Monthly Archives: November 2016

Random thoughts – keeping you on your toes

Election Day Quote

Leave a comment

Today is the US presidential election.  It comes around every four years.  This years contest has drawn a lot of attention from around the world because of one candidate – Donald Trump.

Election Day Quote

I came across the following quote this morning that puts a bit of perspective on the days proceedings.

” What counts now is not just what we are against, but what we are for.  Who leads us is less important than what leads us —  what convictions, what courage, what faith —– win or lose.”  – Adlai Stevenson, US Statesman and former presidential candidate – 1952

Much of the discussion in this campaign has been around the candidates themselves.  The debates have focused on personal attacks against each other as has most of the advertising.

Sadly, as Stevenson notes, this is the least important factor.  Considering what we are for rather than against,  is a more powerful perspective with a higher probability of a successful result.

It’s a boy or it’s Girl

Unfortunately this most acrimonious of contests has been all about the negative.  That is the complete focus has been on attacking the other candidate.

For Donald Trump, of course, this is a standard tactic, he is a bully by nature afterall.  For Hilary, she decided not to take the high road and fight back.

The losers in all of this will be the American people, for many they have chosen to provide their support based on what they are against.  Ultimately it is highly likely the voters will regret this, whoever wins.

Random thoughts – keeping you on your toes

The Leadership has Spoken

Leave a comment

I had a interesting discussion about ethics at lunch today.  I was not alone, so this post is not about me talking to myself but actually dialoguing with others.

Follow the Leader

Often in our societies its the government that provides (dictates?) our morality and thus the associated ethical behaviour.   The crusades goal of recapturing Jerusalem was obviously moral and ethical (obvious to the leaders and their pions).

Conclusion, murdering others is a moral and ethical behaviour if the cause is just.  Justice as defined subjectively by the leader and accepted by their followers (pawns?)

Really!!!!

My wife does not agree with this assessment.  Perhaps the winners of a conflict will position themselves as moral practioners of ethical behaviour but this is in fact just self justification. War is wrong!

Checking in with the Greeks

Plato postulated, at it’s core,  human nature was based on three main objectives:

  • seeking knowledge
  • seeking power (victory/reputation)
  • seeking wealth (money, material gain)

By there very nature the practice of these behaviours clouds humans abilities to define morals in a consistent and sustainable way.

We each have a different mix  of beliefs underpinned by our very natures.  That is our individual  drive for knowledge, power, and material gain.

There are of course infinitesimal ways these attributes can be weighted.

The Result

Murder is morally wrong, my ex colleague opined at lunch today.  At least we can agree on that.  My counter is “except in self defense or pursuit of a just cause”

And so the slippery slope of morality and ethical behaviour begins.  Is it within the realm of human beings to solve this difficult question definatively.

I like Plato’s answer,  in essence he said, we can seek to define and achieve morality but we will never attain that goal.  The three fundemental aspects of human behaviour make it impossible.

Disclaimer

The aforementioned  philosophical discussion about plato and comments from my lunch companions and wife are my interpretations and may not accurately reflect their feedback.

Random thoughts – keeping you on your toes

Torturing the Data

Leave a comment

A colleague of mine made an interesting observation today relative to a discussion about using data to draw conclusions.   “If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything”

There must be a reality

This is an interesting twist of words.  There certainly is some truth to the implication that a given set of data can support a variety of truths.

The reality, however, is that data does not speak, only the human interpreters do that. The point is really about salesmanship.  Interpretation of data has a subjective component.

My own personal experience with this comes from years of developing business cases.

I used to brag (cynical me) that if I was advised the organizational threshold for rate of return (aka the hurdle rate) I could document a business case that would result in approval to move ahead, every time.

The sad part of this boast is that I have been crafting business cases since 1980 ( for various organizations) and in over 35 years I have never had one business case proposal rejected. (I did not count them but we are talking about lots including one for several hundred million)

Back to the Point

Based on my own experience of torturing data, truth is, getting the data to say anything was not about the data but all about my ability to interpret, organize even shape the story the data told.

The data, well it was silent putty in my hands.

I do strongly recommend questioning and validating proposals, however my advice would be to focus on the story as oppossed to the data itself.

Random thoughts – keeping you on your toes

Doing documentation

Leave a comment

I have posted before how all work generally falls into one of four categories.

  1. Urgent, Important
  2. Urgent, not Important
  3. Not Important, Not Urgent
  4. Important, not urgent

Today’s post I will use these categories to explain why it’s harder to start some work than others.

