The concept of ego is tossed around quite a bit these days and deserves a bit of exploration. Many current day philosophers and authors present ego as a bad element, being something that interferes with goodness.

These modern day thinkers therefore conclude that the ideal state is one defined by the absence of ego. Ego is often related to self-centeredness and selfishness, both of which also have negative connotations. These states of being are not one in the same and should not be confused.

In order to have a shared exploration, let’s look at how and why one’s ego develops. To gain a good understanding, it will be helpful to return to the day our birth, for that is the beginning of our development in this earthly existence. It will serve us well to reacquaint ourselves with the early years of our journey.

I have previously referenced what happens from day one, the moment we emerge from the womb. We come into this world as clean, little slates, so to speak. Our existence is one without choice about what we see, hear, smell, touch or taste. Without a sophisticated way to communicate, our lives are controlled by our caretakers. In most cases, our parents assume this role.

The extent of our capacity is to respond or react to that which we are exposed. And those reactions are greeted with approval, discouragement, or in some cases, are completely ignored.

It’s important to remember that as we grow in those first years of life, behavioral scientists have calculated that 80 percent of what we experience is negative. There are a lot of “nos,” “don’ts” and “don’ts” with consequences.

We repeatedly hear statements that discourage too much curiosity, exploration and ventures beyond easily monitored and safe surroundings as determined by our parents.

Think about having your thoughts, ideas and sense of fun met with constant road blocks. It continues to happen in adulthood, both among family and friends, as well as at work. New ideas and new paths are most often met with skepticism and comments about all the things that could go wrong.

A natural reaction to such nay saying would be defensiveness. If you believe in your idea or plan, it would seem automatic to make a case for its soundness. Enter in ego, the believer of Self.

Ego begins a transformation into a defensive mechanism to overcome all the negativity we are inundated with in our everyday existence. It begins to serve as a protector of Self. And considering the amount of negativity, it is easy to see how the ego can become overdeveloped.

In the repeated act of countering negativity, an environment of competition and score-keeping is grown. There is an overemphasis and necessity for right vs. wrong, and an either/or perspective. A spirit of one-upmanship manifests, creating a circular pattern, or ongoing domino effect of disapproval and discouragement sparking a defensive posture.

It’s a rather uninviting and miserable scenario. Thus our philosophers make their case for throwing out ego all together without discerning at what level ego is bad. This in turn instills guilt, contributes to the world of negativity, and in essence, becomes part of developing the ego to an extreme.

Perhaps we can easily acknowledge and agree that an overextended ego is not good. That, however, does not translate into the extinction of ego being the pathway to universal nirvana. Swinging the pendulum from one extreme to the next does not get us to an ideal state, but rather a new version of extension, which in this case is an under extension.

In all things, balance is the ideal state. Life is about balance. When everything about our existence is in a state of equilibrium, we are at peace, happy and productive. That includes our ego. It is the balancing of our individual well-being and existence with that of others. There is no need for proving rightness,

Behavior resulting from an attempt to rid oneself of ego often appears as martyrdom, self-sacrifice, a holier-than-thou savior or just the opposite, no self-esteem. At the root of all of these behaviors is little or no self-worth. One no longer values or loves Self.

Equalizing your ego makes you just as important, not more or less, as everyone else. Everyone is of equal value. There is appreciation for one and all, as the connectivity and viral impact between all is clearly seen.

This allows one to take in others’ differing, even negative, perspectives, extract what value they offer and then move on. It’s movement forward not in spite of, but despite others’ thoughts. It allows one to be true to oneself.

Let me end with some words of wisdom from others. They just might help you put your ego in perspective.

“The minute you begin to do what you really want to do, it’s really a different kind of life.” – Buckminster Fuller

“It is up to you to illuminate the world.” – Phillippe Venier

“We define ourselves by the best that is in us, not the worst that has been done to us. – Edward Lewis

Anita Ancel is President of Ancelary Group, a Vermont firm that helps executives and their teams develop habits and attitudes for ongoing success and happiness.

