Showing posts with label Flow. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Flow. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Talent, Passion, and the Creativity Maze - HBR

HBR Blog Network.


Teresa Amabile and Steve Kramer


12:25 PM Monday February 27, 2012

by Teresa Amabile and Steve Kramer
Comments (7)

HBR FEATURED PRODUCTS

Nine Things Successful People Do Differently
by Heidi Halvorson     $3.99     Buy it now »

 Betterness: Economics for Humans
by Umair Haque     $2.99     Buy it now »


We live in a world mad for talent. From Hollywood and sports to executive search firms and HR departments around the globe, everyone seeks that special mix of natural abilities and attitudes that will make performance pop. A few months ago, Douglas Conant wrote a terrific blog post on how to find talented candidates for a job. When evaluating a potential hire, Conant looks for a strong mix of three qualities — competence, character, and skill as a team player. He gives great advice on how to find such a person. But he's missing a crucial ingredient.

That ingredient, at least as important as the talent package described by Conant, is passion for the work — what psychologists call intrinsic motivation. Without it, no amount of talent will yield great performance. For 35 years, we have been exploring how motivation affects creativity. In studies involving groups as diverse as children, college students, professional artists, and knowledge workers, we have found that people are more creative when they are more strongly intrinsically motivated — driven by interest, enjoyment, satisfaction, and a sense of personal challenge in the work they are doing.

Arthur Schawlow, a Nobel laureate in physics, said it eloquently: "The labor of love aspect is important. The successful scientists often are not the most talented, but the ones who are just impelled by curiosity. They've got to know what the answer is."

Intrinsically motivated people are more creative because they engage more deeply with the work. Imagine a task you have to do — say, an important marketing problem you have to solve at work — as a maze you need to get through. Most business problems have multiple solutions that would work, multiple exits from that maze. Often, there is one clear, straight path out of the maze — the standard solution that everyone uses for this type of problem. If you're extrinsically motivated, perhaps by a looming deadline or fear of a negative evaluation, you're likely to take that safe path. The solution works, but it's boring; it doesn't move things forward. But if you're intrinsically motivated, you love the hunt through the maze for a more interesting — and likely more creative — solution.

As a manager, you can leverage the link between passion and creativity by following three guidelines:

First, hire for passion as much as for talent. If you don't look for passion in the people you hire, you could end up with employees who never engage deeply enough to dazzle you with their creative productivity. As Conant advises, get to know potential hires for important positions as thoroughly as possible, long before you might have an opening for them. When you talk to them, ask why they do what they do, what disappointments they've had, what their dream job would be. Look for fire in their eyes as they talk about the work itself, and listen for a deep desire to do something that hasn't been done before. When you talk to their references, watch for mentions of passion.

Second, nourish that passion. Unfortunately, standard management approaches often (unwittingly) end up dousing passion and killing creativity. But keeping it alive isn't rocket science. We have found that the single most important thing you can do to fuel intrinsic motivation is to support people's progress in the work that they are so passionate about. This is the progress principle, and it applies even to the seemingly minor small wins that can lead to great breakthroughs. You can use the progress principle by understanding what progress and setbacks your people are experiencing day by day, getting at the root causes, and doing whatever you can to remove the inhibitors and enhance the catalysts to progress.

For example, be vigilant about whether your creative professionals have sufficient resources to make progress without a constant struggle. Give them autonomy in how to achieve a project's goals, because there's no point in hiring people with great talent if you don't let them use it. And support them in learning from both successes and failures, because talent is not a fixed quantity; it can and should grow over time. Give talented people every opportunity to develop, keeping in mind the "10,000 hour rule" cited by Malcolm Gladwell: You can't become expert enough to create an innovative breakthrough in a field unless you have put in at least 10,000 hours of practice. That kind of persistence is fueled by passion.

Finally, look to yourself. If you don't have passion for your own work, you'll end up disappointing both yourself and those who count on you. And you're unlikely to develop your own best talents. One of us, Steve, is an avid photographer of landscapes. An important mentor, the photographer Craig Tanner, has taught both of us a great deal about the connection between passion and the development of talent. In a brilliant essay on "The Myth of Talent," Craig says: "Long-term, focused, practice powered by the energy of passion [...] leads to amazing transformations. The bumbling beginner becomes the exalted expert. The trapped and depressed become the liberated and empowered."

Ask yourself: Am I liberated and empowered by passion in my work? Are the people around me?


Teresa Amabile is Edsel Bryant Ford Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School. She researches what makes people creative, productive, happy, and motivated at work. Steven Kramer is a psychologist and independent researcher. They are coauthors of The Progress Principle (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011); visit its website.


Access Source And Its Great Content: http://blogs.hbr.org/hbsfaculty/2012/02/talent-passion-and-the-creativ.html?referral=00563&cm_mmc=email-_-newsletter-_-daily_alert-_-alert_date&utm_source=newsletter_daily_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alert_date

Thursday, July 14, 2011

A Roadmap to a Life that Matters - Umair Haque - Harvard Business Review




FEATURED PRODUCTS

So, are you psyched for the new Harry Potter movie? Like you, your kids, and approximately 99% of humanity, I confess: I too am captivated by the thought of a magical world where diligently memorized incantations can grant thunderous powers beyond the reach of mortals. "Accio, job growth!"


If only it were that easy. In our messy muggle world, there are no magic formulas. So, while many of you have been asking me for a roadmap to prosperity — and I've tried to offer a blueprint of a better kind of business — it might be that, despite what late-night infomercials and endless banner ads suggest, there's probably no framework you can pick up off the shelf, pay a few bucks for, do a little dance around, and (voila!) prosper. The plain fact is that great achievement, deep fulfillment, lasting relationships, or any other aspects of an unquenchably, relentlessly well lived life aren't formulaically executable or neatly quantifiable. First and foremost, they're searingly, and deeply personally, meaningful. The inconvenient truth is: you'll probably have to not just blaze your own trail — you'll also probably have to plot your own map for own journey.


