Can I trust the quick and easy psychological tests?

There are hundreds even thousands of quick and easy surveys out there. Many of them are called “self-assessment” instruments. The advent of inexpensive survey creator tools like Qualtrics and Survey Monkey have allowed the proliferation of survey tools.  Some are of value, some are not. Creating a valid and accurate survey requires significant effort: question formulation, item writing, item testing usually with a field of experts, initial testing to establish various validity and dependability statistics to ensure the survey is actually measuring what you hoped it would, sample selection, and more.

At the simplest level, surveys should report the demographics of their samples (not assuming the results apply to the general public), and percentages of responses. Beyond that there are many ways to analyze the data depending on the size of the data set and the tested validity (does it measure what it says it does) and dependability (does it yield the same kind of results time after time).

The “psychological” studies that one reads in popular magazines are of the simplest kind with very little validity and/or dependability analysis. Typically, they simply report as noted above, sample characteristics and simple percentages.

Note that some tests have been analyzed and re-analyzed over the years to mixed results on both validity and dependability. IQ tests are among these as is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) which was originally developed by a mother and daughter team trying to analyze the “different” personality of the son-in-law/husband.

THEREFORE, I STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT ONE NEVER PLACES CONFIDENCE IN THE RESULTS OF ANY SINGLE ASSESSMENT TOOL. No instrument is accurate enough nor comprehensive enough to hang your hat on/believe in. I have taught career management courses at Harvard and Virginia for over 3 decades and we always said that one should ONLY TRUST RESULTS THAT APPEAR REPEATEDLY ACROSS MULTIPLE DATA SETS/INSTRUMENTS. This is inductive logic, scanning evidence and looking for patterns across multiple data sources.

We summarized this technique at Harvard based on the award-winning work of John Kotter, Tony Athos, Charles McArthur and Victor Faux. You can see my summary of that work with guidance on how to use some 25 self-assessment tools on one of my webpages at Personal Web - James G. Clawson (at the bottom the Career Option Workbook COW and at Getting Below the Surface The interactive PDF file FindingFit is available through Darden School Business Publishing. FindingFIT

NEVER TRUST THE RESULTS OF A SINGLE INSTRUMENT! There are many reasons for this.

Is there one best method or way to learn that works well for everyone?

Well, there are many sources describing variations in learning styles, kinds of intelligence, and preferred channels of data input. So on the surface, the answer would seem to be “no.” “Works well” may be the differentiating phrase.

That said, learning involves creation and maintenance of neural-neural synaptic connections that we ill-understand—yet. Research into brain function continues apace around the world. There are reports of multiple amputees learning to control prosthetic hands, for instance, with electrodes attached to their foreheads.

Early in life, right after birth, babies can’t even follow you with their eyes and they cannot speak a language. As the weeks and months and years go by, babies gather more and more physical and mental skills. From observation, emulation, and REPETITION.

SO, I offer that while it’s more difficult from one person to the next, REPETITION is on balance the learning system that works most deeply and most broadly across the world. People memorize the Koran, or poetry, or the Bible or parts in plays. They learn 800 moves in taekwondo or karate. They learn mathematics, history, etc. One time exposure usually doesn’t do much. Creating the neural-neural connections that we refer to as “knowledge,” “wisdom,” or “experience” takes time and REPETITION. The brain, however vast it is, tries to be efficient by letting go of synaptic connections not used and applying energy and resilience to connections that are used over and over again.

So, my answer is REPETITION. Malcolm Gladwell popularized the concept of 10,000 hours, even for geniuses like Mozart, of repetition to get really good at something. Eric Clapton would practice guitar as a youth until his fingers bled. (see his autobiography)

Doug Newburg and I in our book, Powered by Feel, note that one challenge is the love of something enough that one will do whatever it takes to get good. WIthout that love or desire, one will not have the STAMINA required to excel through repetition. Bruce Hornsby spent 18 months “shedding” learning to convey whatever he wanted on his keyboard—and that included crossing hands and going over and over again. That stamina was based on enjoying or liking or wanting or loving a thing so much that “practice” became a “want to” not a “have to” (choice vs. obligation)

So that, the desire or love of a thing/skill/knowledge is the underlying basis for repetition as the doorway through which one becomes an expert.

Where/how does one get that desire? It might come naturally, it might be imbued by parents, it might be internal desire, it might be a simple but powerful choice. The presence or absence of that choice pretty much defines who we will become—or not.  

Characteristics of Cults

Cults are dangerous. Cults erode or remove your free agency and in return they offer a sense of membership, of belonging.  Beware. Beware.  Maintain your freedom to think and act.  Recognize and be aware of these characteristics of cults.  

