and consumer products, we seek to develop the most creative, innovative and profitable entertainment experiences and related products in the world” (Fortune 500 Companies, 2012).

I really like the specificity of their statement, “one of the world's leading producers and providers of entertainment and information” because it seems to be a much better platform in which to launch a strategy. When forming a strategy to determine how an organization will achieve, or live up to, its mission statement, having one that already points to a tangible objective is helpful. I am not sure how someone might measure which organization is the “best” in their field. Is it through profits, shareholder dividends, market penetration, brand recognition, customer satisfaction, or employee relationships? I am not sure. Some might be stronger than others in different areas, and then it seems to leave us with a subjective decision as to who is really the “best.” However, measuring who “produces and provides the most entertainment,” could be measured in concrete ways. For example, which movie company delivered the most movies, most television programs, sold the most merchandise relating to their brand, or who has acquired a larger audience share are some of the tangible ways to measure.

Saying that to say this, when an organization is trying to develop a strategy it becomes immensely more relatable to the mission and vision of the organization if they offer some tangible goal to help the leadership determine concrete goals and outcomes (Kaplan, 2001).

2. What is meant by strategy as hypothesis?

The strategy that an organization follows is somewhat of an uncertain proposition, and this being the case traveling down the path is done through studied guess-work so to speak. What the organization does, as we would say in East Texas, is to plow new ground. Having not plowed the ground before, a farmer would be making an educated guess (hypothesis) about whether or not plowing the ground and planting (strategy) will produce a profitable harvest (outcome).

However, the key for the farmer would be to clearly understand, and make sure the hired hands understand what he is trying to accomplish. He would also need to align his resources with his strategy to work the new ground. It would not make much sense if the farmer bought the new field, formed a strategy to produce enough to make a profit, but only committed a small riding lawnmower to work the ground. He would need to align everything he had that would enable him to fulfill his goal. Finally, he would need to watch the production and make necessary changes at the time they need to be made. Once again, if he plants a crop requiring X amount of water to yield the best results, he would need to monitor the field and introduce water, or drain water away in order to reach the optimal production level of the field.

My whole scenario is based on the Kaplan idea that strategy implies the movement of an organization from its present position to a desirable but uncertain future position (Kaplan, 2001). The hypotheses occur because the organization has never been to this future place (Kaplan, 2001), and getting there requires making a decision about getting to this place, although based on somewhat on existing knowledge, is still an educated guess (hypothesis).

How can managers monitor the appropriateness of a strategy over time?

The most important way, in my opinion, is making sure that the goals are in harmony with what the organization is doing on all levels. Do their goals match their policies (financial, employee, vendor). Second in importance might be making sure the ongoing level of risk is appropriate, and do not over-commit or under-commit resources by finding the needed ROI. Third, the strategy needs to be flexible. For example, when a church puts into writing their by-laws, employee manuals, constitution, or whatever they have to keep the future in mind. So many organizations set up these documents in reaction to past issues. While I understand the reasoning, I absolutely believe that it is wrong. You cannot build an organization for the future while looking back. Ever tried driving your car using only the rear-view mirror? Driving this way seems kind of goofy. Churches are not alone, but they are my wheel-house, and they make the same mistakes other organizations make.