So while I can't offer a roadmap, I can try and give you a pen and protractor instead to help you begin to create your own:

Put what, why, and who you love ahead of what, why, and who you don't, and your roadmap will begin to write itself.



Now, my little principle might cause those with hand-made suits and beancounterly tendencies to leap out of their chairs and hit me with the tarantallegra jinx. But even the cynics might be willing to admit: given a mysteriously non-recovering "recovery" for a global economy perpetually poised on the brink of perma-crisis, the status quo's out of ideas, out of options, and running out of time.


In an economy dedicated to the pursuit of more, bigger, faster, cheaper, nastier, the greatest hidden cost and unintended consequence is that something vital, enduring, resonant, and animating has gone missing from our lives — and it might just be the biggest thing: meaning in what we do, and why we're here.


More, bigger, faster, cheaper, nastier has built an economy that might just be in furious pursuit of mediocrity. Five hundred channels and nothing on, corporations whose behavior plunges past merely unethical, or criminal, to sociopathic, big box stores larger than an airplane hangars, billions of dreary, me-too, not-so-great "goods" that fail to inspire, not enough McJobs to go around, financial markets that are more deft at blowing up scarce resources than at allocating them.


So what went wrong with our path to prosperity? I'd suggest: our economy might be in pursuit of mediocrity because too many of us put what, why, and who makes us want to go into a fetal crouch, plug our ears, and bang our foreheads against our knees above, beyond, and before what, why, and who we love.


There's no magic formula for a life well lived, but my humble suggestion is that the above is probably the polar opposite: a surefire recipe for a life poorly lived, for intellectual, relational, social, ethical, and creative stagnation. Hence, what's stagnating not just our economy — but our human potential. Too many of us (and some have argued, the best and brightest among us) are trained from birth to be — and rewarded with each bonus to remain — what economists call "rent-seekers," experts at squabbling over (and winning) the last stale morsels of yesterday's fading industrial age harvests, the mere mechanics and advocates of wealth extraction, instead of value creators, the architects and master builders, dreamers and doers, theorists and practitioners of the art of great human accomplishment.


Hence, I'd suggest: my tiny principle might not just a disposable epigram, but a diagnosis for dysfunction — and a challenge to all of you. The pursuit of more, bigger, faster, cheaper, nastier too often seems to demand putting what, why, and who we love at the end of the list, the underworld of the inbox, the bottom of the heap. That's a recipe for stagnation, whether for people, communities, cities, countries, or the globe. But the converse might just hold, too: if nations and corporations want to punch past the glass ceiling of mere opulence, to what I call eudaimonic prosperity — lives that are meaningfully well lived — well, then people might just have to begin by making if not radically, then at least marginally more meaningful choices themselves.


Here's what my little principle doesn't mean: immediate, lowest-common-denominator self-gratification. That, for example, since you "love" Jersey Shore, you should spend all day, every day GTLing harder than the last. Sorry, lotus eaters. Instead, what it suggests is that if you "love" GTL [Gym, Tan, Laundry] that much, then, well, your roadmap might be clear. Whatever the method to your madness, whether inventing a better tanning bed, perfecting a better workout, or devising less water-intensive laundry, the authenticity principle says: don't just mutely "consume" it — live it. Better it, reimagine it, blow the doors off it, and don't stop until you're within shouting distance of the point that it matters to the future of humanity.


The roadmap you need to follow is deeply, resonantly, profoundly, and irrevocably your own — the one that calls to you in every dreary meeting, every missed birthday, and every misplaced-but-not-quite-forgotten dream. It's the one that leads you to your better self. It says: "Follow my lead. Let's go somewhere that matters — not just somewhere that glitters."




Umair Haque is Director of the Havas Media Lab and author of The New Capitalist Manifesto: Building a Disruptively Better Business. He also founded Bubblegeneration, an agenda-setting advisory boutique that shaped strategies across media and consumer industries.




Tuesday, June 7, 2011

We Is Bigger Than Me - Bill Taylor - Harvard Business Review

We Is Bigger Than Me - Bill Taylor - Harvard Business Review



Harvard Business Review






We Is Bigger Than Me






New York Times pundit David Brooks recently expressed in 800 words a message I have spent the last 15 years trying to communicate to senior business leaders and ambitious young people around the world. The title of Brooks's column was "It's Not About You," and he wrote it as a rebuttal to commencement-season addresses that urge young people to follow their passion, pursue their dreams, and, above all, do what makes them happy. "This is the litany of expressive individualism," Brooks warns, and "this mantra misleads on nearly every front."


Truth be told, the column makes him sound like a bit of a curmudgeon, the skunk at balloon-filled graduation parties celebrating the sense of possibility and the spirit of freedom that defines life for young people who have come of age in a world of instant communications, global connectivity, and dotcom millionaires. But I'm with Brooks and his words of warning against the cult of self-fulfillment. The more executives, entrepreneurs, and talented individuals I get to know, the more convinced I become that true happiness, a genuine sense of satisfaction, comes, as Brooks suggests, not from "finding" yourself but from losing" yourself — in a company you believe in, a cause you are prepared to fight for, a commitment to solve a problem that has defied solution.


In other words, "we" is bigger than "me" — the true measure of success is not the value you create for yourself but the values that define your work and how you lead and live.


It sounds counterintuitive, I know. This is the age of the maverick, the startup, and, dare I say it, as the cofounder of Fast Company, "The Brand Called You." That's why it's so easy to focus on the magazine covers, the IPO wealth, the personal narratives. But what these celebrations of business individualism overlook is that the most successful companies and the most effective leaders spend most of their time focused on things bigger than themselves — on their sense of purpose, their willingness to struggle, the legacy they and their colleagues hope to leave.


