It may not have been as devastating as the Great Depression, but the recession of 2008 changed a lot of lives, in many cases, not for the better.
As New York Times columnist David Brooks writes, after such a change, “a certain number of people are dispossessed. They lose identity, self-respect and hope.
“They begin to base their sense of self-worth on their tribe, not their behavior,” he continues.
“They become mired in their resentments, spiraling deeper into the addiction of their own victimology,” he adds.
Brooks discussed this in relation to national politics in a column published July 15, 2016, in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
If you were dealt a blow sometime around 2008, or since, you probably can relate.
Perhaps you lost a job, and haven’t been able to find one that pays you anywhere close to the job you lost. Perhaps you lost your house.
You keep hearing that things are getting better. The economy is picking up, say the experts. Yet, you don’t feel it.
You tend to blame people, or things, that really are not to blame. Even the employer who canned you, if that happened to you, probably was forced to.
Bear this in mind: blaming takes valuable energy away from solving the problem at hand.
Blaming is also easy. Solving the problem may be more difficult.
You may also hear that employers WANT to hire more people now. Yet, you are not among those they are looking for.
An example might be that police forces and the military are looking for new recruits. But you might not be the best candidate for that because, for example, you are too old. Even if you are the right age, perhaps you are not in the kind of physical shape to deal with the rigors of the job.
Perhaps you’ve just graduated college, with a good bit of debt, but employers want something more than just your raw brain to train. They want built-in expertise that you don’t have.
Therefore, you feel you have nowhere to turn. The natural instinct is to blame.
However, there are many ways out there to take your problem into your own hands, and help others do the same. For one of the best, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau.
The economy is going through a transition to the information age. As Brooks points out, it went through something similar in the 1880s, when it transitioned from an agriculture base to an industrial base.
“America still has great resources at the local and social level,” Brooks writes. He believes local is more powerful.
When a natural disaster befalls us, we must decide to rebuild or move. The choice is clearly in our hands. In this era, we have choices. The choice to be a victim is not healthy. The choice to take matters into our own hands, perhaps with the help of great local resources, is preferable.
Doing so may mean changing what you did, and how you did it, or getting used to something new, different and, at least at first, uncomfortable. But it can be done if you just look for the right vehicle for you.
If you have the urge to blame, remember this: You can’t embrace what is gone forever. But it can help you embrace what comes next.
Peter
Tag Archives: David Brooks
GRIT IS A GOOD THING, BUT …
#grit #innovate #GradePointAverage
Creative people are good at asking new questions, but the grade-point average rewards those who can answer other people’s questions.
So writes New York Times columnist David Brooks, in a column published in the May 13, 2016, edition of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Brooks calls the grade-point average “one of the more destructive elements in American education.”
“In life, we want independent thinking and risk-taking, but the GPA system encourages students to be deferential and risk-averse, giving their teachers what they want,” Brooks writes.
In other words, the education system highly rewards students who are good at a lot of things, rather than those who are very good at one or two things.
Even if you are not good at something, the education system wants students to use their grit, and do things they don’t like, to grind out a good GPA.
There is certainly nothing wrong with grit. It helps people overcome obstacles and gets people through difficult times.
But the education system is designed for students to learn things, and they are evaluated by how well they can spit those things back.
“Schools across America are busy teaching their students to be gritty and to have ‘character’ – by which they mean skills like self-discipline and resilience that contribute to career success,” Brooks writes.
In other words, they teach kids to be good employees, rather than innovators.
In today’s world, innovators are handsomely rewarded, providing they solve a problem that needs solving.
In one adage, the “A” students end up working for the “C” students.
How does one deal with this?
There are a couple of ways. First, be a rebel.
Take the grit that you learned to develop in school, and use it to innovate.
Thomas Edison tried many times before he successfully invented the light bulb, so he had enough grit to know to stay with his idea.
If you are not an innovator, or if you have resigned yourself that you will work for someone else forever, there are many alternative ways to make money outside of a traditional job. For one of the best, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau. Sometimes duplication, rather than innovation, can create potential fortunes.
As for the education system, it’s unlikely to change anytime soon. Learning is difficult to quantify, and the GPA system is, up to now, the best way educators have found to quantify learning.
In recent times, an array of competency tests has come into vogue. These tests have been used to evaluate teachers, much to the chagrin of the educators.
A good teacher should not be penalized, since students’ performance on competency tests can be attributed to many things.