Lets develop and document policies and processes

Seems like a simple task but usually this number one on the procrastination list.  Boring!  Hard to argue, developing processes and practices probably is not the most scintillating task.

Worse they need to be documented, reviewed, aprroved and then communicated and implemented.  Who needs documented guidelines, we can figure it out – every time.

Of course the way we do it might be different every time and the outcomes – same story.  So inconsistent results, ultimately not sustainable.

Sounds Important, so why is it not a high priority?

Intuitively it is natural to prioritize tasks in categories 1 & 2, they are urgent afterall.  Puzzling though how category 2 gets a priority although it is not important.  Urgency though is in your face so reasoned prioritization does not always apply.

Category 3 are easy to do.  No pressure and they are not important so no one really cares.  Keeps you busy though and low stress so surprisingly they often get a higher priority than caregory 1.  (Notwithstanding the fact they are generally a waste of time).

I’ll get to it when I have a chance

And there you have it, we rarely get around to the important not urgent tasks.  They are not urgent so we can survive without them.  No one is bugging us to get it done and although the benefit of completing important tasks is usually high it’s not visible.

You have to think about the benefits, they are usually not obvious.  Lack of documentation leads to rework, inefficiencies and often poor quality and high cost yet usually is the last item to get addresses , if at all.

 

 

 

Random thoughts – keeping you on your toes

More on Ethics

Leave a comment

When social norms and common beliefs clash between different cultures, organizations or countries the question of whose behaviour is ethical gets raised.

For Example

Religious organizations often practice different beliefs .  For example, one religon restricts priests from marrying while another does not.  Some religions recognize and accept homo-sexual practices.

Is it ethical for someone whom has taken holy vows to marry?  Can people of the same sex co-habit as partners or even in wedlock?

Interestingly, your answer to these questions could be driven by your religious beliefs or could be drawn from your background and experience or even just your social group (the society you belong to).

The ethics of these questions could even be derived from a combination of these factors and some not even mentioned.  Ultimately though the direction most often comes from leaders (religious, societal, cultural,etc.)

Leadership and Ethics

Do you need a leader to practice ethical behaviour?  Probably not, how you behave is really up to you.  That being said a leader, with a critical mass of followers certainly influences what constitutes ethical behaviour.

In many cases the leader sets the framework for behaviour within their group (country, society, organization). Precepts like religious beliefs, prejudices or interrpretations of morality can influence this leaders guidance.

While you do not require a leader to determine what behaviour is ethical the leader requires followers (i.e., you)  in order to set the ethical course.

An Ideal State

As noted in yesterdays post, I am still a beliver ethical behaviour being determined with the least amount of subjectivity or external influence (like that of a organizational, spiritual or political leader).

Although totally idealistic and perhaps impractical to broadly implement I believe each individual should simply ask themselves, “Is it right, Is it fair” when determining the ethicality of their behaviour.

 

Random thoughts – keeping you on your toes

But is it Ethical

Leave a comment

The definition of ethical behaviour is very open to interpretation.  That is  applying the principles of morality to determine right or wrong behavioural conduct (so called ethical behaviour) can be somewhat subjective.

What is moral behaviour?

In simplistic terms I would argue moral behaviour is the practice of good works through selfless actions.  Of course this raises the question what is good?  Also what is selfless.

Considering my life is all about me, selfless must be a behaviour I embrace within the context of my self.  (That is I decide what is selfless behaviour not the observer).  Thus selfless behaviour is highly subjective.

External Influences

My conclusion is, if the practice of ethical behaviour is entirely based on your own subjective assessment it is truly of little value.  In truth it must reflect your knowledge/understanding of social and cultural norms.

Still subjective, (ultimately you are the one doing the interpreting) but at least now there is a bar or baseline to validate and measure against which is not entirely about you.

The ethical behavior arising from this moral understanding will then be governed by rules or standards for right conduct or practices influenced and directed by societal norms.

Typically these rules are refered to as laws, professional standards or common cultural beliefs with such universal acceptance they are labled as behavioural norms.

Were it so Simply

Logically then, we should all be able to operate within a common moral context leading to consistent ethical behaviour.  NOT!!!

Rationalization and selective interpretation are virtually impossible to banish.  And so, our own believe system (and it is as individual as we are) is a key inflencer to our moral understanding and thus the associated ethical behaviour.

So isthat  just the way it is?  Do we throw up our hands and give up?Can we do something to make it better? As a society are we doing something to make it better?

Stay tuned, more musings on this topic tommorow.