Arkadi Kuhlmann, chairman and president of ING Direct USA, is one of my favorite CEOs, and an unquestioned success. He's brash, colorful, outspoken — in terms of his style, he personifies the sense of freedom and innovation that drives so many businesspeople today. But in terms of the substance of what he does and how he leads, he understands that he as an individual is less important than the cause in which he and his colleagues believe — creating a financial culture that is more serious, sober, and responsible than what exists today.


"Leadership is about service," he told an interviewer last year, "and you can't lead if you can't follow. It's never about you. It is always about the mission. And people will follow you if you're prepared to get a mission done, something with a goal that is a little bit beyond the reach of all of us."


Wise words from a game-changing CEO. That same spirit also applies to how each of us conducts our lives as individuals. The trouble with always searching to find yourself, work on what makes you happy, and communicate your attributes as a brand, is that you spend too much time looking in the mirror rather than at the world. As Brooks writes, "Today's graduates are told to find their passion and then pursue their dreams. The implication is that they should find themselves first and then go of and live their quest."


In fact, true success requires you to flip that logic on its head. Randy Nelson, who spent years as the influential dean of Pixar University, loves to talk about what it's like to be surrounded by "wildly talented individuals" of the sort who work at a company as rich, powerful, and successful as Pixar. His message to these individual stars, for whom it is so easy to strut their stuff and show what they know, is as simple as it is powerful. "It's no trick for talented people to be interesting," he likes to say. "But it's a gift to be interested" — interested in big problems, interested in the talents and struggles of your colleagues, interested in the enduring mission of the enterprise and in new ways of bringing that mission to life.


In other words, less interested in you and more interested in the world around you. As Brooks concludes in his must-read piece, "The purpose in life is not to find yourself. It's to lose yourself."


Here's hoping all of you can get lost, in the best sense of that word.




William C. Taylor is cofounder of Fast Company magazine and author of Practically Radical: Not-So-Crazy Ways to Transform Your Company, Shake Up Your Industry, and Challenge Yourself, published January 4, 2011. Follow him at twitter.com/practicallyrad.






"It’s Not About You" , By DAVID BROOKS, New York Times Opinion Pages - Published: May 30, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/opinion/31brooks.html?_r=1

 
********************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Career Strategy: Increase Your Visibility at Work | CAREEREALISM.com

Career Strategy: Increase Your Visibility at Work CAREEREALISM.com


CAREEREALISM



Career Makeover Strategy: Increase Your Visibility at Work




If you come in on time, keep your head down, do your work and show you are a team player – surely your boss will realize your dedication right? And there’s no way your company will be able to overlook your hard work and above and beyond contributions right?




Wrong.


In today’s world of work – hard work, being a team player, and adhering to basic professional standards are baseline expectations of all employees. Promotion, recognition and reward more often land on professionals who have learned how to maximize their exposure to the right people and the right opportunities. Increasing your visibility at work isn’t about kissing up or brown nosing – it’s about positioning yourself in the right place from which to make your next best career move. Savvy professionals take the initiative to be relevant, contribute and to make sure their efforts are visible to people of influence within their industry and organization.


Here are 6 ways to increase your visibility at work:


Volunteer for special projects: Unless you are in a very small company, there’s a wealth of action taking place outside of your desk, cube, department and floor. And chances are the people making decisions aren’t sitting right across from you. Looking for special projects you can be a part of is a great way to get your name, skills, ideas and performance in front of people who can help you make vertical and horizontal career moves.


Find and share relevant information with people outside of your normal network: While your primary responsibilities may be in IT, spend some time browsing trends and insights in other areas. Did you come across an interesting article about marketing? Or maybe you just found out about a new book related to leadership development. Pass a quick message onto someone outside your normal connections to start building new relationships and increasing your exposure.


Attend those “optional” meetings and events: Meetings, especially boring meetings can be the bane of existence for busy professionals. But…they can also be a good place to show your face with higher up required attendees. Show up, listen, contribute and introduce yourself. Not only are you increasing your visibility, you are showing you are interested and getting first-hand experience of how things work outside your cube.


Ask for bigger and better assignments: When a new project is announced, step up and ask for the lead role. The misstep here is one of two things: You either expect it will go to the usual person that gets put in charge of things, or you wait and hope you will be hand picked by your boss. Don’t wait for someone to be assigned or someone else to take the lead. Speak up and step up to ensure you are getting more responsibility and more opportunity for exposure.


Start a group: Chances are there are other ambitious professionals looking to connect within your organization. If there are no existing opportunities to connect through something like a book club or community service project, create one. This gives you a chance to practice and demonstrate leadership skills as well as build new relationships.


Learn how to toot your own horn: You can be the most productive, innovative results driven professional in your company, but if no one knows about it – it won’t help you build the career you want. Most of us know how to talk about ourselves – we share our successes with friends and family easily. The challenge here is to find a way that feels comfortable for you to communicate your accomplishments. For tips on how to do this check out this practical article from Psychology Today: How to brag about yourself without being seen as narcissistic.


There’s an old saying, “out of sight, out of mind.” Help ensure you are never out of sight by using the tips above to increase your visibility at work. Being proactive about your exposure puts you exactly where you should be – in the driver seat of your career.


[This article was originally posted on an earlier date]


Tai Goodwin is a career and business coach who specifically works with professionals who are launching a business while working full-time.