So use the education system to cultivate grit, but use that grit to go out and do great things for others.
Peter
LITTLE LOVES, BIG LOVES AND WHAT’S NEEDED
#LittleLoves #BigLoves #DreamBig
We all have little loves in our lives. We also have big loves.
What’s the difference?
New York Times columnist David Brooks discussed this in a column published June 4, 2016, in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
One might think that little loves are for our favorite foods, and big loves might be for our family. That’s not the case, as Brooks writes.
“In daily life, we have big and little loves,” Brooks writes. “The little loves, like for one’s children, one’s neighborhood or one’s garden, animate nurture, compassion and care. The big loves, like for America or the cause of global human rights, inspire courage and greatness,” Brooks writes.
In other words, the little loves are beautiful and are intimate and romantic. The big loves are sublime, and inspire awe – “what you might feel when you look at a mountain range or tornado,” Brooks writes.
He says the little loves are fraying in today’s society, and big loves are almost a foreign language. Pessimism is in vogue, according to Brooks.
Why is pessimism in vogue? Certainly, a lot of folks have gone through hard times in recent years. The security we had known just a decade ago is either gone or disappearing.
Yes, there is reason for some to be pessimistic. When a secure foundation suddenly gives way, one can be shaken.
When one is shaken, he must learn, to quote a Taylor Swift song title, to “Shake It Off.”
That’s easier said than done, to be sure. So one must start with recognizing what is good in his life. Family, friends etc., make a life, while a job makes a living.
When your living goes away, your life does not. That’s a good place to start to “Shake It Off.”
When your living goes away, you must replace it. Getting a new job that pays as much as the one you just lost can be as much of a challenge as scaling Mt. Everest. So, what can one do?
There are many ways out there to make money without a traditional job. To check out one of the best, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau. To those open to looking outside the traditional job-for-money arena, these alternatives may provide an enlightening escape.
“Before the country can achieve great things, it has to relearn the ability to desire big things,” Brooks concludes. “It has to be willing to love again, even amid disappointments – to love things that are awesome, heroic and sublime.”
You CAN dream big. You can believe that, perhaps, by adjusting your outlook on life and your pursuit of a living, the big loves will return and the little loves will become greater.
Consuming pessimism wastes energy. Consuming optimism brings great relief. Perhaps your parents told you as you went to bed as a child not to let the bedbugs bite. Today’s “bedbugs” keep many people up at night. Fight them. Fumigate them from your mind. It’s OK to stay involved and aware of what’s going on, but don’t let bad things control your thoughts.
Don’t wish for life to get better, while believing it will only get worse. Embrace what is good. Fondly remember the past, but believe the future will be better than the present.
Dream big again, and bring back the big loves.
Peter
DON’T PANIC: INVESTORS ARE CHANGING THE WORLD FOR THE GOOD
#investors #stockmarket #socialproblems #purposeoriented
It’s tough to love the stock market with the volatility we’ve seen in recent weeks.
Certainly, both the market and the government have tarnished reputations, as New York Times columnist David Brooks recently pointed out.
But there are a few big-money types who have tried to use the market to solve social problems. Brooks writes that these investors have opposable minds. They are part profit-oriented – nothing is done in the markets without someone making money – and part purpose-oriented.
These investors have created organizations that look a little like businesses, a little like a social-service providers and a little like charities – or some mixture of the three, Brooks writes. His column was published in July 2015 in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Ben & Jerry’s ice cream led the first wave in this sector, Brooks says, but now you’ve got a burgeoning array of social-capitalist tools to address problems. They range from B Corporations like Warby Parker, which gives free glasses to the poor, to social impact bonds, Brooks writes.
Brooks cites a phenomenon is called impact investing, which seeks out companies that are intentionally designed to both make a profit and provide a measurable and accountable social good.
We all would like to put our hard-earned savings into companies that do good. But as a small saver, or one who is diligently saving a small portion of what he or she earns toward retirement, one has to focus on getting the most growth and income from his contributions.
For these folks, gyrations in the market, like the ones we’ve seen recently, cause great consternation. But most experts in the field would advise them not to panic. Usually, what goes down goes back up, as we have seen. You see, those with some cushion in their accounts, and with good advisers, will have raised cash by selling some of the underperforming investments, so they can use that cash to buy some great stocks cheaply when the overall market tumbles.
Remember that when the market reacts this way, an individual stock is just following the market. It does not mean the companies, or their products, are no good. Those good companies will come back because investors see discount shopping opportunities in tumbling markets.