Ever been told there are some things you just can’t do because of physical limitations? You know, that you should be realistic because the people that are successful in particular field all have certain physical attributes. Maybe you are too short to be a basketball player, or maybe sports of any sort just aren’t for you because you’re blind.

You can believe such things if you want. I’d rather not. There are some amazing people in this world that show us that we can pretty much do what we set our minds to do, despite the perception of limitations by others.

One of the starters on our high school basketball team was about half the height of the other players. Short, indeed, he was. All the other players literally towered over him. So how the heck could he be a starter?

Instead of seeing his shortness as a hindrance to be overcome, he saw it as advantage to be used. He was quick, and though he couldn’t quite fit through their legs, he could whiz around his opponents, dribbling all the way.
His dribbles were so low that those tall guys became a little awkward when they attempted to steal the ball. With basketball being a team sport, our starter would get the ball to his mates to compete at the higher levels.

Ever heard of Mike May? He was just a typical little boy until a garage explosion left him blind and needing 500 stitches. Nonetheless, he’s seen plenty of victory.

His mother insisted he go to a regular school, when that was not usually allowed. And she let him do anything other boys his age were doing. He rode a bike, and when he crashed it, he asked if he could ride his sister’s. The May garage eventually became home to four mangled bikes.

His mother set aside her protective instincts and told Mike that all kids fall down when trying new things. And so it should come as no surprise to learn that Mike also played flag football, soccer and baseball.
That continues to be the spirit with which Mike chooses to live his life. After Mike set a record in downhill skiing, a reporter asked his mother how she had raised her blind boy. She replied, “What blind boy, I raised my son.”

Mike is also a sky diver, lecturer, guitarist, and was the first blind CIA analyst. There’s more to his story, including how he regained some of his sight. It’s all in his inspirational book titled, Crashing Through.
If we look in earnest, we can probably find an example of someone overcoming just about any physical limitation to achieve what others thought they could not. And while that takes determination when from birth you are without all abilities, it takes a special will to move on when physical capabilities you’ve enjoyed are taken away midlife.

A child prodigy, Leon Fleischer made his public debut on piano at the age of 8 after four years of training. He continued on to have an amazing career until one day he noticed that the fourth and fifth fingers on his right hand were curling up toward his palm. The condition, called focal dystonia, worsened until all the fingers on that hand were curled into his palm. He was 36.

The piano and performing were Fleisher’s life, literally since the time he was a tot. So how could this world renowned pianist continue without the use of one of his hands? Quite simply, he played concertos created for the left hand. And after some years and various treatments he was able to play two-handed again.

Inspiration comes from those who dare to do what others think impossible. They make the rest of us think twice about our excuses and so called limitations. Perhaps they understand what Kierkegaard proclaimed so long ago:

“To dare is to lose one’s footing momentarily. Not to dare is to lose oneself.”

Anita Ancel is President of Ancelary Group, a Vermont firm that helps executives and their teams develop attitudes and habits for ongoing success and happiness.

I’ve been on vacation, seeking a different level of balance and some veg time. I read a couple of mysteries, explored some of Canada’s Eastern Townships, and then lessened the activity to increase the quiet and still time.

Filling up days with places and events is often considered a great vacation. And great it is if not for beginning and ending with exhaustion. Its restorative score could be low, as most often vacations are expected to provide a break from schedules and their pressures as experienced in daily routines. A change in place, without pace, doesn’t always leave the residual effect anticipated with a vacation.

And while a change in pace, and not place, may serve up most of the benefits sought, vacations, we should note, are personal, and preferences as such will vary. The key is balance, something we all need and seem to believe is more achievable while on vacation.

Balance can be as elusive as the universal sought after happiness. And there’s a reason: they are intertwined with our state of mind. So while a change in pace or place seem appropriate for creating balance, neither provide a guarantee for a great vacation.