********************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Attunement, Equipoise, Metis, Limerence - David Brooks - The New York Times

David Brooks - The New York Times


Op-Ed Columnist

The New Humanism



Over the course of my career, I’ve covered a number of policy failures. When the Soviet Union fell, we sent in teams of economists, oblivious to the lack of social trust that marred that society. While invading Iraq, the nation’s leaders were unprepared for the cultural complexities of the place and the psychological aftershocks of Saddam’s terror.
David Brooks

David Brooks’s Blog


The intellectual, cultural and scientific findings that land on the columnist’s desk nearly every day.



The Conversation



We had a financial regime based on the notion that bankers are rational creatures who wouldn’t do anything stupid en masse. For the past 30 years we’ve tried many different ways to restructure our educational system — trying big schools and little schools, charters and vouchers — that, for years, skirted the core issue: the relationship between a teacher and a student.

I’ve come to believe that these failures spring from a single failure: reliance on an overly simplistic view of human nature. We have a prevailing view in our society — not only in the policy world, but in many spheres — that we are divided creatures. Reason, which is trustworthy, is separate from the emotions, which are suspect. Society progresses to the extent that reason can suppress the passions.

This has created a distortion in our culture. We emphasize things that are rational and conscious and are inarticulate about the processes down below. We are really good at talking about material things but bad at talking about emotion.

When we raise our kids, we focus on the traits measured by grades and SAT scores. But when it comes to the most important things like character and how to build relationships, we often have nothing to say. Many of our public policies are proposed by experts who are comfortable only with correlations that can be measured, appropriated and quantified, and ignore everything else.

Yet while we are trapped within this amputated view of human nature, a richer and deeper view is coming back into view. It is being brought to us by researchers across an array of diverse fields: neuroscience, psychology, sociology, behavioral economics and so on.

This growing, dispersed body of research reminds us of a few key insights. First, the unconscious parts of the mind are most of the mind, where many of the most impressive feats of thinking take place. Second, emotion is not opposed to reason; our emotions assign value to things and are the basis of reason. Finally, we are not individuals who form relationships. We are social animals, deeply interpenetrated with one another, who emerge out of relationships.

This body of research suggests the French enlightenment view of human nature, which emphasized individualism and reason, was wrong. The British enlightenment, which emphasized social sentiments, was more accurate about who we are. It suggests we are not divided creatures. We don’t only progress as reason dominates the passions. We also thrive as we educate our emotions.

When you synthesize this research, you get different perspectives on everything from business to family to politics. You pay less attention to how people analyze the world but more to how they perceive and organize it in their minds. You pay a bit less attention to individual traits and more to the quality of relationships between people.

You get a different view of, say, human capital. Over the past few decades, we have tended to define human capital in the narrow way, emphasizing I.Q., degrees, and professional skills. Those are all important, obviously, but this research illuminates a range of deeper talents, which span reason and emotion and make a hash of both categories:

Attunement: the ability to enter other minds and learn what they have to offer.

Equipoise: the ability to serenely monitor the movements of one’s own mind and correct for biases and shortcomings.

Metis: the ability to see patterns in the world and derive a gist from complex situations.

Sympathy: the ability to fall into a rhythm with those around you and thrive in groups.

Limerence: This isn’t a talent as much as a motivation. The conscious mind hungers for money and success, but the unconscious mind hungers for those moments of transcendence when the skull line falls away and we are lost in love for another, the challenge of a task or the love of God. Some people seem to experience this drive more powerfully than others.

When Sigmund Freud came up with his view of the unconscious, it had a huge effect on society and literature. Now hundreds of thousands of researchers are coming up with a more accurate view of who we are. Their work is scientific, but it directs our attention toward a new humanism. It’s beginning to show how the emotional and the rational are intertwined.

I suspect their work will have a giant effect on the culture. It’ll change how we see ourselves. Who knows, it may even someday transform the way our policy makers see the world.

__________

This version of this op-ed appeared in print on March 8, 2011, on page A27 of the New York edition.

__________

David Brooks's Op-Ed column in The New York Times started in September 2003. He has been a senior editor at The Weekly Standard, a contributing editor at Newsweek and the Atlantic Monthly, and he is currently a commentator on "The Newshour with Jim Lehrer." He is the author of "Bobos In Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There" and “On Paradise Drive : How We Live Now (And Always Have) in the Future Tense,” both published by Simon & Schuster. His most recent book is “The Social Animal: The Hidden Sources of Love, Character, and Achievement,” published by Random House in March 2011.


Mr. Brooks joined The Weekly Standard at its inception in September 1995, having worked at The Wall Street Journal for the previous nine years. His last post at the Journal was as op-ed editor. Prior to that, he was posted in Brussels, covering Russia, the Middle East, South Africa and European affairs. His first post at the Journal was as editor of the book review section, and he filled in for five months as the Journal's movie critic.

Mr. Brooks graduated from the University of Chicago in 1983, and worked as a police reporter for the City News Bureau, a wire service owned jointly by the Chicago Tribune and Sun Times.

He is also a frequent analyst on NPR’s "All Things Considered" and the "Diane Rehm Show." His articles have appeared in the The New Yorker, The New York Times Magazine, Forbes, the Washington Post, the TLS, Commentary, The Public Interest and many other magazines. He is editor of the anthology "Backward and Upward: The New Conservative Writing" (Vintage Books).