1. Charismatic leader who demands total loyalty and obedience.
   
2. Threat of exclusion if you disobey the leader's rules.
   
3. Contribution and "consecration" of your property and wealth.
   
4. Instructions to avoid reading or viewing or listening to anything that contradicts the teachings of the great leader.
   
5. Difficulty in leaving.  Threats of bodily harm, loneliness, loss of privilege, loss of property and/or wealth, loss of fellowship, being followed, byzantine rules for getting out, constant pressure to stay, etc.
   
6. Instructions to study and re-study daily the teachings of the great leader.  Constant imprinting of the core teachings beginning with loyalty and obedience.
   
7. Expectations to attend meetings and demonstrate loyalty and obedience.
   
8. Strict hierarchy topped by the great leader.  You may think you know what's best for you, but if your local or general leader says otherwise, you are wrong.
   
9. Expectations to conform to grooming and dress.
   
10. Sexual implications of membership from intimacy with the great leader and / or unwillingness to recognize the natural sexual variations evident in 10% of the global population since history began. Responsibility to confess in some detail sexual "sins" of which there are many.
    
11. Questioning or Criticizing the great leader and their appointed lieutenants is not tolerated.
    
12. Asking or forcing members to separate themselves from the rest of the (evil) world.  Clipping communication links including phone, mail, news, radio, etc.
    
13. Placing loyalty and obedience to the leadership above all else, including self and family.  Even to the point of sacrificing your life and total property and wealth. 

Make a SCRUB CAP! New Generation of Rosie Riveters!

My lovely wife is making scrub caps for the local hospital—which needs 700 more. She’s a saint and responsible citizen! 

Let's mobilize every seamstress nationwide. If FEDS can't do it, WE CAN. Every sewing machine idle salesperson, every home seamstress, every person who knows how to sew!  Make 1, 3, 10, 20!  

INSTRUCTIONS: https://drive.google.com/…/16YMnywWx6kgFRrtN9cUkrEWSu-…/view
PATTERN: https://drive.google.com/…/1NpjEqdmsLQd4l5b4y9WrrA2gR3…/view

What are the typical phases or stages of primary research?

The typical phases of a primary research project would include:

1. A question or a wonder or a hypothesis.
   
2. Extensive if not comprehensive reading of the published work on that question or questions surrounding it to ensure that a) the question hasn’t been answered already and b) the researcher knows and understands the current worldwide understanding of the issues in the question.
   
3. Design of a data gathering “experiment” that would ostensibly answer the question or at least give more insight into it than we already have.
   
4. Conducting the experiment taking into account various ways that the data could be inaccurate or distorted by sampling, measurement, and other even exogenous factors and errors.
   
5. Analysis of the data collected using established statistical techniques relevant to the data and question. Recognizing non-established issues such as the value of a 5% error rate as “acceptable.”
   
6. Writing up the results of the analysis which usually means a) framing the question, b) relating the known published work to the question, c) describing the data-gathering technique / experiment, d) describing the data collected, e) presenting the analysis of the data, and f) identifying possible weaknesses in the whole procedure and suggesting avenues for improvement in future work.
   
7. Finding a double-blind respectable journal in which to publish the article/paper.

This is in my experience as a conductor of research and a reviewer for several journals what the “usual” pattern of primary research looks like. I hope this helps.  

BI-LATERAL QUADRICEPS TENDON RUPTURES

This POST is intended as a forum for those who have or have had bilateral quadriceps tears (and subsequent repairs). You can post here or e-mail me at JimClawson@virginia.edu

(The short introduction) On 9/2/06, I was descending a flight of stairs in Istanbul, Turkey, and both my legs gave away. I heard a distinct "pop, pop, pop" in both legs as they collapsed. The next day, MRI's confirmed the diagnosis, bi-lateral quadriceps tears. It was very painful, terrifying, and confusing since I had no sense of weakness, fatigue, or advance warning. Getting home from Istanbul was a grueling experience made possible by a generous client and the warm flight attendant staff on a Delta flight. Since then I've learned that this is a relatively rare event; the first surgery on bilateral quadriceps ruptures (BLQTRs) was only done in 1949, two years after I was born. If you've had or are in the middle of a BLQTR event, I hope my experience here will help you. And if you're willing, I hope you'll write and share your experience with me and others. When I was going through my experience, I couldn't find any blogs on-line that covered this kind of experience. So I wrote a "BLIARY" (non-interactive) which if you want more details and recovery history, you can find at:

https://faculty.darden.virginia.edu/clawsonj/BLQuad_Ruptures/Bilateral_Quad_Tear_Blog.htm 

If you've had a BLQTR, I hope you'll share your experience with Jim Falvo and me. Very best wishes...

