Working halfheartedly

 I would guess that the magnification power of the mind hovers somewhere around 10x the actual reality of any situation.

Humanly events—like, say, the breakup of a relationship—tend to fill one’s head till it spills out the ears.

Playing hooky from work to lick the wounds isn’t an option for those of us who have to pay rent and purchase fine bottles of Gamay Noir so we trundle on, forcing our outer shells to mimic their former in-love glory while our insides writhe in agony. Joy.

Most people quietly process matters of the heart by heading to work, staring blankly at a screen for eight hours, and doing just enough to stay under the boss’s radar. An informal poll of some friends revealed a common theme – their normal workday productivity shrank to the bare minimum. Some even got away with doing nothing for weeks and months after a break up.

One girlfriend took two years to get over a cheating ex and had to move back home for free rent and mom-love dinners. None spoke to senior managers about their situation. All agreed that such things are private and would be unprofessional to voice at work. That’s just in my small realm, but everyone I know has been through it so multiply that by however many people are in the dating pool, sprinkle it with B.C.’s 41.0 per cent divorce rate, and serve up a big ol’ slice of lackluster-performance pie.

I googled the subject, looking for statistics on how our romantic worlds affect productivity and didn’t find much with Canadian relevance. A 2002 Wall Street Journal story reported that the workplace costs of romantic heartbreak from lost productivity, absenteeism, and increased errors and accidents hover around $11 billion dollars per year in the US. The info was based on an extensive study done by The Grief Recovery Institute in Sherman Oaks, CA. (Interestingly, the same study reported that loss of a pet costs the workplace $2.4 billion, financial trouble $4.6 billion, family crisis $9 billion, and the loss of a loved on $37.6 billion).

So the healing process—that queasy, distracted, unmotivated perma-zone we wallow in when our hearts are bruised (not broken, no heart can be broken—fight the power)—is kryptonite to vocation. The same study says that 85 per cent of management-level decision makers said their decision-making abilities ranked from very poor to fair in the weeks or months following a grief incident. So our bosses are not impervious, which might just make them understanding. Sacrebleu.

I don’t think the boss’s easy chair should be a quasi-psychologist’s couch, but there is something to be said for direct honesty. I recently waded through the sticky swale of a break-up, barely functioning in silence until the guilt of my inability to focus at work forced me to spill the beans to Matt. Because I had managed to meet my deadlines he hadn’t noticed anything was wrong, but crossing that no-no line gave me a certain boost. There was no more reason to feel guilty, which gave me extra energy to devote to writing.

Sharing (not gushing—they don’t need details) can have a marvelous motivational quality, even if it’s only because you realize how rueful you sound outside of your own head.
No matter how agony chooses you, know that it’s bound to stay a little while and addressing it helps. In my own case, solving my issue at work stopped the past from meddling with my present.

The future, as always, is flawless.

• Add new comment

Did the creative class do in Harper?

I've talked before about Richard Florida and his concept that there is emerging a new “creative class” in some cities throughout the world that is changing economies rapidly.

Florida is speaking on the subject in BC soon, which is appropriate since Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto are Canada's top creative class cities.

It's my belief that this creative class had a large effect on this federal election.

This was written before voting day, but if pre-election polling is any indication, it appears that this new group thwarted Conservative leader Stephen Harper's dream to gain a majority government.

Harper had proposed cutting a measly $45 million from Canadian arts programs, which should have been lost amid all the standard-fare campaign noise about carbon taxation schemes, kitchen table politics, and tough-on-crime movements.

But throughout the campaign, it became a bigger issue. Arts groups and their supporters in the creative cities mobilized.

And from that grew a mental distillation among many others that the Conservative party was completely unaware of what is happening in their cities.

Only about 1 million Canadians are employed in the arts and culture sector, but 64 percent of them reside in the three cities. Most live a marginal existence because their mission is to create, not to make oodles of money. They're easy targets for politicians who toss off epithets about “ordinary Canadians” not being able to relate to artists who spend all their time at government funded galas.

That kind of envy politics might play in rural areas, but it's death in creative class cities, which contain many other people involved in creative pursuits. Like science, technology, entrepreneurship, venture funding, new media, games production, and film.

Large populations in the three cities share the artist mindset. And they saw in the Conservative attitudes that Harper just didn't get today's new economies. Perhaps, they also felt that they could easily be next.

So there's a lesson here for all politicians. This isn't the Canada of 20 years ago. A new class of “ordinary Canadians” now exists and must be taken seriously.

• 3 comments

Big thinking in small places

There's a possible guide for B.C. communities devastated by changes in the resource economy in a New York Times article about the rebirth of Bellows Falls, Vermont,

The “gritty river village” is, like many other towns, caught in a downward spiral of economic decline.
But townspeople decided they wouldn't simply use off-the-shelf solutions like most impoverished towns,who usually reach into the same “best practices” basket.

Instead, Bellow Falls put its collective thinking hat on and became more creative. To do so, it drew upon the very things that made it vibrant several centuries ago—its river and railroad, which it would use in new ways. As an example, one man bought (over the Internet) an abandoned paper mill and is turning it into a totally sustainable eco-resort for “green marriages, green bar mitzvahs and carbon-neutral vacations”.