_________



********************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Happiness Breeds Success…and Money! | Psychology Today

Happiness Breeds Success…and Money! Psychology Today

"One factor towered over relationships in its connection with happiness. That factor was work. "

How of Happiness **
The scientific pursuit of happiness. **
by Sonja Lyubomirsky *

Sonja Lyubomirsky is a social psychologist at the University of California, Riverside and author of The How of Happiness: A Scientific Approach to Getting the Life You Want. See full bio Happiness Breeds Success…and Money! *

Does happiness deliver dollar bills? The evidence suggests it does. ***

I had a rather interesting experience this week appearing on the CNBC show, The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch. The theme was that being happy will bring you cash. Over the top? Absolutely. Ridiculously enthusiastic and fakely combative? Definitely. The people were all very nice though, and I had fun (even after the first segment, when the executive producer told everyone they were doing “a great job,” but then pulled me aside and ordered me “to amp it up”). *

So, does happiness deliver dollar bills? Well, actually, the evidence suggests it does. *

I’ll explain how, but allow me first to backtrack for a moment. *

As an experimental social psychologist who has been studying happiness for almost 20 years, I’m often asked, “What makes people happy?” Until a few years ago, my answer always reflected the common wisdom and empirical findings in my field – “It’s relationships, stupid.” That is, I always responded that our interpersonal ties – the strength of our friendships, familial bonds, and intimate connections – show the highest correlations with well-being. *

Imagine my surprise then, after Ed Diener, Laura King, and I conducted a meta-analysis (a “study of studies”) of 225 studies of well-being. I wholly expected to discover that social relationships – more than any other variable – would be both causes and consequences of being happy. However, what I observed was something rather different. One factor towered over relationships in its connection with happiness. That factor was work. *

The evidence, for example, demonstrates that people who have jobs distinguished by autonomy, meaning and variety – and who show superior performance, creativity, and productivity – are significantly happier than those who don’t. Supervisors are happier than those lower on the totem pole, and leaders who receive high ratings from their customers are happier than those with poor ratings. And, of course, the income that a job provides is also associated with happiness, though we now all know that money has more of an impact when we have less of it. *

Why does our work make us happy? Because it provides us a sense of identity, structure to our days, and important and meaningful life goals to pursue. Perhaps even more important, it furnishes us with close colleagues, friends and even marriage partners. *

The story doesn’t end there, however. Studies reveal that the causal direction between happiness and work runs both ways. Not only do creativity and productivity at the office make people happy, but happier people have been found to be more creative and productive. They are better “organizational citizens” (going above and beyond their job duties), better negotiators, and are less likely to take sick days, to quit, or to suffer burnout. *

The most persuasive data regarding the effects of happiness on positive work outcomes (as opposed to vice versa) come from longitudinal studies – that is, investigations that track the same participants over a long period of time. These studies are great. For example, people who report that they are happy at age 18 achieve greater financial independence, higher occupational attainment and greater work autonomy by age 26. Furthermore, the happier a person is, the more likely she will get a job offer, keep her job, and get a new job if she ever loses it. Finally, one fascinating study showed that people who express more positive emotions on the job receive more favorable evaluations from their supervisors 3.5 years later. *

But the point that really interested Donny Deutsch and his producers is that all of this applies to income. Not only does greater wealth make people (somewhat) happy, but happy people appear more likely to accrue greater wealth in life. For example, research has demonstrated that the happier a person is at one point in his life, the higher income he will earn at a later point. In one of my favorite studies, researchers showed that those who were happy as college freshmen had higher salaries 16 years later, when they were about 37! *

But before we find yet another reason to be envious of very happy people (not only do they get to feel great, but they get to have good jobs and make more money as well!), consider what the research on happiness and work suggests. It suggests that, when it comes to work life, we can create our own so-called “upward spirals.” The more successful we are at our jobs, the higher income we make, and the better work environment we have, the happier we will be. This increased happiness will foster greater success, more money, and an improved work environment, which will further enhance happiness, and so on and so on and so on. *

If you want to learn more about the psychology of happiness and how people can become happier, I’m teaching a “master class” (via phone) on 7 Thursdays (1pm-2pm EST) starting July 24, 2008 (with a break in August). *

Access original post: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-happiness/200807/happiness-breeds-success-and-money

***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

New PBS Documentary: Can Americans Be Happier? | Psych Central News

New PBS Documentary: Can Americans Be Happier? Psych Central News

New PBS Documentary: Can Americans Be Happier? >

By Psych Central News Editor >

Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on November 11, 2009 >

PBS has announced that a new series will air during the first week of the 2010 new year that examines the question, Can Americans be happier? >

This Emotional Life, a co-production of Vulcan Productions and the NOVA/WGBH Science Unit, unfolds across three, two-hour episodes, exploring the nature of the social relationships that are the key to our human happiness; the obstacles to happiness, negative emotions, which we can’t live with and can’t live without; and the sometimes misguided pursuit of happiness itself. >

Each episode weaves together the compelling personal stories of ordinary people and the latest in brain science research, along with revealing comments from celebrities such as Chevy Chase, Larry David, Elizabeth Gilbert, Alanis Morissette, Katie Couric and Richard Gere. >

“Science has revealed three important facts about happiness: You can’t be happy alone; you can’t be happy all the time; you can be happier than you are. Our three shows examine each of these three facts,” notes Harvard psychologist and best-selling author of Stumbling on Happiness, Professor Daniel Gilbert. Prof. Gilbert’s research has examined why people so often mispredict what will make them happy. >

“This Emotional Life represents what television does best — it opens a window into real lives. People shared their personal stories, honestly and openly,” said Senior Executive Producer Richard Hutton of Vulcan Productions. “The results are dramatic. You’ll see first-hand how people, both ordinary and extraordinary, cope with challenges as they struggle to achieve greater happiness and fulfillment.” >

“This Emotional Life is about human connections and understanding how our social interactions are deeply wired in our brains,” said Paula Apsell, Senior Executive Producer, NOVA/WGBH Science Unit and co-producer. >

“The series looks at the latest, cutting-edge biological and social science behind our human nature to help us better understand what drives our emotions and what can lead us to happiness.” >

The three episodes — which air on PBS January 4-6, 2010 (at 9:00 PM) — trace our relationships and what science reveals about them beginning with our very first one, the parent-child relationship, and how our connections to others impact our happiness. Below are descriptions of This Emotional Life’s three episodes: >