How to Make Career Decisions

I taught a career management course for over 30 years, first at HBS and then at the Darden School, UVA. I'm surprised at how important career decisions are to people and at how little rigor they bring to those decisions. The result is a modified trial-and-error methodology that unfortunately leads to current statistics of something like 5-8 career changes for most graduating MBAs. People use a variety of techniques for making career decisions: serendipity, opportunistic, creation, and peer pressure. Given the high proportion of habitual behavior among most people, a matching approach seems to be the obvious best approach. By matching approach, I mean making decisions based on goodness of fit between personal habits or enduring life themes and the demands of any particular job, career or organizational culture.

The problem is that most people don't know themselves well enough and in enough detail to make a good decision based on goodness of fit between themselves and the demands of a job. Well, you might say, I know myself well. Really? What are your habitual ways of thinking? How do you prefer to process information? What's your preferred social structure and style? Have you analyzed your preferred lifestyle? What about your analytic skills? Energy level? Biochemical brain balances leading to or away from ADD, OCD, BPD, etc.? The danger with any degree of self awareness is what we might call "benign self deception." If you make career decisions based on your momentary reflections of who you are and what you want, be careful! You may overlook some key factors (habits or themes) in your life that will surface after you've taken the job--and then you'll be looking again.

Those who make career decisions on a rigorous self assessment are likely to make better decisions than those who don't. So then the question is, "how can I get a good self assessment to use in my career search and decision making?" There are thousands of self assessment tools out there, some of them trash and some of them quite helpful. But consider this premise: no single instrument is accurate enough or comprehensive enough to give you confidence in making career decisions.

There are just too many variables to consider in one instrument and too many variables in the answering of the questionnaire items to trust your career future or even a part of it to one instrument. The answer is to take several self assessment tools and look for the repeating patterns or themes or the tips of iceberg habits that appear across instruments. This requires some time and effort and some skill at inductive logic (looking at the data and generating the principles). 

Too much time and effort you say? Compare that with the cost of time and effort in working in a job that doesn't fit you and then doing it all over again in 1-3 years. Why not invest up front and narrow your career search to the band of jobs that would likely fit you better?

Whenever you approach your next major personal or professional decision, consider a carefully (preferably data-based) developed list of your dominant Life Themes (cognitive, interpersonal, social, professional, etc.) before you decide. If you choose ignoring them, the odds are you'll be unhappy and be making the same decision again shortly. Save yourself a boatload of time and effort by investing in a good self assessment up front.

My Career Option Workbook (COW) is available for free on my website https://faculty.darden.virginia.edu/clawsonj/index.htm.  There are over 20 self-assessment tools and a framework there for analyzing and distilling your data into a list of Life Themes that taken together describe who you are as a person.  

Which is better: ONLINE courses or TRADITIONAL Classes and Courses

This depends on the kind of “traditional class” you refer to. If it’s a large lecture class with no questions, an online class can be just as (in)effective as a F2F lecture. Lectures are little better than well-written texts. Some rare professors can make large lectures an exciting experience—not many do. AND let’s take into account that people learn in different “preferred” channels. Some people prefer to hear things to reading or “seeing” them. Some people cannot sit and prefer to be active while learning. Brain chemistry also filters in here. A large lecture for a person with ADHD is not the best way to “learn.”

My experience and career has been based on case method classes which include the following:

1. Selection of cases that present real, (not made up) business problems and end with a decision dilemma (not description cases).
2. Selection of accompanying technical notes or chapters that give students some frameworks for analysis.
3. Writing a syllabus that charts a path through related business problems.
4. Students with some work experience who read and analyze the materials in advance.
5. Students who meet in learning teams to make sure everyone is as far as they can go with the case given different backgrounds and experiences.
6. 90 minute classes.
7. Rooms with semi-circular seating so everyone can see and listen to everyone.
8. Rooms with multi-media channels—internet, chalkboards, flip charts, projectors, overhead cameras, audio systems.
9. Instructors who cold call on students (not just volunteers) so everyone has a chance to speak and express their opinions.
10. Instructors who are highly skilled at asking good questions that stimulate thought for everyone.
11. Discussions in which the students talk more than the instructor.
12. Discussions in which what the students say is graded daily by the instructor after class.
13. Discussions that include intense role plays—only when implied by student comments.
14. Discussions in which the instructor is facilitating learning and going at the envelope of the STUDENTS’ understanding not the instructor’s.
15. Discussions characterized by high energy, humor, deep insight, working at the edge of students’ understanding, no interruptions (coming in late, going to the restroom, AV faux pas, etc.) multi-media segments seamlessly intermixed, and complete and intense focus on the “magic bubble” of collective insight in the room.
16. Summaries driven by the students’ insights and only the gaps filled in by the instructor.

