How to think win-win. Covey’s 7 effective habits, people

First published 28 July at 2200 hours with the title
“7 must-have-its. Sean Covey’s book for teenagers”

A good book is for sharing. At home, we have a good-size collection of about 1,000 books. I have read at least 500 of them, not to mention some other 500 I don’t see around anymore. At 69, either you have lost your books, or your balls.

I do book reviews every now and then when I’m able, or when I’m eager, whichever comes first. It sharpens the mind, not to mention it relaxes it. You’re never too old to read and appreciate what now you know and what yet you don’t. As a writer, I find reading productive if not also enjoyable. I have always been a wide reader. Often, I buy second-hand books to read, to add to what I already know, to gain new insights.

Not only our books. If your book happens to visit our house and I like it, I will review it too. When I review, I don’t consider the state of the book, or the year of publication, or the author. If I see that it can contribute to knowledge, revises current understanding, or challenges what we think we are sure of, I’ll review it.

Habits are for cultivating. A good habit is a must-have-it, but it’s hard to cultivate; a bad habit is easier. Consider 7 good habits and you’ll probably give up trying if you’re a teenager.

Not Sean Covey. His father Stephen Covey published one of the bestsellers’ bestsellers of all time, the self-help book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People in 1989 that has since sold 15 million copies (Wikipedia). Based on Stephen’s book and Sean’s own experiences, the son’s book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Teens, came out in 1998 and has since sold 3 million copies (barnesandnoble.com). I like the father; I like the son.

I read the father’s book a few years ago, at least 2 times; I read the son’s book recently, also at least 2 times. There’s exactly no difference in the 7 habits earlier proposed and propounded by the father and presented by the son (page 5):

1 - Be proactive. Take responsibility for your life.
2 - Begin with the end in mind. Define your mission and goals in life.
3 - Put first things first. Prioritize, and do the most important things first.
4 - Think win-win. Have an everyone-can-win attitude.
5 - Seek first to understand, then to be understood. Listen to people sincerely.
6 - Synergize. Work together to achieve more.
7 - Sharpen the saw. Renew yourself regularly.

The difference lies in the presentation, Sean’s book being peppered and plastered with cartoons, anecdotes, quotes, quips and fun. Here are 3 examples of how deep and delightful Sean’s book is:

(1) Isn’t all-you-can-eat a win-win situation?
(2) Sean reproduces on page 17 the cartoon from FRANK & ERNEST by Bob Thayes that shows a newly cracked egg and the chick exclaiming, “Oh wow! Paradigm shift!”
(3) Baby Steps (page 242): Body - Eat breakfast. Mind - Subscribe to a magazine that has some educational value, such as Popular Mechanics or National Geographic. Heart - Go on a one-on-one outing with a family member like your mom or your brother. Soul - Take time each day to meditate, reflect upon your life, or pray. Do what works for you.

Title revised and this text added the next morning, 29 July starting at 0706 hours

On second thought, 7 is too many habits for me! Whether I’m speaking of the father’s or the son’s list (they’re the same actually), I like to simplify. So, if I were to choose which habit I like best to cultivate, and it’s also I like to cultivate 1st, it’s

Think Win-Win.

This must be the most difficult habit to cultivate, and so if I start here, the rest will be easy. In fact, I think the rest of the good habits will follow naturally once I have the win-win habit automatic in my heart, mind and spirit.

I have just realized that the win-win habit is a brilliant, very practical mode of applying the 2nd cardinal commandment of Jesus: “Love your neighbor as you love yourself.” “Think win-win” is the first step towards the journey of a thousand miles called “love.” And of course, it’s the most violated commandment of all, a sin against your fellowman. How can I think win-win when I hate the fellow?

Think win-win – you can apply it anywhere for anything at all as long as there are 2 people involved in a would-be transaction. Remember that hate is loss-loss situation – you lose a friend, and you lose your peace.

Think win-win is certainly Christian. Ask God. But don’t ask like this: “Lord, give me an idea of a win-win in this one. Just don’t ask me to forgive him.” It won’t work. Not forgiving is a loss, on both sides of the equation.

Now I know why God doesn’t answer some prayers – those who are praying are not thinking win-win. Like, if you pray for a new car and not work for it, not save for it, only beg for it, God knows you’re thinking win-lose – your win is God’s loss, because you’re withdrawing from the bank when you don’t have a bank account, except on account of God. “God, please give me patience, and I want it now!” You’re thinking win-lose. Miracles don’t happen that way. God doesn’t play games. Thinking win-win is not a game; it’s a habit, and in the end it’s all about love.

Technorati Tags: Be proactive,Begin with the end in mind,Put first things first,Think win-win,Seek first to understand,Synergize,Sharpen the saw

Search, Sex & Google’s Boolean smut

MANILA - 7 February 2010 at 1115 hours, I googled for this entry exactly as you see the line below:
philippines “sugarcane smut”
and Google gave me, in 0.48 seconds, 2,020,000 webpages, thank you very much.