The lesson from Bellow Falls is that you have to—and I hesitate to use this hoary old cliché, but it fits—step outside the box for a change.

When towns lose their job base, armies of government advisors usually swarm in and provide “economic aid” and retraining for townspeople. This usually takes two forms: attracting new versions of old industries or converting workers to service business entrepreneurs. It rarely works well because governments are process oriented and so aren't typically very creative or innovative.

The usual result is a kind of templated process in which everybody is trained to do the same old thing. And because there aren't enough customers for their service, many of the businesses struggle.

So, maybe, like in Bellow Falls, it's time for big thinking in small towns. Stop doing what every other smaller community is doing and start walking your own path. There are opportunities out there, but you have to think in different ways to see them.

Since innovation should be a democratic pursuit, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. How can we revive our declining communities?

• Add new comment

Watching out for Palinistas

As most media-watchers know, Sarah Palin defied low expectations in last Tuesday's Vice Presidential debate. She didn't say anything appallingly dumb, or anything appallingly inappropriate. The problem, at least for GOP supporters, is that she didn't say much of anything. She dutifully forewent any real engagement with moderator Gwen Ifill's questions, instead swinging the conversation around to well-rehearsed (and details-poor) set pieces on Iraq, gay marriage, her ticket's "maverickness," and taxes.

You can accuse her supporters—if that's what they are—of no such vagueness. They've been direct, if largely unpleasant. Local religious-affairs columnist Douglas Todd has taken a particular interest in Palin on his Vancouver Sun blog, The Search, laying out Palin's evangelical credentials and arguing that her "Christian values" may be skin deep. And for this, Todd has had an unholy amount of vitriol aimed at him.

A full collection of Palin videos and utterings

He writes: "When I asked if [pursuing vendettas and firing officials who crossed her] would be the behaviour of a Christian, one emailer responded: 'You are a sad little pathetic man who does not have a shred of decency and cannot support his beliefs with the truth, so must make up 'facts.' Someday you will be judged for this, and I hope that day comes soon. You deserve what you get.'

Another wrote to the blog to tell me to shut up and just ask Jesus Christ for forgiveness. Otherwise, she said, 'You are headed to Hell, the eternal Lake of Fire, originally created for Satan and his angels.'

A third called me a 'perpetually embittered' atheist (for the record, I'm not an atheist) who will be gnashing his teeth after McCain and Palin win the 2008 presidential elections. His advice to me: 'Try again in 2012, Lucifer.'"

And perhaps my favorite. Todd again: "Religion and U.S. politics is a touchy subject, to be sure. That may be why many Americans have expressed their scorn that any Canadian would dare, through the borderless Internet, express opinions about it.

As one wrote to my blog: 'Thank God (not 'my' god" or 'a god,' but THE GOD) that you troglodytes have no say in American politics (in French or English, eh). In this, the only civilized part of the American continent, we have to tolerate sub-human grunters like you Canadiots complaining about OUR President, as if anyone in your prehistoric slab of semi-paved wilderness had half the brains or balls that George W. Bush has.'"

In other news, Saturday Night Live is continuing to make a grand argument for its own cultural relevance. Tina Fey's latest Sarah Palin spoof is top drawer. My favourite bits are her rants of stitched-together non sequiturs; this skit has a good one that ends with "...and the great Ronald Reagan."

It's the second Presidential debate tonight. Predictions?

• 2 comments

BizGib, as it's spoken

As a multi-skilled individual with an eye for the bottom line and who collaborates extensively, I'm always open to opportunities.

Particularly the opportunity presented by bad jargon. Like the above, which I'm sure most of you have now guessed means, roughly: For money, I'll do anything for anybody.

Yes folks, we're talking about authentic business gibberish (BizGib), that verbal shorthand that is everywhere because no one wants to put an obstacle in their career path by displaying bandwidth deficiency when it comes to thought leadership.

Here's some of the latest BizGib, all of which I have caught myself using in weak moments.

Future Proofing: As in, OK, let's future proof this plan. Or this economy. Or this portfolio. Which I think means assessing risk and then forming a plan to deal with it. Maybe. Like much jargon, it sounds cool, but doesn't make sense. How do you avoid the future?

Best Practice. It's been around for a while, but it's still popular. Supposedly, this means you'll survey others in your area and pluck the best from each. Usually, it means you'll copy a mishmash of “solutions” in your business. Which then will safely be like every other one.

Results-driven. On every resume I've seen. And, probably in half the pitches I've been subjected to. Supposed to indicate that you're a tough guy who produces. But really indicates nothing. Is anyone driven to produce nothing?

Monetize. Yep, it's everywhere. Especially among consultants and venture capitalists, as in how are you going to monetize that social media play? It means convincing someone to actually pay for it.

Innovative. Modern version of “new and improved”. As in this innovative new product will change the customer experience. Despite the prevalence of this modern marketing buzzword, innovation is still a process to commercialize a new (and useful) idea – emphasis on idea -- not simply tweaking something to boost sales.

Send me your favorite piece of business gibberish.

• 2 comments