So, if you are small, careful investor, who has put his or her money into good companies or good funds, relax. When the market drops, it’s usually a temporary glitch. Stick to your original plan, and follow the advice of the person you trust. If it helps, don’t watch the news – at least the parts about how the market is doing. If you know that your savings and investment plans are well-thought-out, cringe if you must at what’s going on, but breathe easily.
Someday, you may have enough money to make a real impact on a global problem. For now, though, secure your own nest egg little by little, and don’t let the market gyrations get you down.
Of course, there are many other worthwhile things you can do to enhance your wealth. For one of the best, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau. If you are thinking of getting a second, part-time job to throw a little bit more toward your retirement, think a little outside the box. You just might find a way to better utilize any free time you would devote to a second job, and have a lot more fun than a second job would be.
It’s a marvelous thing that some smart, rich folks are looking for ways to solve the globe’s problems with their own money. We all may wish to be in that situation, but, for those who are not rich, it’s best to work on enhancing your own wealth FIRST, and help others do the same.
When, and only when, you’ve done that, by all means feel free to make an impact on the world. Work hard, play hard, save and invest hard. Help others, and you will be enriched. Once enriched, keep helping others. It will bring you great joy.
Peter
PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE: BE AN IMPACT INVESTOR
#investors #publicprivate #impactinvesting
Who will solve the great problems of the nation and the world?
Will it be governments or private citizens?
Or, will it be a little of both?
It was thought that private citizens would never solve anything unless they can make money – gobs of money.
Governments, on the other hand, don’t have any money, but spend it anyway, sometimes futilely.
New York Times columnist David Brooks discussed the new concept of “impact investing.” That is private money going into investments that attack some of the world’s problems. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution published his column Feb. 3, 2015.
Brooks says that the private market, prone to devastating crashes and producing widening inequality, combined with gridlocked, ineffective government aren’t getting the job done.
So a group of smart people with opposable minds – part profit-oriented and part purpose-oriented – have created organizations that look a little like businesses, a little like social-service providers and a little like charities – or some mixture of the three, Brooks writes.
They are creating new impact funds, social stock exchanges and include players like Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse. The first wave of this sector was led by Ben & Jerry’s ice cream. Now you have an array of capitalist tools ranging from B Corporations like Warby Parker, which gives free glasses to the poor, to social impact bonds. Brooks writes. He quotes at 2010 report by the Rockefeller Foundation and JPMorgan that says impact investing capital could amount to $1 trillion by 2020.
So what’s happening here? Did government failures in helping its people make wealthy people feel guilty – guilty enough to accept a potentially lower profit to help lots of people?
Capitalism is a marvelous institution that has gotten a bad rap. People are beginning to realize that it’s not how rich you become that matters, but how you become rich. Did you do well by doing good? Were you helping others succeed as you were succeeding? Once you’ve achieved success, did you hoard all your gains, or did you use them to help those worthy of your help?
It’s clear not everyone is going to get rich. But there are many vehicles out there that allow ANYONE to get rich. For one of the best, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau. Check out a model in which success only comes by helping others succeed.
Think back to the days when you were young, and just starting out in the workforce. You probably had an entry-level job for, say, a small business. When the time came for you to move on to other things to better your life, how did your boss treat you when you left? Was he wishing you well, telling you he was proud to have you work for him and offer any lifelong assistance (not necessarily financial) that you might need? Or, was he the type that was upset that you were quitting and leaving him short-staffed? The former likely was a pleasure to work for, because he looked out for you, and you, in turn, made sure you did your best for him. The latter likely had employees who were indifferent toward the boss, didn’t care whether his business succeeded and probably worked under a good deal of stress.
If you become a boss, which kind would you like to be? If you become an investor, which kind would you like to be? People who work hard on being better people tend to have success follow them. Those who don’t, and still achieve success, probably have lots of current and former employees, who got relatively little in return, to thank.
Peter
CHARACTER, DRIVE AND POVERTY
#character
To paraphrase an old adage: give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime.
We’ve developed a culture in which the poor receive aid without conditions. We believe that they are poor because of bad luck or circumstances, or because their parents or other family was poor.
We, as a society, believe some are poor because they are lazy, resentful or don’t have the skills to hold a job. The poor believe they are poor because they have been discriminated against, treated badly by employers or, they believe the government somehow owes them.