When I think of vacation I’m reminded of the carefree, imaginative and fun-filled days of childhood summers. Playing was the balance I needed then, and now. From creating our Indian village to spending hours throughout the day and evening at the local pool, to climbing a rock face of one of the bluffs overlooking the Mississippi, I was free to explore, create and experience. Our play was simply accepted, with few boundaries. And the appropriate level of silliness was always balanced with equal seriousness.

Self-expression flowed, and laughter came easy and often as we were loving life. With our laughter, we were releasing plenty of those healthy endorphins, which by the way are 10 times more powerful than the pain-relieving drug morphine. And no doubt we were increasing our little hearts’ rate, as in addition to the physical activity, our endless laughter gave it a boost. FYI, just a few minutes of laughter can double your heart rate, according to Dr. William Fry, Jr.

I’ve mentioned this before, but it bears repeating: As children we laughed on average 400 times a day; by age 35 we’ve reduced that to 15. So creating a more healthy balance truly does require a bit more play and laughter, in both the mental and physical sense.

For me, there’s nothing more fun than wandering and pondering. Wandering to see and experience new things, like dark chocolate enrobed blueberries we purchased at the Saint-Benoit-du-Lac Abbey. A burst of fresh berry flavor surprised us, because it was truly fresh and truly a burst.

As for pondering, time is given to those things that just don’t make their way into my brainscape during the normal course of a week. Topic matters not because vacation offers a chance to twirl anything and everything around and peer at them from different perspectives. My mental escapades are free to involve matters of the farfetched and otherwise inconceivable.

Play, mental and physical, has been recognized as a key ingredient of well being and happiness for centuries. Aristotle and Plato spoke of such beliefs. On through history, these beliefs have gained merit through the studies of the brain pertaining to the development and education of children, problem solving, creativity, relationships at home and work, as well as team performances.

According to one study, Schaeffer 1993, play is as important to human happiness and well-being as love and work. By nature we are born to play. It’s a source of energy and excitement, stimulating our bodies and brains. At the same time it provides for calmness, relaxation and improved sleep. Vacations that incorporate play are downright therapeutic.

It has been said that you can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation. I suspect the same is true in exploration of our selves. I’ve not happened upon too many down sides to play, other than the occasional skinned knee.

So with a hop and a skip, unleash yourself. Get in the spirit, stay in the spirit, be the spirit needed to jump into a fun-filled vacation. Giggle and laugh as if you’ve never grown up. Let vacation be like skinny dipping, where without hesitation you leap in. No clothes, no second thoughts are necessary as you understand life is not a dress rehearsal. Allow yourself to recapture the carefree feelings and well-being of childhood.

Anita Ancel is President of Ancelary Group, a Vermont firm that helps executives and their teams develop attitudes and habits for ongoing success and happiness.

During a recent visit to Quebec City, we went to the exposition on the Titanic. It was an incredible walk back in time. From the stories of the ship’s creators to those of its passengers, one couldn’t help but be moved by the excitement and grandeur of this maiden voyage and its tragic ending.

It led me to wonder about all the decisions that resulted in this ship, believed to be unsinkable, being broken in two and taking a dive for the ocean floor, leaving the 2,000 some passengers in its wake. And I realized that those decisions were made much like decisions made all the time, every day.

In the case of the Titanic, the focus was entirely on the gains this magnificent ship could achieve for the Star Line Company. Whether we focus on potential gains or losses determines how we deal with risk.

For example, if a doctor tells a patient they are going to die, they will take greater risks with treatments. They feel they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. On the other hand, if the doctor tells the patient they have a certain number of days to live, they are more risk averse. They frame their decisions around the days of life they could lose.

Oddly, the primary factor in decisions concerning the design and operation of this new ship was the perceived absence of even the usual risks. Standard practices, warnings and common sense were ignored.

In 1912, the Titanic was the world’s largest, fastest, safest and most luxurious ship, and the maiden voyage was meant to prove it. Confidence was in abundance as the design included 16 water-tight compartments, leading to the belief that the ship was unsinkable. Star Line management would not conceive of a situation where so many of the compartments would be flooded as to cause the sinking of its newest ship.