THAT’s a “traditional class” to me. I tried to get all of that every class, every course. I’ve taught on-line classes. Invariably they were a miserably poor approximation of what happens in the class outlined above. People on commuter trains, in coffee shops, watching tv etc. in the on-line classes, no facial or body language, connectivity issues, synchronous versus asynchronous structures, and on and on.

ONLINE courses are a reasonable approximation of a lecture class. LECTURE classes are a very poor substitute for a well-done F2F CASE METHOD class. There’s little comparison. 

The ASSUMPTION of the question above is that most students have experienced LECTURES as the typical “traditional” class. That is a travesty of educational institutions and instructors who don’t understand or apply the basics of adult learning.

See Teaching Management published by Cambridge University Press. 

What are VABEs?

VABEs are Values, Assumptions, Beliefs, and Expectations about the way the world IS or SHOULD BE.  VABEs for short.  We all have hundreds even thousands of VABEs.  

Richard Dawkins created the term MEMEs.  Memes are intangible packets of information while GENES are tangible packets of information (we can see them under electron microscopes.)  Dawkins argued in The Selfish Gene that memes (meems), like genes can linger and take root or die out.  

Richard Brodie (writer of Microsoft Word) in the Virus of the Mind asserted three kinds of MEMEs.

1. Identity or Concept memes:  what is "France?"  There is no line on the ground, yet we can think of France the country or "Hindus" as members of a religion or "Smiths" as members of a family.  The "stirrup" is a meme that took root and spread across the world. 

2. Value memes:  what is good and bad?  "Cannibalism is bad" is a value meme not shared by all people.  "Polygamy is bad" "Stealing is bad" etc.  Any value judgment.  Values usually carry an emotional component and can be linked to Concept memes: "Those people are bad."  

3. Instrumental memes: If/then propositions. "If I jump, I will fall."  "If you put your finger in boiling water, it will hurt."  "If I obey, they won't hurt me."  etc.  

VABEs are like memes but with a stronger, clearer, more personal emotional component.  
     "I Value honesty."  
     "I Assume they are telling me the truth."
     "I Believe they are telling me the truth." 
     "I Expect people to tell the truth."  

VABEs typically revolve around a central core element: for example "honesty" above.  The meme "honesty" can mean different things to different people.  What is honesty?  VABEs sharpen that concept to include an individual's attitude or stance toward that concept--and therefore has a stronger, clearer emotional component.  

Daniel Kahneman and other students of Amos Tversky have demonstrated that humans in the majority make decisions based on their VABEs (although they didn't use that term) rather than on actual evidence and hard data.  

In other words, "it all comes down to VABEs."  VABEs trump data.  Beliefs supercede science.  Assumptions dominate analysis and logic.  Expectations blur perception of information.  

The confirmation bias is another data point on this.  

The term VABEs was mine first introduced in Level Three Leadership now in the 5th edition.  Level One refers to visible behavior, what we can capture on film.  Level Two refers to Conscious Thought--which we may or may not reveal at Level One.  Although sometimes, often, it "leaks" in a sigh, a frown, a shrug of the shoulders.  Level Three refers to our semi-conscious VABEs.  Semi-conscious because we are often unaware of them yet they reveal themselves in our behavior.  Relate to Langer's work on Mindfulness and Mindlessness.  A summary of my life's work appears at www.nadobimakoba.com.  

It all comes down to VABEs.  "IT" meaning human behavior, human decision making, human thought, even science.  (See Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.)  

What if I didn't get what I needed as a child?

I infer from your question a difficult childhood, perhaps abuse. Those first six to ten years are critical in that they form the basic neural-neural and neural-muscular synaptic connections that we carry with us. Changing them is possible and challenging. My wife was physically and emotionally abused as a child to the point where they “almost” put her in foster care. She learned early on that “everything was her fault.” When I married her at her age 24, knowing nothing of this, she was ‘tiny.’ 43 years later, she still says “I’m sorry” more than any other person I’ve met. We’ve worked hard with therapy and coaching on this so she’s much more outgoing, vivacious, and living “inside-out” rather that “outside-in” than she was then. And I was raised in an abusive alcoholic home so have had my own issues.