Episode 1: Family, Friends & Lovers (January 4) >

The first episode looks at the importance of relationships and why they are central to our emotional well-being. What are the cognitive and neurological processes underpinning our everyday interactions, and can they help us to understand why some relationships flourish and others fail? We meet a young boy adopted from a Russian orphanage, whose story illustrates how a lack of attachment in infancy fundamentally shapes his ability to build relationships for years to come. We meet the young parents of newborn twins; a couple in therapy for a troubled marriage; a teenager who was bullied with tragic consequences; two women grappling with the stress of workplace conflicts; and other characters — all to better understand the importance of social connections and relationships. >

Episode 2: Facing Our Fears (January 5) >

In the second episode, we look at emotions that are commonly regarded as obstacles to happiness — such as anger, fear, anxiety and despair. Why do we have these emotions and how can we best manage them? Our brains are designed for survival, and the negative emotions they create are vital to that mission. But those negative emotions can spiral out of control with debilitating effects. We meet a woman whose inability to control her temper is jeopardizing her relationships; a college student whose fear of flying is limiting her life; and a teenager on the eve of attending college who is struggling to overcome clinical depression. We also meet veterans with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and follow their journeys to find effective treatment. Across the episode, science reminds us that we are of two minds — a rational brain that’s relatively new and an emotional brain that’s older than time. Sometimes, emotion overwhelms reason, sometimes reason outwits emotion, and it is the endless struggle that makes our lives so painful, so joyous and so interesting. >

Episode 3: Rethinking Happiness (January 6) >

Finally, the last episode explores happiness. It is so critical to our well-being and, yet, it remains such an elusive goal for many of us. What is it, why is it important and how can we attain more of it? We meet individuals facing major turning points in their lives — a job loss, a cancer diagnosis, the death of a child, an accident — as well as those facing more common struggles. We learn from the latest research that we often incorrectly predict what will bring us greater happiness, leading us to look for it in the wrong places. As the study of behavior turns more toward positive emotions, we explore the latest research on the activities and qualities that foster them, such as meditation, compassion, forgiveness and altruism. We also share the remarkable stories of resilient individuals whom scientists are studying in order to learn more about us all, including a man who overcame an abusive childhood to become a renowned surgeon and a Vietnam veteran who survived torture, solitary confinement and seven years as a POW, yet emerged emotionally unscathed. Understanding why some people have the ability to bounce back after disaster strikes, while others do not, sheds light on how all of us can lead happier, more fulfilling lives. The film ends by coming full circle to the understanding that it is the quality of our relationships — with friends, family and the larger community — that ultimately defines our happiness. >

The film is complemented by a content-rich Web site, www.pbs.org/thisemotionallife. It provides vetted resources and opportunities to build social support networks around topics highlighted in the series, such as the importance of early attachment, how to heal strained or damaged relationships, PTSD, stress, depression, grief, resilience and our pursuit of happiness. >

The Web site is the centerpiece of a nationwide outreach campaign, extending the reach of the project beyond the broadcast. The effort provides people with valuable information, offers access to mechanisms for social support and helps mitigate the stigma attached to mental illness. >

http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/11/11/new-pbs-documentary-can-americans-be-happier/9517.html

***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Is It Possible To Become Lastingly Happier? | Psychology Today

Is It Possible To Become Lastingly Happier? Psychology Today

How of Happiness
The scientific pursuit of happiness.
by Sonja Lyubomirsky

April 27, 2008, Happiness
Is It Possible To Become Lastingly Happier?

Introducing The How of Happiness

Excerpts:

“To change one’s life, start immediately, do it flamboyantly,no exceptions.”– William James
Why are some people happier than others? What are the benefits (and costs) of happiness? And is it possible to become permanently happier?

These are some of the questions that I hope to address in my new blog – the very questions that I tackled in my recent book, The How of Happiness: A Scientific Approach to Getting the Life You Want. My other goal is to comment on how research on emotions and well-being can inform our understanding of current events, as well as our own behavior.

I am an experimental social psychologist who has been doing research on happiness for almost 20 years. Along with my students and my collaborator Ken Sheldon, I have conducted the first experiments (called “randomized controlled experimental intervention studies”) that try to increase and maintain people’s happiness. In broadest terms, my research suggests that lasting happiness is attainable, if you are prepared to do the work. Much like with permanent weight loss and fitness, becoming lastingly happier demands making some permanent changes, requiring effort and commitment every day of your life.


Today, I hope to stir your interest in the topic by describing some of the happiness-increasing strategies that researchers have studied and concluded to be most successful. This list won’t make any of you spill your evening tea, but take note that all the strategies have been supported by empirical research. (They are discussed in a lot more detail in The How of Happiness.) Also, as I argue in the book, you do not need to attempt the entire list of happiness activities, but should choose to focus only on the 1 to 4 strategies that “fit” you best – the ones that seem most natural and enjoyable to you.

- Counting Your Blessings
- Practicing Acts of Kindness
- Nurturing Optimism
- Learning to Forgive
- Increasing “Flow” Experiences
- Investing in Relationships
- Avoiding Overthinking
- Savoring Life’s Joys
- Taking Care of Your Soul
- Committing to Your Goals
- Using Your Body: Exercise, Meditation, Smiling, and Rest

Read full article: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-happiness/200804/is-it-possible-become-lastingly-happier


***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Shortcuts - If Not Passion for the Job, at Least Warm Feelings - NYTimes.com

Shortcuts - If Not Passion for the Job, at Least Warm Feelings - NYTimes.com

If Not Passion for the Job, at Least Warm Feelings
By ALINA TUGEND
Published: September 25, 2009

Excerpts:

I know I’m being somewhat flippant, but I do wonder if passion is being oversold. Are we falling into a trap of believing that our work, and indeed, our lives, should always be fascinating and all-consuming? Are we somehow lacking if we’re bored at times or buried under routine tasks or failing to challenge ourselves at every turn?