The high degree of confidence in the Titanic led to many out-of-the-norm behaviors. The designer was overruled on two critical matters. One, the water-tight compartments should have extended all the way up through the ship. However, that would have eliminated some living space.

The same type of rationale was used when it came to not including enough lifeboats for all the passengers. The decks, it was decided, would be too cluttered. These matters rested on one key factor: how conducive were they to the vision of making Star Line the leader in luxury experience and accommodations.

In addition, the lookouts stationed in the crows nest were without binoculars. In the hustle and bustle visual aids were forgotten or misplaced. No one seemed too concerned.

Ice warnings from three other ships were ignored. This is a hard one to understand. It was as if, like with youth, there was this sense of being invincible. The Titanic steamed ahead at full speed with the intent to surprise and impress with an early arrival in New York.

Without binoculars, the iceberg was sighted without much time to respond. And despite the quick reaction, the ship was clipping along at such a fast pace that it was almost impossible to safely clear the iceberg. Though the Titanic was saved from a head on collision, skimming within inches of the icy structure, below the surface the berg’s protrusions sliced into its side.

It seems all the world bought into the belief that the Titanic was this unsinkable wonder. For even the captain of the Californian, a ship just ahead of the Titanic that had sent the last iceberg warning, ignored the distress flares sent up. He figured Titanic was enjoying a bit of celebration.

More astounding was the unfailing belief of a passenger as she watched the ship on its descent from a lifeboat. “The first wish on the part of all was to stay near the Titanic. We all felt safer near the ship. Surely such a vessel could not sink,” recalled 40-year-old Elizabeth Shutes.

Like in the launching of the Shuttle Challenger, facts and experts were ignored. Appropriate questions were not asked and important input was simply dismissed. The decision-makers were so determined, it was as if they thought they could will success. Instead, they met with disaster.

It happens every day in business boardrooms and on manufacturing floors. Politics, influencing skills, position and intimidation get in the way of good decisions. Framing around gains or losses plays with our perceptions, and in some cases blinds us to balanced decision-making. Perhaps the error of our ways goes unnoticed; the consequences are not always as visible, nor as painful as our historic tragedies. Costly, nonetheless, they are.

Anita Ancel is President of Ancelary Group, a Vermont firm that helps executives and their teams develop attitudes and habits for ongoing success.

It was a blustery, winter day, much like those we are all too familiar with in Vermont. But no one was cold, even though they were all outside. I suppose they were hot with excitement, or perhaps fear.

You could hear a father yelling to his son, “Go get your mother, she’ll never have another chance to see anything like this.”

The day was December 9, 1914. The man was the owner of the largest laboratory in the world. His name is a familiar one: Thomas Edison. At age 67, he was watching his research complex go up in flames. All but a few buildings of the Edison Industries burned to the ground that day.

The losses exceeded $2 million. He had some insurance; less than $300 worth though. The building was made of concrete and in those days it was believed fire could not destroy such a structure. That belief couldn’t have been more wrong.

So how do you think our “light up the world” guy reacted? Remember he’s 67; he’d stuck it out through thousands and thousands of attempts (or some might say, mistakes) to succeed in developing the light bulb. How would you react if you showed up at work to find the place lost to fire? Imagine what would be happening in the next few days… the next weeks.

Edison didn’t waste much time wallowing in his sorrow. Nor did he let the expense of his losses drown him in pity or despair. No, it was quite a different reaction.

The next morning he returned to where his life’s work had been housed. While the fire had been brought under control through the night, all that remained were a couple of buildings and smoldering rubble. Edison stood there, looking over his losses. We don’t need to guess what his thoughts were, for he proclaimed:

“There is great value in disaster. All our mistakes are burned up. Thank God we can start anew.”

And start anew he and his team did, as if there was no time to waste. In just three weeks, Edison Industries introduced the world to a new and better phonograph.