But Google also had this note below the Search box (my italics):
The word “smut” has been filtered from the search because Google SafeSearch is active. And I’m supposed to rejoice?

I’m very sensitive. Of course SafeSearch is active! Don’t tell me that; I know. You see, since many years ago, I have always been setting my Google Search Preferences to English only, Google’s SafeSearch - “Use strict filtering” meaning filter out both explicit text and explicit images, display 100 results per page, and open search results in a new browser window. Google is supposed to follow my instructions to the letter.

Today, in those 2,020,000 webpages, I see separate webpages on “Philippines” and “sugarcane” and not “sugarcane smut” like I want to. What good is a fast 0.48 seconds search for millions of webpages if I can’t use any of them? Like somebody said long ago, the PC does not improve on your making mistakes; it only makes your mistakes happen faster. My search experience today proves the point. I’m unhappier faster.

My mistake? I believe it’s Google’s. My Google smut experience tells me now:

Google is not searching like I tell it to. When I search for “sugarcane smut” I mean “sugarcane smut” and not any other kind of smut; my smut is described as sugarcane, not somebody else’s smut. Why am I on my desktop PC 24/7? Not for smut. Did Google consider that?

For Google to look in separate ways “sugarcane” apart from “smut” means Google is not looking for my exact phrase “sugarcane smut” - which is what those double quotes stand for as I used them - exact phrase within those quotes - that to me indicates that Google’s vocabulary (thesaurus) is limited. Or its search programming is. How would I feel if Google searched separately the words, even if I put the double quotes “I love you” - that would be like splitting hairs.

“Smut” means “obscene” and “speck of dirt” and “plant disease” - but I wasn’t searching for “smut” only or “sugarcane” only - so why expand my search when I’m trying to do the exact opposite: limit it? I don’t want to have anything to do with your sex filth or her ground dirt; I want my sweet disease!

When I say “sugarcane smut” I mean “sugarcane smut” and not AND/OR, not either or both “sugarcane” and “smut” - does this mean that Google has changed the rules of Internet search without telling me? My double quote means I want the exact phrase, so don’t give me any Boolean smart, or smut.

Technorati Tags: Google Search is Boolean smart,Google Search is not smart enough for me,sugarcane smut vs smut

Maxwell's Failing Forward

This John C Maxwell book has this as subtitle: Turning Mistakes Into Stepping Stones For Success (amazon.com has copies). This is getting personal. So, how do I like this book? Frankly speaking, I have to tell you I fail to appreciate the book's  worth, and that's what I'm forwarding to you.

But if you want to fail forward yourself, here are the chapters:

(1) What's the main difference between people who achieve and people who are average?

(2) Get a new definition of failure and success.

(3) If you've failed, are you a failure?

(4) You're too old to cry, but it hurts too much to laugh.

(5) Find the exit off the failure freeway.

(6) No matter what happens to you, failure is an inside job.

(7) Is the past holding your life hostage?

(8) Who is the person making these mistakes?

(9) Get over yourself - Everyone else has.

(10) Group the positive benefits of negative experiences.

(11) Take a risk - There's no other way to fail forward.

(12) Make failure your best friend.

(13) Avoid the Top Ten Reasons People Fail.

(14) The little difference between failure and success make a big difference.

(15) It's what you do after you get back up that counts.

(16) Now you're ready to fail forward.

Am I ready to fail forward? Well, as a creative thinker, I always start with failure - chaos, clutter, confusion, hodgepodge - then, I go forward and create order out of disorder. As a creative writer, I never fail. Forward, creativity!

Technorati Tags: John Maxwell fails forward,I start and stays for a while with failure,as a creative writer I work with chaos,as a creative writer I never fail

Maxwell's 17 Indisputable Laws Of Teamwork, Annotated by Frank A Hilario (2010)

Revised 16 August 2010 at 1707 hours Manila

The subtitle of this John C Maxwell book is Embrace Them And Empower Your Team (2002,published by Thomas Nelson, 265 pages. amazon.com has copies). The 17 laws are:

(1) The Law of Significance: One is too small a number to achieve greatness. Einstein did!

(2) The Law of the Big Picture: The goal is more important than the role. The roles are all important if they help achieve the goal.

(3) The Law of the Niche: All players have a place where they add the most value. The niche may add a small value at the beginning, but that is a great value in itself.

(4) The Law of Mount Everest: As the challenge escalates, the need for teamwork elevates. Climbing Mt Everest is not that demanding in terms of creativity. Above all, a team must be creative.

(5) The Law of the Chain: The strength of the Team is impacted by its weakest link. A chain is a weak metaphor for a team – a link is fixed, unyielding, inflexible.

