Different thoughts about thinking differently

Archive for the ‘psychology’ Category

Would you like to turn off your emotion chip?

Tuesday, March 9th, 2010

As you can see in the picture to the left, Lt. Commander Data (in a scene from Star Trek:  First Contact) is loaded and ready for bear, as they say.  But just a few minutes earlier, he was almost ready to collapse into a puddle of trembling jelly, full of fear.  While talking with his captain, Data expressed his feelings of fear of impending battle with the Borg.  This feeling was a “gift” newly available to him from an emotion chip that he had recently found.

As we know, Data is an android, a machine full of information and devoid of emotion.  The chip changed that.  However, he also had to deal with negative, paralyzing feelings while the emotion chip was active.  So, naturally, when Data expressed his fear, Captain Picard very logically suggested that Data turn off the chip.  So he did and he calmed down.  In the next breath, Picard expressed his envy of Data in that moment, when the android could just turn off his emotions like you would turn off a lamp.

Haven’t we all felt that way at one time?

Emotional fuel (or fire)

Our emotions are powerful motivators.  Joy, love, anger, envy, and fear:  they make us want to do things.  Or keep us from doing things.

Unlike Data, we really can’t shut off our emotions.  We can train ourselves to ignore them, we can accept them, and we can use chemicals to temporarily deaden them, but they don’t go away.  Feelings don’t have on and off switches.

Fear is one of the strongest feelings, at least it is in my experience.  How many things have I kept myself from doing because of fear?  (Note:  I don’t claim that the fear stopped me; I let the fear stop me.)  Perhaps you’ve had the same experience?

No matter how you feel about privacy, there’s no doubt that having a social media presence using your real name is a test of fear and bravery.  After all, people can Google you and find out what you’re saying.  They can judge you, for good or evil.  You can be made fun of.  Hell, your boss might read your blog and decide that what you’re doing isn’t in her best interest, or that of your employer.  And so on.

Fear of exposure

I’ve done it both ways:  I’ve used aliases and I’ve used my own name.  Every now and then it’s very tempting to create a new identity so you can write and rant about your more extreme views without fear of reprisal.  The possibility of telling the unembellished truth is seductive and perversely empowering when you can do so without connecting the words back to your true identity.

To borrow one of the most famous analogies of our times, I consider that to be the Dark Side.  Power without responsibility, without remorse, without accountability – that is both the lure and the damnation of the anonymous blogger.  Better to keep your name and face in the light, to add power to your thoughts.

However, that doesn’t mean that you need to share everything.  Despite any trends in technology and society, we all have a right to some privacy.  We don’t need to continually bear our souls, we don’t need to expose all of the secrets.

Authenticity is worth pushing through the fear

But if you want to say something with power, it sure helps to have your real name and face behind it.  It may be scary and you may wish for your own emotion chip to deactivate your fear, but fear can be mastered and that energy can be used.   One of my favorite super-heroes is focused on willpower and mastery of fear.  It can be done and you can use your courage to do great things.

If you have something reasonable to say the world, please don’t be afraid to say it using your own real face and voice.  It could be the best thing that you ever do.

Data, Picard, Star Trek are all properties of Paramount.  Please don’t sue, guys.  Kthksbai.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

From assuming nothing to trust

Thursday, January 7th, 2010

In yesterday’s mega-collaborative post of better work tips (and thanks again, everyone, for contributing, reading, and commenting on the post), I shared the following observation about doing better work:

My advice: assume nothing until you have established solid trust in the different people that you work or partner with.

President Ronald Reagan helped to popularize the saying “Trust but verify” and I think there’s a lot of truth in that statement. A mistake made by someone you’re depending on (or made by us when we mistakenly assume that a commitment is in place) can cost more than any productivity gains from any tips.

Trust

It’s a sad state of affairs that a book like Trust Agents had to come out.  That book is about humanizing modern business, especially on the Web or over the Internet, based on finding ways to look and act as a reputable citizen of the Web.  It’s about lifting individuals onto more human-looking perches and having them behave accordingly.  The foundation of the Trust Agents house is that when we are perceived as being trustworthy, we will do better in business.  You have to be more than just a superior (well, OK, great) human being, though.  You have to earn trust through your actions.  You have to give a lot before you can feel remotely comfortable about starting to ask for things.

It reminds me of when I first started buying and selling on eBay years ago.  eBay reputation was the Web 1.0 prototype of the “trust agent”, in my opinion, although reputation and reference-based commerce went back to the days of the BBS and Usenet.  eBay, though, had the first relatively clean and easy way to make reputation, and by extension trust, available for literally any idiot to use.  Many people would almost literally give stuff away, losing money on sales, trying to earn positive feedback while avoiding the dreaded negative feedback that knocked your reputation down from 100% to some smaller percentage.  I know I did.  And I know it stung like hell on the very rare occasions when I got negative feedback (and, yes, I did screw up a couple of times, although it was out of sloppiness or ignorance rather than greed or malice).  To my mind, this is when online reputation became available to the masses.

Amazon.com reviews ushered in a new type of reputation proof through the quality of your reviews and the feedback that you got from other Amazon.com community members.  This was another step towards what we now have for social media because while you could profit from eBay sales, it wasn’t very easy to profit from Amazon.com book reviews since you never got paid for reviewing their products – they were more about reputation or “whuffie”, as Tara Hunt or Cory Doctorow might say.

Today we use social proof for creating visible reputation on social networks, social media applications, and blogs.  Twitter followers, Facebook friends, blog subscribers, and LinkedIn recommendations are the Web 2.0 version of eBay reputation.