Now before I go any further, I know, I know. In these economic times, fewer of us are worried about being fulfilled and more of us are concerned about simply being paid. But as switching jobs and careers becomes increasingly common, as whole professions are disappearing, we’re more frequently forced to ask ourselves what we want to do with the rest of our lives.

That’s where passion comes in.

So first of all, what is it? I turned to Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, the director of the Quality of Life Research Center at Claremont Graduate University in California, who has looked at the idea, though he calls it “flow.”

“It’s a state of complete involvement,” said Professor Csikszentmihalyi (pronounced CHECK-sent-me-high), who first wrote about this in his book “Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience” (Harper & Row, 1990). It’s when we’re totally immersed in our activity, not watching the clock, not thinking of what others think, but simply absorbed in the experience. He first studied it, he said, in relation to activities people chose freely, like chess players, rock climbers and musicians, then later in terms of work and everyday life.

Although Professor Csikszentmihalyi says he does not believe that people can constantly be in a state of flow, he has written a great deal about how it can be encouraged in the workplace and elsewhere. While he outlines a number of factors needed to feel good about your job or life, two of the major ones are a sense of personal control over a situation or activity and a balance between one’s ability and potential so the endeavor is neither too easy nor too hard.

Read full article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/26/your-money/26shortcuts.html

***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Sunday, August 9, 2009

"FInding Your Flow"

Work Life balance is still a myth for many people


Work Life balance is still a myth for many people
August 8, 9:34 AMWorcester ExaminerAjita Perera

Excerpts:

Flow... It’s about enjoying and finding meaning in what we do and doing what we enjoy and find meaningful. Flow refuels us.


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
" Flow is the mental state of operation in which the person is fully immersed
in what he or she is doing by a feeling of energized focus, full involvement,
and success in the process of the activity. Proposed by Mihály Csíkszentmihályi, the positive psychology concept has been widely referenced across a variety of fields. Colloquial terms for this or similar mental states include: to be on the ball, in the zone, or in the groove.
(From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Says Dr Perschel, “When flow happens you are in a state of harmony. All the gears are engaged and synchronized. Work is effortless. A trial lawyer who loves to compete and win is in the flow when she prepares her case. Her heart pumps faster. Ideas just pop. After working 12 hours she has plenty of energy to care for her two young sons. A landscaper is in the flow when she presses the dirt firmly around the flowers and the scent of damp earth fills her nostrils. She goes home dirty but joyous and ready to engage with her family. When an architect is in the flow the building seems to draw itself.”

Read full article: http://www.examiner.com/x-1560-Worcester-Examiner~y2009m8d8-Work-Life-balance-is-still-a-myth-for-many-people
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Thursday, March 5, 2009

The Zen Millionaire's 14 Secrets To Happiness - FOXBusiness.com

The Zen Millionaire's 14 Secrets To Happiness - FOXBusiness.com

Fox Business
Monday, March 02, 2009
The Zen Millionaire's 14 Secrets To Happiness
Paul B. Farrell
MarketWatch


Excerpt:


Take a few moments, read the "14 Secrets" below, then finish this simple sentence: "I'm the happiest (and richest) investor because ..."

Impossible? After all, we can't all be "the richest," let alone "the happiest." Yes you can. This is your life. Each of us in our own unique way can be "the happiest and also the richest" ... in your special way, in your world, all by yourself. You decide. Just do it.

Here are a few reminders, my Zen Millionaire's 14 secrets to being happy and rich. Maybe they'll jar your memory, maybe bring a smile, maybe help you see that at this one moment in time, in your own unique way, you really are the happiest, richest and luckiest investor living in the whole wide world:

Read full article: http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/zen-millionaires--secrets-happiness/

***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Saturday, February 28, 2009

"40 Ways To Relax" - Boost your long-term productivity, creativity, and effectiveness

40 ways to relax

Note from Jim: Boost your long-term productivity, creativity, and effectiveness. Read "40 Ways To Relax"

Read article here: http://health.asiaone.com/Health/Wellness+@+Work/Story/A1Story20090227-124965.html
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Sunday, February 22, 2009

How Positive Psychology Can Boost Your Business - BusinessWeek

How Positive Psychology Can Boost Your Business - BusinessWeek

February 12 2009
Business Week
How Positive Psychology Can Boost Your Business
In tough times, entrepreneurs try the so-called science of happiness to build thriving companies
By Jill Hamburg Coplan

Note from Jim: Great article about the science and psychology of happiness, a serious area of academic study launched in 1999 by the President of the American Psychological Association, Martin Seligman. Learn how adoption of these principles can enhance your personal and business performance.

Full article here: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_62/s0902044518985.htm
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Work isn’t all that bad; it just takes a little time off to realise there is worse - Times Online

Work isn’t all that bad; it just takes a little time off to realise there is worse - Times Online

Work isn’t all that bad; it just takes a little time off to realise there is worse (Holiday/Vacation?; Watching Television?)

From The Time (Times Online UK)
February 3, 2009
Work isn’t all that bad; it just takes a little time off to realise there is worse
Sathnam Sanghera: Business life

Excerpts:

Americans survive because, ultimately, holidays aren’t that great and work is more fun than fun. And there are two factors behind my sudden belief in the meaningfulness of work, the first being that this column has suddenly become really quite hard to write.

Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, written by Mihaly Csikszentmihaly

Elegantly written, Csikszentmihalyi merges research from the fields as diverse as consciousness, personal psychology and sociology in an original way and backs up his arguments with experiments he has conducted himself. And the experiment most relevant to the question of American workaholism involved Csikszentmihalyi asking more than a hundred men and women working full time in a variety of occupations to wear an electronic pager for one week and respond at random points to bleeps asking how they felt.