How we would love to change the thought process of poverty. On Aug. 4, 2014, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ran two columns – one by the New York Times’ David Brooks, and the other by engineer and former Atlanta Falcon William White – that discussed the thought process of the poor.
Brooks talked about character development among the poor. He quotes Richard Reeves of the Brookings Institution as saying that both progressive and conservative orthodoxies in dealing with poverty do so in the abstract. He believes the orthodoxies view the poor as a species of “hollow man,” whose destiny is shaped by economic structures alone.
White, on the other hand, grew up poor in Lima, Ohio. His father worked in a foundry, in which the only air-conditioned place was the engineer’s office. He was determined to succeed in school and become an engineer. As it happened, he also had a successful 11-year career in the National Football League, after graduating with an engineering degree from The Ohio State University.
What both Brooks and White are saying is that circumstances shouldn’t define a person. They also say that fewer people would be in dire circumstances if they just had the belief that they could get out of them.
We, as a society, can’t want success for anyone more than he wants it for himself, as White has shown. We hate to see anyone live in poverty, but we can’t give anyone the desire to get out. If you have the desire to get out, you WILL get out. You will fight through your circumstances and become successful.
Brooks says we should teach people in dire circumstances several things to help them out of their own situations. First, we teach good habits. If you change behavior, you will change disposition eventually, Brooks writes. He cites many government programs that help poor parents and students to observe basic etiquette and practice small, but regular, acts of self-restraint.
Then, we have to show them opportunity. Most of us, Brooks writes, can only deny short-term pleasures because we see the path between self-denial now and something better down the road.
Third, exemplars. Character is not developed individually. It is instilled by communities and transmitted by elders, Brooks writes. That brings to mind another adage: if you can’t change the people around you, change the people around you.
Fourth, standards. People can only practice restraint after they determine the sort of person they want to be, Brooks writes.
In other words, give people something to shoot for, instill in them the belief that they can get it and show them what they need to do to get it.
If your circumstances aren’t what you want them to be, there are many vehicles out there that could help the person who wants to change his life, and has a vision of what he wants his life to be. For one of the best, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau.
So if you don’t like your circumstances, don’t wallow and blame. Dream that life can be better, believe that YOU can make it better, then step up and do what you need to do.
Peter
YOUR THOUGHTS SAY A LOT ABOUT YOU
#thoughts
What characterizes your thoughts?
Are your thoughts courageous? Are they fanciful? Are they rewarding? Can you be a hero just sitting at your desk, thinking?
New York Times columnist David Brooks discussed this in depth in a Sept. 1, 2014, column published in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
As Brooks writes, it’s easy to see heroism in a soldier who displays courage under fire. But can someone sitting at a desk, alone, be a hero? He can, with the right thoughts.
Brooks cites the 2007 book “Intellectual Virtues,” by Robert C. Roberts of Baylor University and W. Jay Wood of Wheaton College. The authors list six characteristics that would determine whether you might be a thought hero.
First, Brooks writes, one must love to learn and be ardently curious. In other words, a thought hero would seek the most information he can before he talked about, or formed an opinion about, something.
Secondly, one needs courage. It’s not just a willingness to hold unpopular views, as Brooks writes, but, as he puts it, the reckless thinker takes a few pieces of information and leaps to some faraway conspiracy theory.
Third is firmness. That’s the middle ground between surrendering one’s beliefs at the slightest opposition, and holding dogmatically to a belief against all evidence. You might say it’s an upgrade from wishy-washy, and a dial-down from arrogance.
The fourth is humility – not letting a good story get in the way of the facts, to paraphrase a quote attributed to Mark Twain.
Then there’s autonomy – forming your own thoughts, not just adopting as gospel what someone else may have told you. You may gladly accept others’ guidance, but, in the end, what you think should be your own.
Finally, there is generosity. If you know something that someone else doesn’t know, you share it – willingly and for free. It also means hearing others as they wish to be heard – not looking to pounce on others’ errors, Brooks writes.
All this adds up to openness of thought. To open one’s mind, one must also open his heart and soul. Today’s society is loaded with what the comedians call “truthiness.” Ads, political statements, online postings and other communications are loaded with stretched truth, even outright falsehoods.
The dangers we face have to do with what we accept as true. Along the way, if we have constant curiosity, we might find that something we were told was true by someone or something we respect may not be true. We have to recognize those situations as we encounter them.