Here are some things that helped me/us.

1. Good therapists. Not all therapists are skilled. Find the ones that really help you.
2. Reading. My wife doesn’t read psychology, but I have a doctorate in human behavior in organizations (not clinical). Necessary Passages by Judith Viorst. Choice Therapy by William Glasser. I’m Ok, You’re Okay. They F*#k You Up by Oliver James. Love, Guilt and Reparation by Melanie Klein. A Guide to Rational Living by Albert Ellis. Adult Children of Alcoholics. Just for starters. It will be a lifelong issue. Even 1 or 2 books a year will help if you read them carefully.
3. Understand that you cannot change the past, but you can work to understand the “holes” you were left with and deal with them. The first one is to let go of or “divorce” your parents. Yes, it would have been better had we all had good and capable parents. We didn’t. When their lingering behavior and judgments no longer mean so much to you, their influence will begin to evaporate. It’s very difficult to divorce your parents. And it’s a necessary passage for those who were mistreated. I found my wife curled up in bed sobbing at age 33 because her mother in a phone call said she was “repulsive.” At some point to live a relatively normal life, one must divorce toxic parents.
4. Freud noted that we spend our adult lives dealing with the residue of our childhoods. Again, getting beyond that means no longer allowing those early “lessons” to dominate our lives and our self-esteems.
5. Reduce the power that the opinions of others have. Living “outside-in” is necessary for a functioning society, AND too much OI is unhealthy and creates doormats. Living above 50% “inside-out” means listening to others’ feedback as data but protecting your self-esteem. The gap between our IDEAL SELF (who we think we should be) and our SELF-IMAGE (who we think we are) affects our SELF-ESTEEM. BOTH IS and SI are affected by others. Don’t expect too much of yourself and don’t let others’ opinions especially your younger parents’ affect your SI overmuch. We live OI because we fear rejection. Examine that carefully. From whom? Why? Rejection by parents? God? Clergy? Friends? Nameless faceless people on the street?
6. Exercise creates good moods. Endorphins affect our mood positively. Exercise regularly. I took up non-contact “traditional” taekwondo at 52 and my self-confidence grew weekly. It’s a great system to build flexibility, strength, aerobic capacity, and mental toughness. Or walk briskly for 30′ a day.
7. Find a partner who loves you for who you ARE not whom they want you to be. That’s unconditional love. Most religions are built on conditional love—you have to do or be something else to be accepted. This just reinforces OI behavior.
8. Face your feelings. Stay away from anything that avoids dealing with your feelings. No drugs, alcohol, looking for love in promiscuity, tobacco. You will grow when you recognize and accept that you didn’t get what you needed when you were young and those evil substitutes won’t fill the hole.
9. Understand that brain chemistry plays a major role. Shadow Syndromes by John Ratey. Different brain chemistry issues can be alleviated with the right medications. My marriage was saved by ADHD medication for my wife.
10. Find a career you love. Create your purpose in life and pursue it. Don’t wait for others or God to tell you what to do. What do you want to spend YOUR life doing? Focus on that and do what you have to do to become really good at it. Let go of the VABE that a job is just a means to a small paycheck. Get out of the DO-REST-DO-REST cycle and into the DO-REST-LEARN-DO-REST-LEARN daily cycle.
11. Fight for your emotional and mental health. Don’t give up. It’s hard work. And it’s possible. If you fight for it.  

What Social Skills Should I Learn?

If only we all could/would!  

1. Respect the rights and views of others. Don’t abuse other people. (One of our Family Principles. Personal Web - James G. Clawson
2. Listen without judgment. Recognize your own VABEs and that the VABE “I’m better than you.” is destructive to relationships. (VABEs are Values, Assumptions, Beliefs and Expectations about the way the world is or should be.)
3. Eliminate your “buts.” “I agree with everything you say, but …” is a little lie. Replace your buts with “ands.”
4. Don’t disguise your opinions as questions. “Don’t you think that ….” puts people on the defensive and shifts responsibility for your views. OWN your opinions. “I believe….”
5. Avoid the stative verbs. “This IS the way things are.” Really? That’s your opinion. Avoid making factoid statements, opinions presented as facts. (See Albert Ellis, A Guide to Rational Living. )
6. Don’t discount your own opinion. “This maybe stupid but….” rather → “I believe…” Own your opinions.
7. Avoid the 2nd person. “You have a problem.” creates defensiveness. In reality, a problem is a Want-Got Gap for Someone. Someone is not getting What they Want. When I say, “you have a problem” in reality “I have a problem: you aren’t behaving the way I think you should.” OWN your own problems.
8. Respect the Commons. You can do as you wish in your own bubble. In the social world, we all have a responsibility to respect our common air, water, soil, flora, fauna and the underprivileged. Don’t litter—and in fact, pick up trash. Recycle. Spread smiles and cheerfulness instead of drama and vitriol. Be a jerk at home. Be a citizen in public.
9. Focus on how we are SIMILAR as humans and UNIQUE as individuals and DOWNPLAY the intermediate tribal differences of color, ethnicity, religion and culture. Focusing on the differences creates conflict. Focusing on our commonalities creates bonds.
10. Don’t lie to yourself or others. Lying repeatedly will put you in a fantasy world unable to deal with reality.
11. Build your Self-Esteem mostly on your Self-Image and only partially on the opinions of others. Let feedback be informative but not paralyzing. Don’t expect to be “perfect” (whatever that is), rather be kind to yourself as you learn. If you have OCD, manage it. Self-Esteem is a result of the gap between your Ideal Self (what you want) and your Self-Image (how you see yourself). Be kind to yourself.
12. Learn to learn. Love discovery. Seek knowledge. Seek to know how things really are—not just how others tell you they are.  