(6) The Law of the Catalyst: Winning teams have players who make things happen. All players should make things happen, but any player at any time may make things happen for the first time.

(7) The Law of the Compass: Vision gives team members direction and confidence. Vision gives Mission; Mission gives Direction. You cannot miss Mission. Confidence is not a quality of Vision but a product of Leadership.

(8) The Law of the Bad Apple: Rotten attitudes ruin a team. Only if the team is weak in the first place. One Robin doesn’t make a bummer.

(9) The Law of Countability: Teammates must be able to count on each other when it counts. They have to be able to count on each other all the time, not just some of the time.

(10) The Law of the Price Tag: The Team fails to reach its potential when it fails to pay the price. Why can’t the team learn from the mistakes of others instead?

(11) The Law of the Scoreboard: The Team can make adjustments when it knows where it stands. Where it stands is a given; flexibility is not.

(12) The Law of the Bench: Great teams have great depth. And width and length and height.

(13) The Law of Identity: Shared values define the Team. The Vision defines the Mission; the Mission defines the Team. Shared values connects the Team.

(14) The Law of Communication: Interaction fuels action. Understanding fuels action; misunderstanding foils it..

(15) The Law of the Edge: The difference between two equally talented teams is leadership. Too much emphasis on leadership. There is no leader without the rest of the team.

(16) The Law of High Morale: When you're winning, nothing hurts. When you’re losing, all the more reason to cultivate high morale!

(17) The Law of Dividends: Investing in the Team compounds over time. For once I agree.

Them, 17 of them. How did Maxwell come up with 17 Laws of Teamwork and not 16, 15, 14, or just 10? In "Acknowledgements," he gives thanks to "the people who helped me to create The 17 Indisputable Laws Of Teamwork." It's the INJOY Team, "who helped me to think through and refine the laws."

So, he did not conduct a 3-year study along with his INJOY Team to find out the Laws of Teamwork - they simply worked them out among themselves. The Team created the Laws of the Team! So, how good is this Team? So, how good are these laws? How irrefutable are they? Maxwell doesn't introduce his INJOY Team; he just assumes the reader knows.

Maxwell doesn't explain what he means by "laws" - he assumes you know. There must be Vision and Mission somewhere, even if you don't call them by those names. He doesn't start with Vision until Law 7! So, I'll stick to the Law of Supply and Demand: If the demand for this book is high, the supply will be high. And the Law of Countability: As a believer of John C Maxwell, count me out!

Technorati Tags: Alone Einstein was great,roles are important to achieve goal,the niche is a great value itself,a team must be creative,a chain is a weak metaphor for a team,any player can make things happen for the team,mission and not vision gives direction,rotten attitudes ruin only a weak team,the team must be able to count on each other all the time,learn from mistakes of others at no cost,flexibility is not a given,great teams have depth & width & length & height,mission and not shared values define the team,understanding and not interaction fuels action,there is no leader without the rest of the team,losing is the time to cultivate high morale,investing in the team pays in the long term I agree

Maxwell's 21 Irrefutable Laws Of Leadership

Published by Thomas Nelson, this John C Maxwell's 1998 book has this as a subtitle: Follow Them And People Will Follow You. It is dedicated "to the thousands of people to whom I've taught leadership over the years through conferences and books." (If you want a copy, visit amazon.com right away.) It has a Foreword by Zig Ziglar. But is it as good as it looks?

The 21 irrefutable laws of Maxwell are:

(1)   The Law of the Lid - Leadership ability determines a person's level of effectiveness.

(2)  The Law of Influence - The true measure of leadership is influence - nothing more, nothing less.

(3)  The Law of Process - Leadership develops daily, not in a day.

(4)  The Law of Navigation - Anyone can steer the ship, but it takes a leader to chart the course.

(5)  The Law of EF Hutton - When the real leader speaks, people listen.

(6)  The Law of Solid Ground - Trust is the foundation of leadership.

(7)  The Law of Respect - People naturally follow leaders stronger than themselves.

(8)  The Law of Intuition - Leaders evaluate everything with a leadership bias.

(9)  The Law of Magnetism - Who you are is who you attract.

(10)The Law of Connection - Leaders touch a heart before they ask for a hand.

(11)The Law of the Inner Circle - A leader's potential is determined by those closest to him.

(12)The Law of Empowerment - Only secure leaders give power to others.

(13)The Law of Reproduction - It takes a leader to raise up a leader.

(14)The Law of Buy-In - People buy into the leader, then the vision.

(15)The Law of Victory - Leaders find a way for the Team to win.

(16)The Law of the Big Mo - Momentum is a leader's best friend.

(17)The Law of Priorities - Leaders understand that activity is not necessarily accomplishment.

(18)The Law of Sacrifice - A leader must give up to go up.

(19)The Law of Timing - When to lead is as important as what to do and where to go.