So, after reviewing the “Intellectual Virtues,” where do your thoughts fit in? Are you truly open to the truth? If you are, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau. You’ll see and hear real, truthful stories from real people. You might even like what you hear and see.
It’s possible to become more intellectually virtuous if you are honest about yourself and your thoughts. Change can be hard. Improvements may come slowly. But if you desire intellectual virtue, go for it! Do what you need to do to get it. It may not be as hard to attain as you might think. And, others you never thought would may follow you.
Peter
CHARACTER, DRIVE AND POVERTY
To paraphrase an old adage: give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime.
We’ve developed a culture in which the poor receive aid without conditions. We believe that they are poor because of bad luck or circumstances, or because their parents or other family was poor.
We, as a society, believe some are poor because they are lazy, resentful or don’t have the skills to hold a job. The poor believe they are poor because they have been discriminated against, treated badly by employers or, they believe the government somehow owes them.
How we would love to change the thought process of poverty. On Aug. 4, 2014, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ran two columns – one by the New York Times’ David Brooks, and the other by engineer and former Atlanta Falcon William White – that discussed the thought process of the poor.
Brooks talked about character development among the poor. He quotes Richard Reeves of the Brookings Institution as saying that both progressive and conservative orthodoxies in dealing with poverty do so in the abstract. He believes the orthodoxies view the poor as a species of “hollow man” whose destiny is shaped by economic structures alone.
White, on the other hand, grew up poor in Lima, Ohio. His father worked in a foundry, in which the only air-conditioned place was the engineer’s office. He was determined to succeed in school and become an engineer. As it happened, he also had a successful 11-year career in the National Football League, after graduating with an engineering degree from The Ohio State University.
What both Brooks and White are saying is that circumstances shouldn’t define a person. They also say that fewer people would be in dire circumstances if they just had the belief that they could get out of them.
We, as a society, can’t want success for anyone more than he wants it for himself, as White has shown. We hate to see anyone live in poverty, but we can’t give anyone the desire to get out. If you have the desire to get out, you WILL get out. You will fight through your circumstances and become successful.
Brooks says we should teach people in dire circumstances several things to help them out of their own situations. First, we teach good habits. If you change behavior, you will change disposition eventually, Brooks writes. He cites many government programs that help poor parents and students to observe basic etiquette and practice small, but regular, acts of self-restraint.
Then, we have to show them opportunity. Most of us, Brooks writes, can only deny short-term pleasures because we see the path between self-denial now and something better down the road.
Third, exemplars. Character is not developed individually. It is instilled by communities and transmitted by elders, Brooks writes. That brings to mind another adage: if you can’t change the people around you, change the people around you.
Fourth, standards. People can only practice restraint after they determine the sort of person they want to be, Brooks writes.
In other words, give people something to shoot for, instill in them the belief that they can get it and show them what they need to do to get it.
If your circumstances aren’t what you want them to be, there are many vehicles out there that could help the person who wants to change his life, and has a vision of what he wants his life to be. For one of the best, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau.
So if you don’t like your circumstances, don’t wallow and blame. Dream that life can be better, believe that YOU can make it better, then step up and do what you need to do.
Peter
SMALL TOWNS, BIG CITIES, GROWING AS PEOPLE
Many of us grow up in small towns, rural areas or neighborhoods of larger cities and grow fond of the area, the people etc.
But, when we enter adulthood, perhaps going off to college, it hits us: we may not realize our full potential if we settle down back home. Settle may be the operative word here.
New York Times columnist David Brooks discussed this phenomenon. He wondered whether, in the meritocracy vs. government race, it would be so bad if meritocracy won.
In a nutshell, a young person leaves home and goes off to college. He realizes his limited potential if he moved back home, where only a small percentage of the folks living there had college degrees. He decides to move to a place where, as Brooks quotes, up to 50% of the people have college degrees, i.e. San Francisco, San Jose, Boston, Washington or the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina.
The folks back home may call him snooty for not wanting to move home. But he has a degree from an elite university, i.e. Stanford or an Ivy League school. He got good enough grades back home to get into the prestigious school, did well once he got there and now HAS to reside where people are more like the new him.
WAITING TO HEAR THOSE WORDS
A friend relayed the story of his childhood. He grew up on a farm in Georgia. When he wasn’t in school, he was working on the farm. He enjoyed some aspects of farming, but it was backbreaking work.
Finally, in his teen years, he told his father that he did not want to do this the rest of his life.
His father, it turned out, had been waiting years to hear those words.