What's your favorite subject and why?

The way things are. I am and have been curious for decades about understanding the world around me—especially human behavior. I want to know the way things ARE not the way others believe them to be or want them to be. Eventually this led me to lose confidence in the assertions of others who didn’t have or understand scientific discovery. I’m less interested in opinions and beliefs than in data and evidence. For years I lived more “outside-in” listening to and being influenced by parents and others who were diligent in imprinting me with their beliefs. Late in life, (about age 50) I realized that much of what they had told me just wasn’t true. I despise lies and liars.

Eagleman’s book, The Brain, You, points out how our brains are encased in a box in darkness with no outside information except what comes in through our neural networks. Learning how to screen that data for what is accurate and consistent WHILE dealing with the more than 300 hormones floating around in there is a real challenge. I’ve moved from “In God We Trust” to “In Truth We Trust.”

Early childhood development has a huge impact on our lives. Freud once noted that we spend our adult lives dealing with the residue of our childhoods. Those first 1–10 years involve physical neural-neural and neural-muscular networks that are difficult to change. Imagine if you or I had been born in a different region and culture of the globe—our worldviews would be dramatically different.

Faith, emotions, spiritual feelings are, I’ve discovered, every bit as strong, zealous and deeply held in one region as the next. And ultimately are undependable and capricious. Hard evidence might be re-interpreted over time, and it’s hard, repeatable, “there.”
So my favorite subject is “how are things really?” To that end, I collected data for 20 years (50–70) and after retiring wrote A Song of Humanity: A Science-based Alternative to the World’s Scriptures to counter the mountains of mythological rubbish that is perpetuated all over the world. See Getting Below the Surface and A Song of Humanity

This is an eclectic “subject.” To me, the study of any academic subject in isolation is doomed to an incomplete view of the way things are. Behavioral Economists recently got Nobel Prizes for the insight that people make decisions based on their VABEs over data and logic. For most people, VABEs trump data. Cultural anthropologists, psychologists, and childhood development psychologists understood this long since. (VABEs are Values, Assumptions, Beliefs and Expectations about the way the world is or should be). Consider the “field” of leadership. “Leadership” begs the question “to what end?” Which is the “strategy” question. Where are we going? Which in turn implies the “change” question. If we go from here to there, we must change. So “leadership” is really “leading strategic change.” To separate the three into different subjects as many (most) schools and several of my clients have is, to me, folly. We can study the heart but truthfully only in connection with the circulatory system and the other 12 systems in the human body.

So, the way things ARE. It’s been a fascinating, life-long search that is far from complete. (btw, see Berger & Luckman, The Social Construction of Reality for more.)  

How can I stimulate better sanitation at my school?

This is a wonderful question. One of my personal VABEs and family principles is “Clean as you go: leave your campsite cleaner than you found it.” Here are some ideas:

1. Be a good role model, pick up trash when you see it. I do, even on the golf course or on the street or in my building.
2. Students in Japanese schools were/are involved in maintaining their schools. Organize a cleaning crew with logos, badges, and spend 30 - 60 minutes after school to clean up, even the bathrooms. Organize with school administration.
3. Hang up signs (with permission): “Cleanliness is next to godliness” and “Trash breeds disease!” or “Don’t be a Litter-Bug!” or … you make up some.
4. Meet with the school custodians to see how you and your “Cleaner Crew” (Polish Posse? Neatniks?) could help them.
5. Learn and teach to sneeze or cough INTO YOUR SHIRTS, not elbows or hands (yuck). Keep your germ cloud inside your shirt.
6. Be prepared to deal with mockers and scoffers. Don’t let them bother you. Cleanliness and neatness is a habit that will serve you well throughout your life.
7. Work with the school to provide trash cans at all the usual places—and help empty them.
8. Seek public or private funding for better sanitation systems if necessary.
9. Take pictures of trash (and rats) and post here and there to encourage people to “clean as you go.”
10. Organize your Cleaning Crew to clean up after sporting events.
11. Organize an award ceremony for the custodians. Recognize and respect what they do for you all!
12. Give out SMILEY FACE stickers to students who clean up or pick up. When you see someone picking up a piece of trash, put a yellow sticker on them or their backpack. See how many you can get. A Smiley Face on EVERY Backpack! 8=)
13. Organize a monthly award for Clean Colleague of the Month—with most stickers.
14. Have debates on the TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS. That is, how abuse of the Common spaces (air, water, soil/land, flora, fauna, and the underprivileged) affect us all. Pictures of landfills, polluted air, water, etc. Why should we care about the Commons?

Maybe one or more of those will help you get started. Cleanliness is a habit. Don’t clean later, clean as you go. Don’t litter. Clean up your own messes. Remember, many students do not learn this at home. Positive encouragement will do better than criticism.  

What should I learn and how could I learn that?

Well, IF you wanted to learn about

1. The origin of the universe
2. The origin of mankind
3. How mankind spread across the globe
4. The relationship between rights and laws
5. What kind of gods humans have believed in over the millennia
6. Why we should be very aware of dictator conquerors
7. The role of genes in our lives
8. The dominant role of Values, Assumptions, Beliefs and Expectations about the way the world is or should be (VABEs for short) and how VABEs dominant rational decision making
9. How to become a person
10. How to find your purpose in life
11. The nature of biological mating
12. How to build relationships
13. The nature and impact of CULTURE (if you had been born in a different part of the world, think how your world view would be different!)
14. Stories of real families from all over the globe, not just one region
15. Best insights and learnings of several modern executives
16. The nature of Air
17. The nature of Water
18. The nature of Money and how to manage it
19. The challenges that face our world going forward (including the danger to the Commons -air, water, soil, flora, fauna, and the underpriliveged)
20. and how the Earth will die

THEN read A Song of Humanity: A Science-based Alternative to the World’s Scriptures by Only One Man (me). Getting Below the Surface and/or A Song of Humanity 20 years of data gathering, 20 pages of references, 900+ footnotes.
Yes, that’s all there. A foundational guide to who we are and what we need to know to live rationally.  

What is "critical thinking?"

Read, for example, Kahneman’s Fast Thinking Slow Thinking or the works of Amos Tversky or the Evolving Self by Csikszentmihalyi. The core is this: MOST people, the VAST majority of people think DEDUCTIVELY, that is they begin with their beliefs (VABEs) and force the data to fit them (confirmation bias). Relatively few people think INDUCTIVELY, that is, they begin with raw data and gradually draw logical inferences that lead to conclusions (new VABEs). Not many people can tolerate VABE abrasions. Instead, they tend to deny the data, deny the messenger, deny the relevance to them or deny their ability to change anything.

BTW, VABEs are Values, Assumptions, Beliefs and Expectations about the way the world is or should be. See my book Level Three Leadership 5e at eg Getting Below the Surface

The world’s religions continue after millennia to perpetuate mountains of mythological rubbish about where we came from and the history of the universe. See for example, The History of God (Armstrong), The God Delusion (Dawkins) etc. The religious fights against science (Ptolemy vs Copernicus—see The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Kuhn.) over the centuries rages on in today’s “modern” times.

Yes, this is true of scientists as well. (Again, Kuhn). Not all “science” is good science. AND beginning with the data rather than someone’s VABEs about where thunder comes from, global warming, abuse of the Commons (air, water, soil, flora, fauna, and the under privileged), sexual orientation, and human “rights” is a better short-term, mid-term, and long-term way to think. And doing that will make one immediately a “critical thinker.” Compared dramatically with the deductive thinkers.

There are millions of false and destructive VABEs in the world. For example, “maximizing profits is the core of capitalism.” What the world needs is “sustainable capitalism” that doesn’t abuse the Commons and is responsible for its products to final disposal.