Edison could have been a best selling author with a book on how to move beyond disaster. An appropriate title could’ve been: Don’t Sweat the Big Stuff.

Pretty much, Edison lived his life that way. He didn’t get more squeamish or weak-kneed as he aged. So often, we seem to tire of dealing with even the smaller, everyday adversities as our years accumulate. Not Edison, he kept a strong, youthful and atypical ambitious attitude

His perspectives were not the norm. For example, he never claimed to be an inventor despite his more than one thousand patents. Once when the governor of North Carolina complimented him on his inventiveness, he declared he was not a great inventor. His only claim to an original invention was the phonograph.

He explained all the ideas were not original to him. Instead he referred to himself as a sponge, soaking up ideas any where he could. Those with whom the ideas originated just never developed them. So he’d take them, do a little tweaking and improve them to a point of having value.

How is it that Edison worked his way through about 10,000 attempts to create the light bulb? How many goals have you ever pursued with such persistence? How about your company?

How could he move so many ideas to fruition when those with the actual concept took them no where? How many times have you or a friend had an idea only to see someone else develop it?

Why is it there are a few like Edison who don’t let even the big stuff get in their way, and then there is the majority, who often let even the little stuff stop them?

It’s time for the heart to heart, a look inside, some deep reflection. Can you honestly say you have a habit of pulling yourself up, getting on with life and business no matter the circumstances?

I can hear the excuses now. There’s always a reason why the other guy or gal can move on, but you can’t. There was something special about Edison’s situation, you’re so sure. There’s a piece of the story missing, some advantage or benefit that wasn’t mentioned.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. No special circumstance in this case, just a special person. Edison just didn’t believe in stopping. He didn’t see failure and disaster in the same way as others. Perhaps he didn’t see them at all.

So let’s cop ourselves an Edison attitude, and never acknowledge obstacles in the average way again. Let’s commit to not sweating the big stuff, and moving on.

Anita Ancel is President of Ancelary Group, a Vermont firm that helps executives and their teams develop attitudes and habits for ongoing success.

I found myself somewhat immersed in the world of visual art this past week. From looking at my son’s latest creation, to watching a movie about Georgia O’Keeffe and having dinner with a friend who is celebrating his 50th year as an artist, I took a fresh look at the world and contemplated life.

The three styles of painting are distinctively identifiable with each artist. The canvasses speak to the essence of their creator, hinting at their values, as well as bits and pieces of their life’s journey. But most pronounced in the work are the artists’ passions, undeniable and, for the most part, unwavering.

While my son is just beginning, the stories of the other two reinforce this sense of passion, including a passion for the unique self. O’Keeffe had at one point early on given up on her art, noting that the tradition of what she had learned was not one with which she could distinguish herself. Then, while attending a teaching college, she met Arthur Dow, who believed the goal of art is the expression of the artist’s personal ideas and feelings.

O’Keeffe says Dow “…helped me find something of my own.” It was from within that O’Keeffe found the connection between herself and the land, transferring it to canvas for all to see. And from that point on the world was enriched with her shared intimacy of our landscapes.

In “finding her own,” came a strength and freedom to stay the course. She is quoted, “I get out my work and have a show for myself before I have it publicly. I make up my own mind about it – how good or bad or indifferent it is. After that the critics can write what they please. I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.”

The same is true for my friend, Paul Gruhler, who finds that his modernist abstract works are not always enthusiastically welcomed. And yet, freely he continues, and in doing so his art reveals a strong voice, full of colorful subtleties and an undeniable integrity.

He does not go unnoticed or unappreciated. A January exhibition in New Hampshire proved to be a very confirming and lucrative one, as about a dozen of his paintings sold. His work is currently on exhibit at the governor’s office here in Vermont, and has been a constant in another state official’s office for some time.