(20)The Law of Explosive Growth - Add growth, lead followers - to multiply, lead leaders.

(21)The Law of Legacy - A leader's lasting value is measured by succession.

What is glaring to me in that long list is what are missing. How do you lead people to get to where you all want (Vision) if you don't know what to do (Mission) because you don't know where you are (perhaps you don't know SWOT)?

Another thing: How did John C Maxwell, a top expert with more than 30 years of leadership successes (and mistakes), determine that each of the 21 is a law, and that each is irrefutable? These are just insights; anyone can add to them, or subtract; and so it is not erudition to call them laws - it is error. 

Maxwell & Dornan: Becoming A Person Of Influence

John C Maxwell & Jim Dornan's book Becoming A Person Of Influence has the promising subtitle How To Positively Impact The Lives Of Others and is published by Thomas Nelson (1997, 214 pages). "We know the power of influence," they say, "and we want to share it with you." (For your copy, visit amazon.com.)

Their main point is that everyone has influence. But if you want to exert more influence, you have to learn to be an INFLUENCER:

Integrity with people.

Nurtures other people,

Faith in people,

Listens to people,

Understands people,

Enlarges people

Navigates other people,

Connects with people,

Empowers people,

Reproduces other influencers

I can see that the acrostic was forced, because, for one, the grammar is not consistent: Integrity with people (noun) is followed by Nurtures other people (verb).

Not only that. The authors come up with what they call the 4 levels of influence within which they distribute the steps in becoming a person of more influence:

1: Model - Integrity
2: Motivate - Nurture, Faith, Listen, Understand
3: Mentor - Enlarge, Navigate, Connect
4: Multiply. Empower, Reproduce

The 4 levels of influence are also stages. Note that they want to empower you (never mind what they mean) only at the 4th and highest level: Why not at the beginning of helping a person become one of greater influence? Empowering last, not first, is a selfish way of empowering people - empowering is what this is all about. I would rather not be a person of influence influencing other people that way.

Fraser & Estrada: Communicating For Development

Authors are Colin Fraser & Sonia Restrepo-Estrada. The subtitle of the book is Human Change For Survival (for your copy, visit ibtauris.com). The very brief Authors' Note can very well describe this volume:

In this book we envision how communication could help societies engender the changes and development necessary for a better and more secure future on Earth. We do admit to a certain professional bias, but this is probably a natural consequence of our combined total of more than fifty years of work in development, and in communication for it.

Perhaps some readers may find our views Utopian, but we believe that they should be put forward because we are convinced of the need for radical change by people at all levels and in various walks of life. We trust that these views will at least provide food for thought; if they also lead to action, especially among some influential people so much the better. In hoping this, we quote the memorable words of Margaret Mead: "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

The book presents successful communication cases: societies mobilized for immunization, rural development in Mexico, 2 educational radio programs, condoms for family planning, and the "electronic carabao horn" (small radio station). It's not interesting reading because it's too technical in language.

I was looking for the authors' synthesis or one overall insight into communication for development, but there isn't any. The authors simply decided to "identify common elements" in the successful cases and "suggest some possible guidelines for applying communication to change and development" (page 219). Not good enough for me. Their promise in the subtitle that the book would tackle "Human change for survival" requires that they also should have come up with one communication formula or paradigm for development, not simply guidelines or strategies (page 221-235), and policies (236-265, and a framework for action (266-283). All that is mere enumeration, more elaboration, not synthesis, not gaining one great insight into all those success stories. They could have started with the experience of Louie Tabing's Tambuli, the electronic carabao horn (190-218): that Tambuli brought about social awareness of the true nature and social unacceptability of gambling in Camarines Sur, and that killed it. It is a social problem, so it has a social solution - and that is where communication must be put to work.

Before I forget, for this copy, I thank Louie Tabing, whose heart continues to be in radio. His "Sa Kabukiran" airs Saturday and Sunday mornings (0415 to 0600 hours at Radyo Patrol 630 (DZMM), where he talks about agriculture in relation to business. It's in Filipino (Tagalog). Louie is from Tanauan, Batangas, some 50 km south of Manila. He is Tagalog, I'm Ilocano, but we can talk. We have been talking about a certain publication we could both contribute our talents to. He has been a voice in radio since 1969 when he started an aggie program for Radyo Veritas, where he eventually became the Program Director. He is into his own now. And I have been writing about agriculture and forestry officially since I joined the Forest Research Institute in Los Baños, Laguna in 1975; I'm now freelance. Before he came up with his concept of radio as Tambuli (in Filipino, cattle horn used for calling people to a meeting in rural areas), he was saying, "What we need are new public media structures that are owned and controlled by the people." I say, why not a magazine, with the modification that this one is owned and controlled for the people, not the elite. I think that that applies for any of the mass media, including books for development like this one.