After retiring from academe and a global consulting practice, I wrote A Song of Humanity: A Science-Based Alternative to the World’s Scriptures, an attempt to provide a data-based alternative to the mythology perpetuated by all of the world’s religions. See on Getting Below the Surface I just didn’t want to die without having done something more to combat (be critical of) the deductive thinking that dominates the human population.
Consider: If you or I had been born in a different part of the globe, our world views would be dramatically different. The training we get from ages 0–6 (or 10 depending on the child development researchers you read) has a huge impact on our world views and behavior. We literally form neural-neural and neural-muscular synaptic connections laboriously over time. Changing those is a challenging, but possible, task.

People feel comfortable in their VABEs, their faiths, their conclusions about the way the world is and they fight vehemently to maintain those VABEs. Even when the contradictions and hypocrisies are obvious. Festinger noted that we try to reduce “cognitive dissonance” (VABE abrasions) — usually by changing the way we look at the data we have. (confirmation bias)

SO, in my view, universal intellectual standards begin with INDUCTIVE logic and thinking and that by nature is “critical” of DEDUCTIVE or self-reinforcing thinking.

A big part of the issue is the desire that all humans have to be accepted—by someone. We live “outside-in” conforming to rules and regulations because of the fear of rejection. Rejection by whom? God? Parents? Clergy? Elders? Bosses? Nameless faceless people on the streets? Neighbors? Police? SELF??? It’s a constant effort to decide where, when, and how far to push those “accepted” boundaries of our local culture and society. 23 countries, 23!, still tolerate female circumcision for example—a horribly destructive and utterly un-scientific practice. (see for example, Infidel by Hirsi)

Living totally “inside-out,” doing only what we want is not a viable option. That’s a formula for chaos, anarchy, and now, rapidly increasing destruction of the Commons (air, water, soil, flora, fauna, and the underprivileged). Think landfills. Oceans as landfills. Declining fish populations. etc.

So the challenge is for inductive thinkers worldwide to become more persuasive and powerful. The challenge is HUGE, again, because most people protect their VABEs with deep-seated vigor. Data to most people simply is not convincing. Even repeatedly corroborated data is simply not convincing. 

 VABEs trump data for the vast majority of people.  Critical thinking challenges VABEs.

Think of human behavior as having three levels:  

1. Visible Behavior that you can capture on film.
2. Conscious Thought which we may or may not reveal at Level One.
3. Semi-conscious VABEs.  

Then, what percentage of each of these, in your experience, are habitual, that is, mindlessly repetitive?  Having asked people all over the world, the rough result is 75%, 85% and 95%+ respectively.  How does one think about changing the way people behave, think and believe?  

What skills are necessary for an MBA?

Most business schools have about ten disciplines: finance, accounting, economics, decision analysis, operations, ethics, communications, leadership and organizational behavior, marketing, and strategy. Each of those disciplines decide roughly what it means to be a business “master” of their content. If one “passes” those courses, one has, roughly defined, achieved a “master’s” level of “business administration.”

As for the skills thing. If you mean skills to get in an MBA program, strong reading and writing skills, good math skills, good study habits, good team skills, and relatively high energy are necessary to do well.

As for learning skills during an MBA program, well, one other responder has said there are none. I disagree. If you go to a strong school with a heavy emphasis on case method you will be asked to learn the following skills: working hard, forming conclusions from data (inductive logic), working in learning teams, and striving to influence people in group settings. A good case curriculum will present you with as many as 600 current business problems with background data and theoretical frameworks and ask you to debate your peers (forget your instructor) about the issue and demand some kind of decision-making. Every case class is a mini-leadership laboratory: can I present my analysis cogently and concisely and persuasively? If your CLASSMATES aren’t listening, that’s a big red flag.

Once an MBA graduates, and realize “an MBA is not an MBA is not an MBA”—they vary widely—one must learn the specific systems of the company they go to work for. They won’t have the company specific skills until they learn how to get things done in that company. Frequently, if the MBA is well-trained, they will be able to begin influencing processes right away. (I did that in my first job in international banking-writing computer programs to do things the bank wanted done faster and thereby modifying existing processes.)

Influence, leadership, team participating, team building, communicating, political skills, process innovation, industry specific analytic tools, strategy formulation, broader galvanizing SKILLS will continue to be developed IF the individual is a learning person and IF the organization is a learning organization.
MBA graduates from quality programs have knowledge and skills. Some of those skills were strong as they entered the MBA program and were further developed in school. The learning curve in a good MBA program is unique to each individual: for some it’s steep, for others, not so much.




I hope this helps. One way to “test” your “MBA-ready-or-not” skills is to take the GMAT and see how it turns out. In the end, I assert “thinking” is a skill, a highly important skill—and it’s useless unless married to execution skills as noted above.