Gruhler grew up in New York “in awe of the tall buildings and the orderly grid of streets and avenues.” Combined with an equal wondering reverence for the art of Sung and later Chinese dynasties, he creates both harmony and tension through a sophisticated use of the basics: color, line and form.

He creates with a respect for the individual in all of us. Thus, he doesn’t title his works because he wants “above all to leave them available to the experience and discovery of others.”

This passion, this relentless commitment to share the best of who they are, is a wonderful display of leadership. For at the core of great leadership is authenticity, which can only begin with self.

That’s not the only lesson here, though. Key to survival in the art and business worlds, alike, is something upon which many a strategic planning sessions have focused. That is, the unique value proposition.

If artists can take the same tools and palette of colors, and present the everyday in a way that is recognizably of them, a business likewise can present its products or services in a way that sets them a part. Like so many things in life, these distinctions come from taking a deep look within, as opposed to solely keeping a watchful eye on the outer world.

A few weeks ago I likened a business environment heavy with policy to the culture of a prison. My point was that managing for the worst case employee makes everyone an offender, disengaging them and costing the bottom line.

Let me be the first to say, “Shame on me,” for I was acting as if all prisons are awful places. I stand corrected. There are lessons to be learned from what is tagged as the most humane prison in the world. Located in Norway, Halden Fengsel is featured in this week’s Time magazine.

Before you dismiss me as a nut case, read just a bit further. Let’s treat this as a business case study, relating it to motivating and engaging employees. We’ll judge success on bottom line results as they relate to the vision, mission and core values.

For fairness sake, we need to admit upfront that motivating murderers, rapists and drug dealers to align with the prison’s goals is a bit more of a challenge than getting qualified employees to do likewise for a business. While prisoners are more of a captive audience, their attitudes are generally not conducive to collaboration. And we all know the difference a bad attitude can make.

A prison’s short term goal is to separate criminals from the rest of society. The longer term mission is to rehab criminals, helping them to become contributing citizens instead of repeat offenders. The vision, therefore, is to create a safer world, reducing crime and its overall cost to society.

Halden succeeds on all fronts, especially when compared to the United States. After two years, Time reports, Norway’s recidivism rate is 20 percent, compared to 50 to 60 percent in our country. And there are fewer criminals: 69 per 100,000 people in Norway, to 759 in the U.S.

The spread in these prison success rates can be likened to those established between businesses with the most and least engaged employees. To state the obvious, it’s significant. And in both situations success can be linked directly to the valuing and treatment of individuals.

The Towers Watson 2010 Global Workforce Study, involving 20,000 employees in 22 markets, concludes just that. For businesses to experience optimum results, according to the study, they will need to “create a more personalized work experience and foster self reliance by enabling employees to build their skills, plan for their financial future and live healthy lives…”

In this workforce study as well as the previous one, the relationship between leadership and employees is tagged as being critical. Trust, respect and appreciation for employees are among the gauges that have been correlated with business growth.

Back at the Norway prison, we learn that Halden’s greatest asset may be the relationship between the managing staff and inmates. Instead of carrying guns, guards share meals and engage in sports with those serving sentences.

Referring to them as pupils, the goal is to give inmates “a meaningful life inside these walls.” Through education and work, the intent is to “build them up (and) give them confidence.”

The culture is one of family, and the environment one that could easily be referred to as “home, sweet, home” With long windows to let sunlight in, flat screen TVs, mini fridges and shared kitchens and living rooms, inmates are given comforts unlike most of their real homes.

And not unlike business climate studies, Halden surveys inmates to find out how the prison experience can be improved. It’s a partnership, with organizational and personal goals being respected and realized.

For those who think a prison’s business is that of punishment, I remind you that our own penal system is costly proof that doesn’t work. And for those who think businesses can’t afford the attention or expense to provide much beyond a paycheck for employees, I ask you to compare your results to those companies with engaged employees. You’ll think differently.

            Refreshed and somewhat tan, I just returned from Jamaica where warmth, both in weather and smiles, prevail.  Not surprising, the lyrics of Bob Marley’s carefree song, “Don’t Worry, Be Happy,” continue to play in my head.