Farming taught him hard work. But it also taught him how NOT to spend his life. There was so much more out there.
He stayed in Georgia, but had a superb sales career.
So what’s wrong with growing up in a small town, or rural area, or a specific neighborhood of a city? Nothing at all. But the kids grow up in an age of equality – everyone is the same and should be treated as such. When they move on to bigger and better things, they have to learn to go for distinction. They must be more accomplished, more cutting edge, to thrive in the new world, as Brooks points out.
This distinction even occurs in higher education. Many universities look to hire professors from the elite schools. Even the graduates they produce are not good enough, Brooks says.
The world demands innovation, collaboration, global thinking. Where one has grown up often thrives on a collective sameness and routine. There is security in sameness. There is tradition in sameness. There is equality in sameness. But for those who want to thrive in the world, change must be the operative word.
There is good news for those who may live in the sameness of “home,” wherever that is. There are many ways for you to prosper without leaving home. To check out one of the best, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau. Like the young college grad who needs to move out of his comfort zone into the bigger world, those left at home may have to leap outside their comfort zones. And, it can be done without leaving home.
The moral here is that sameness and equality may not improve the world as it should. Those seeking to see their great potential thrive have to depart their world of sameness and venture out into the world of competition, and, yes, discomfort.
It isn’t to say that they shouldn’t help the folks back home. But, they don’t have to settle for the sameness of their parents’ world. The more people who jump from their comfort zones to find their full potential, the better the world will be. Striving to be equal has far worse consequences than striving to be better.
Peter
BE A GOOD PERSON: SUFFER FOOLS GLADLY
He didn’t suffer fools gladly.
That’s an old expression with biblical origins that is used to describe a person who didn’t tolerate well those who he thought were fools – or at least not as smart, as informed or as well-versed as he.
To many, this is an honorable trait, as New York Times columnist David Brooks points out. But, as Brooks says, good manners permit one to suffer fools gladly.
Manners have gotten a bad rap over the years, just as political correctness has.
Brooks points out that when someone who doesn’t suffer fools gladly humiliates someone, he can look to be the bigger fool.
Let’s take it a step further. Suppose you worked for someone who did not suffer fools gladly. How would you feel when he didn’t show the necessary patience as you were learning your job? Sometimes, the fool you don’t suffer gladly is merely someone who disagrees with you. We’ve seen in Washington, D.C., in recent times, how not suffering fools gladly can actually prevent things from getting done.
Speaking of Washington, D.C., Maureen Dowd, another New York Times columnist, pointed out the differences between President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Biden relishes negotiating deals on Capitol Hill, while the president has little patience for it, Dowd says. Apparently, the president does not suffer fools gladly, if Dowd’s assessment is correct. Biden, on the other hand, loves to.
CONFIDENCE ON THE INSIDE, HUMILITY, GENEROSITY, INTEGRITY OUTSIDE
It’s been said that good people have three characteristics, among many. They have humility, integrity and generosity. Perhaps one can have integrity and not suffer fools gladly. But it would be difficult to be humble and generous, and not suffer fools gladly.
It’s OK to be confident. It’s certainly OK, even desirable, to think well of yourself – on the inside. But being humble means you don’t flaunt that confidence by making others feel less worthy. You do your thing well, and give others credit.
Being generous means that you are blessed to have what you have, and are willing to share with those who may not have what you have. The more you give, the more you get in most situations.
Go back to the employer-employee relationship. A humble, generous employer with integrity is someone everyone would want to work for. He shows patience with the employee when needed. He appreciates the efforts his employees give him. He generously pays for those efforts. He realizes that without those employees, he would not be where he is. Because of his integrity, he always does the right thing, regardless of the effect on him.
He realizes his employees may not know as much as he does, because they are not in position to know. But they are not fools to be suffered.
He is not just being polite, and showing good manners by being humble, generous and having integrity. He’s being a good business person and a great employer. Those characteristics greatly improve his chances of success.
He also believes that his success depends on how much he helps others succeed. If you are a humble, generous person with integrity, and have the desire to help others like you succeed, visit www.bign.com/pbilodeau. That could be the vehicle to fulfill your dream of helping others, thus helping yourself.
It takes many to make a world. It’s OK to know something that someone else doesn’t know. Just don’t be afraid to share what you know. Share it with humility, integrity and generosity. Suffer “fools” gladly, then give them credit for accomplishments. If you don’t, you could look like the bigger fool.
Peter