Assume nothing

The reason that I listed “assume nothing” as my work tip is that I used to have that phrase taped to my work computer monitor over a decade ago when I was helping to coordinate parts of the largest project I’d ever been on:  an acquisition that my employer was absorbing into one of its existing divisions.  I was dealing with a number of external parties for the first time in my career:  I was in a back-office IT role and I normally only dealt with other employees of my company.  Lots of new stuff; lots of new people to deal with, even from within my own company.

Deadlines were tight, the stakes were high, and money was involved.  My risk management strategy was to assume nothing and make darn sure that something needed to happen, then it would happen.  Thus, a lot of follow-up, verification, and ticking things off lists filled my days.  You could argue that it’s the only sane way to work with people in places that aren’t familiar to you.  Imagine, for instance, what it must be like for a CEO to start with a company that he or she has never worked for before.  They’re building trust from the ground up – they have to be a bit paranoid in order to survive.  If you’re in this position, the only way you can afford to let your guard down is either:

  • deal only with people you can trust based on your own experiences with them
  • deal with people who have high reputation, with references and accomplishments to back it up

Reputation management, not personal branding

I know I would have liked to have had some kind of online reputation system in place when I worked on that acquisition over a decade ago.  I bet the people who dealt with me the first time would have liked to have the same thing.  Instead, we had to take increasingly larger risks over time to built the required trust to be able to let our guards down and not keep trying to prevent disasters from happening.

This is why I think the Trust Agent concept, or some similar type of widely accepted reputation system might be a good thing.  Over time, this may become the dominant factor for hiring or for making business deals, replacing the walled gardens of corporate files and Intranets or the shadow word of mouth networks that exist.  And I think it could be a very good thing if everyone plays that way and follows the rules.

As long as it can’t be gamed.

Question for the day

Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009

If your ideas are associated with you and your name, is it easier to be controversial, confrontational, or brave on the Web or in person?  Think carefully about this one.

What do you think?

When common knowledge is proven wrong

Tuesday, December 1st, 2009

I’m an introvert:  have I mentioned that before?  I used to think I was in the minority of “the population” based on common knowledge, plus other research that I did on the subject.  Yesterday I read an article at Penelope Trunk’s blog which referenced reasonably recent research (starting in 1998 and repeated afterward) which says that the old wisdom about extroverts outnumbering introverts is wrong.  Previous research claimed that extroverts outnumbered introverts by a ratio of 3:1 or some similar number.  It turns out that the older research was based on limited samples and extrapolation of those results.

In a way, I feel a little less special today.  Perhaps I should feel a little less weird.  I don’t know.  It’s not something that I lost any sleep over last night and life will carry on as normal.

However, changes in world view get you thinking.

Off the top of my head, here are a number of theories that have entered into common knowledge and may need to be questioned:

  • Dunbar’s number – a limit of 150 significant relationships that each person can have with other people – extrapolated from the cortex size of certain kinds of primates
  • Six degrees of separation – common wisdom popularized based on the results of research conducted about 50 years ago; calculated as an average of experimental results based on a limited sample
  • Homosexuality - what percentage of the population is supposed to be interested in the same-sex?  It seems to vary from study to study.
  • Depression/mental illness – similar to the above
  • BMI (Body Mass Index) – these measurements are averages based on previous studies.  Other studies question these measurements and some worry that these guidelines are too strict.
  • Verbal vs. non-verbal communication – in public speaking circles (e.g.Toastmasters), there’s a rule of thumb that effectiveness of communication comes from the following:  7 percent by the words used; 38 percent by voice quality; and 55 percent by the nonverbal communication (body language).  However, other, more recent research, suggests that words ARE more important than previously thought and the original percentages came from extrapolation from a limited study.
  • Any generalizations based on a person’s ethnicity, race, culture, etc. – for example, I’m Canadian and I have no genetic predisposition towards liking hockey or Molson Canadian (sorry guys).
  • The center of the universe – we’re pretty sure now that the Earth orbits the Sun and therefore it’s not the center of the universe.

And so on.

I’m all for debunking myths and replacing them with facts or better theories, although it’s extremely tempting to rely upon common knowledge at times to make a point.  More often than not, however, people will grab for a simple, handy “fact” that helps to build their case with “logic” that seems reasonable.  Shame on us for doing that.

What common knowledge, that was later proven wrong, surprised you?

The cost of keeping an open mind

Tuesday, April 28th, 2009

I try to keep an open mind about most things, but sometimes I wonder if that’s a good idea. After all, isn’t there that old saying about not keeping your mind so open that your brains fall out? I really don’t believe that old saying (despite the way my avatar looks, there’s been no danger of my brains falling out of my head) but I do wonder if there’s a cost to keeping yourself open to every possibility.

There’s an anecdote about Douglas Adams, possibly exaggerated, that goes like this: (more…)

Why do we participate in group projects?

Friday, March 20th, 2009

After yesterday’s post asking people for their ideas for group projects, I got thinking about why people do things in groups in the first place.

Obviously, people can do things in groups that they can’t do individually (e.g.  constructing buildings, Wikipedia.org, fundraising campaigns) because a single person lacks the strength, reach, knowledge, and so on to tackle something larger than himself or herself.  Therefore, group work is mandatory for many big tasks.

Motivation for doing things often falls into the categories of:

  • Survival/threat – if I don’t do this thing, I’ll die or lose something very important to me
  • Compensation – if I do this thing, I’ll get money or goods and services in kind
  • Curiosity – I want to find out what will happen
  • Intrinsic motivation (i.e. a sense of accomplishment; desire to take on a new challenge)

I’m curious:  are there any other reasons that you can think of that would lead a person to donate some of their cognitive surplus to a group project, particularly if there’s no obvious form of compensation?

Broadcasting Brain is proudly powered by WordPress. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS). Copyright (c) 2010 by Mark Dykeman. All rights reserved. Theme by Omakase Design.