            My mindset became an amusing juxtaposition as I picked up the New Yorker from the mail pile and began to read  Elizabeth Kolbert’s article, Everybody Have Fun; What can policymakers learn from happiness research?

            The simple answer to that question is “not much.”  The research, for the most part, scratched the surface and asked the same old questions.  Happiness, after all, is not a new phenomenon for this century. Philosophers, psychologists and people in general have long tried to universally define happiness.

            It’s not just a matter for public policy, as has made the news globally from Bhutan to Europe and the U.S., but also for business practices. Engaged employees, a.k.a. happy employees, are all the rage now that it’s been shown bottom lines are all the healthier because of them.

            The business world has made progress. It’s realizing that happiness in the work place goes beyond the pay check. Just as in society, money can’t buy happiness. It’s a tool that’s helpful, but more money does not equal more happiness.

            And that’s just what the research showed in Kolbert’s article. A 1978 study asked lottery winners, quadriplegics and a control group about their happiness before and after their life-changing events.  There were no real distinctions between the groups; money didn’t increase happiness and physical limitations didn’t eliminate it.

            Other data showed that despite increases in Americans’ income, house size and number of cars, levels of happiness have “remained virtually unchanged” for the past 50 years.  In addition, countries with lower per capita income levels often register higher average happiness levels.

            These are not new revelations.  And yet we, as a society, can’t seem to let go of falsehoods that have us believing more is better, and one’s net worth directly correlates with one’s level of happiness.

            It was in 1943 that Abraham Maslow presented the hierarchy of needs, detailing how one’s basic needs must be met before one can aspire to such things as self-esteem and self actualization.  Meeting basic needs does not translate into happiness any more than superseding them, however it allows one to move beyond survival and onto living.

            While policy holders and business leaders can and should create environments and conditions conducive to happiness, they cannot ensure it. Our Founding Fathers had it right when they included the pursuit of happiness among the fundamental rights.  Happiness is not something to be given, but pursued.  It’s personal, and it’s a choice.

            Not to be confused with pleasure and satisfaction, happiness is an active state of being, not fleeting feelings. It is unique to each person, with the best definition being self actualization.

            The legend about the ancient tribal leaders who struggled with where to hide the secret of happiness concurs.  Foregoing the highest mountains, the deepest ocean waters and the core of the earth, they chose to hide it in the heart of each individual.  They assumed it was the one spot where it would remain unfound.

            So let’s end the centuries-old debate, and encourage some personal expeditions into the heart of happiness.  That better work place and world will follow.          

            Now is the right time.  Ask any of the Olympic medal winners or last night’s Oscar winners.  They will tell you, NOW is the right time.

            At the opening ceremonies of the Winter Olympic Games in Vancouver, the Gardiner Sisters agreed in song… “Follow your heart, right from the start.”  Now is the right time to start living, or working, your dream.

            The word “dream” is spoken a lot on these momentous occasions.  It’s a word that is expected, accepted and real when spoken by the top performers in these fields. And yet in everyday life, dreams are often sabotaged by doubts and doubters, perpetuating not just short term procrastination but lifelong regrets.

            Dreams are founded on passion, and when pursued generate more energy than any other motivating factor.  With total belief, they give the power to propel beyond any perceived obstacle.

             In the business world, dreams exist in the beginning as organizations are created. With maturity, comes a different attitude. Dreams are seen as soft, a head-in-the-clouds waste of time, being too abstract and just a wish.  Quite frankly, dreams that aren’t pursued are just that.

            Businesses take up strategic planning, which many believe to be a more concrete process. The problem with most strategic plans, though, is they leave out the dreaming step, and end up with more of the same. They wrongly perceive the key word to be “more,” when it is the “same.”  And the “same” isn’t a long-term strategy for success. 

            The vision, the imagination and creativity that helped crystallize the organization’s path in the beginning is not tapped. Mired in protective mindsets, safeguarding the position of individuals and the organization, new directions feel too risky.  Nay-sayers are honored, for what is usually mistaken as loyalty.

            Ironically, dreamers who engage in the pursuit, work the steps of a strategic plan.  Gathering information, determining action steps, creating measurements, as well as planning and adjusting for obstacles along the way are just what they do. The difference is that their level of belief, passion and drive carry them further.  They take the necessary hard work in stride, and safe is no where on their radar.

            Geoffrey Fletcher, when accepting his Oscar for Precious, Best Adapted Screenplay, acknowledged the work and shared the moment, saying, “This is for everybody who works on the dream everyday.”

            Life pursuits are no different than those of business.  In working with kids, I hear them talk about their dreams, and then the possibilities for failure.  They’ve heard such things as “most don’t make it,”  “you can’t do that,”  “you might not win.”  They are hungry to talk about how their dreams could come true, a topic often avoided in an effort to keep them from getting their hopes up too high.

            On into adulthood and the work place we go, all the time being cautious with our hopes.  And yet, when given the chance, we want to be there to experience dreams coming true for others.  We soak in the feelings of victory and success, allowing ourselves, for a few moments, to dream again.

            In so doing, try to remember this perspective from Sarah Ban Breathnach, “The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers.  But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.”  And then consider some “doing.”

            In various leadership positions throughout my career, I’ve often thought if I could wave a magic wand I would want to give people confidence.  I had observed that confident people behaved differently. For the most part, they seemed less defensive. 

            Upon further observation, it became clear that confidence was not something that was always experienced holistically.  For example, I’ve coached some folks that are very confident in their abilities to do their job, but not so confident in the value of themselves as individuals. Therefore, defensiveness emerged.

            Then there are those who are so confident that their defensiveness is elevated to arrogance, and takes on the face of bullying, diminishing anyone who questions them.

            Carol S. Dweck addresses these behavior differences more eloquently in her book, mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Rather than speak of them in terms of confidence, she talks about their mindset and how that translates into behavioral styles.

            In examples of what most would consider successful people, she draws lines of distinction by detailing values and coinciding behaviors.  She would no more put John McEnroe in the same athletic ranks with Michael Jordan and Babe Ruth, than she would group Lee Iacocca and Steve Case with CEO greats Jack Welch and Lou Gerstner.

            And here’s why. McEnroe, Iacocca and Case share what Dweck terms a “fixed” mindset, whereas Jordan, Ruth, Welch and Gerstner share a “growth” mindset. The differences are as stark as being billions in the red as opposed to billions in the black.

            Giant egos, airs of superiority and constant parading of their greatness are characteristics of the fixed mindset group.  Abuse and judgment of the underlings, especially the most competent, is routine and required to uphold the self-created royal status of fixed-mindset leaders. Talent, not effort, is supreme.

            McEnroe blamed losses on many things, but never himself.  The responsibility didn’t lie with him, so neither did the fix.  He even blamed his temper tantrums on others for having allowed them.  Jordan and Ruth, in contrast, looked losses in the face and increased efforts to improve their games.        Likewise Iacocca and Case sat atop success with the sole focus of elevating their self-image. All the while, Chrysler and AOL Time Warner danced with disaster.  True to their fixed mindset, both CEOs lost their crowns but not their elitist attitudes.

            With a switch in mindsets, it was human potential, teamwork and growth that drove Welch and Gerstner. Like the spotlighted Undercover CEOs of the current TV program, they went to the ranks and thrived on good communication.

            Turf wars were banned, credit shared and mentoring replaced blame.  The “Royal I” was no where to be found, resulting in wins all around, including nothing less than stellar financial gains for GE and IBM.

            So you see, while confidence is a characteristic linked to leadership, it alone does not guarantee a leadership style that is respected and sustains success.  True leadership, after all, is only sustainable through the engagement and growth of self and others.  Dweck’s book does a great job substantiating this through a collection of detailed examples.