The results found that about half the time people were working they were confronting above-average challenges, using above-average skills and feeling happier, more cheerful, stronger, more creative and satisfied. In contrast, when engaged in leisure activities such as watching TV and “having friends over”, the corresponding figure was only 18 per cent and people typically reported feeling passive, weak, dull and dissatisfied. However, despite this, when these respondents were asked “Do you wish you had been doing something else?”, they said they wished they were doing something else to a much greater extent when working than when at leisure.

In other words, even though people generally find work rewarding and satisfying and leisure much less so, given the choice they would work less. Csikszentmihalyi calls this “the work paradox” and suggests the contradiction can be explained by a number of things, not least the fact that while people generally find work satisfying and rewarding, they “cannot stand a high level of challenge all the time”.

However, my preferred explanation is his assertion that when it comes to work, people do not heed the evidence of their senses. Basically, we are irrational on the topic of work and leisure. Why? Because we have been brainwashed into thinking of work as tedious and punishing, when it really isn’t.

Read full article: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article5645005.ece

***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Monday, February 2, 2009

Success doesn't make you happy — happiness creates success

newsminer.com • Success doesn't make you happy — happiness creates success

Success doesn't make you happy — happiness creates success
By Judith Kleinfeld
Published Sunday, February 1, 2009

Excerpts:

Remember the saying, “Smile and the world smiles with you. Cry and you cry alone?” Research suggests the adage is true.

“Happy people are more likely to achieve favorable life circumstances,” finds psychologist Sonja Lyubomirski and her colleagues in a review of 225 studies, published in Psychological Bulletin.
It’s not that happiness comes from success. The insight of this research is that happiness also creates success; it’s a causal circle.

Read full article: http://newsminer.com/news/2009/feb/01/success-doesnt-make-you-happy-happiness-creates-su/

Postscript From Jim: Scientific research, in the field of "positive psychology" (American Psychological Association 1999) has found that happiness can be cultivated, learned and or enhanced. If you have an interest in learning how to cultivate or enhance your own happiness (and success) on my Blog, in the left-hand column, look under the category of the Psychology of Happiness. Happiness and learning how to achieve it are available here for your taking!!!!
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Saturday, December 27, 2008

Randy Pausch Last Lecture: Achieving Your Childhood Dreams

Randy Pausch Last Lecture: Achieving Your Childhood Dreams

A note from Jim:… A truly inspiring story. Follow the links to the video. Carnegie Mellon Professor Randy Pausch

http://www.thelastlecture.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji5_MqicxSo


Achieving Your Childhood Dreams
September 18, 2007: Randy Pausch>


"Almost all of us have childhood dreams; for example, being an astronaut, or making movies or video games for a living. Sadly, most people don’t achieve theirs, and I think that’s a shame. I had several specific childhood dreams, and I’ve actually achieved most of them. More importantly, I have found ways, in particular the creation (with Don Marinelli), of CMU’s Entertainment Technology Center of helping many young people actually *achieve* their childhood dreams." - Randy Pausch, Oct. 23, 1960 - July 25, 2008>

Watch online or order a DVD:>

YouTube>


Carnegie Mellon Professor Randy Pausch, who was dying of pancreatic cancer, gave his last lecture at the university Sept. 18, 2007, before a packed McConomy Auditorium. In his moving talk, "Really Achieving Your Childhood Dreams," Pausch talked about his lessons learned and gave advice to students on how to achieve their own career and personal goals.>

Pausch, a professor of computer science, human computer interaction and design, co-founded Carnegie Mellon’s Entertainment Technology Center and was the creator of the Alice interactive computing program, which is being used by students worldwide.>


***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi: Creativity, fulfillment and flow

A note from Jim: Truly fascinating. Professor Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi 19 minute presentation on his concept of “Flow”…. >

Flow is the mental state of operation in which the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing by a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and success in the process of the activity. Proposed and extensively researched by positive psychologist Mihály Csíkszentmihályi, the concept has been widely referenced across a variety of fields.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/mihaly_csikszentmihalyi_on_flow.html

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi: Creativity, fulfillment and flow

Found on TED.com (www.ted.com)

About this talk
Mihaly Czikszentmihalyi asks, "What makes a life worth living?" Noting that money cannot make us happy, he looks to those who find pleasure and lasting satisfaction in activities that bring about a state of "flow."

About Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi says creativity is a central source of meaning in our lives. A leading researcher in positive psychology, he has devoted his life to studying what makes people truly happy: "When we are involved in [creativity], we feel that we are living more fully than during the rest of life." He is the architect of the notion of "flow" -- the creative moment when a person is completely involved in an activity for its own sake.

Csikszentmihalyi teaches psychology and management at Claremont Graduate University, focusing on human strengths such as optimism, motivation and responsibility. He's the director the the Quality of Life Research Center there. He has written numerous books and papers about the search for joy and fulfillment.

"A man obsessed by happiness."
Richard Flaste, New York Times
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

The Creative Personality

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-19960701-000033.html

Psychology Today, Jul/Aug 96
10 antithetical traits often present in creative people that are integrated with each other in a dialectical tension.

The Creative Personality

Creative individuals are remarkable for their ability to adapt to almost any situation and to make do with whatever is at hand to reach their goals.

From "Creativity: The Work and Lives of 91 Eminent People", by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, published by HarperCollins, 1996. By: Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (Wikipedia: Mihaly Csikszentmihalay http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihaly_Csikszentmihalyi)

Psychology Today, Jul/Aug 96

Of all human activities, creativity comes closest to providing the fulfillment we all hope to get in our lives. Call it full-blast living.>

Creativity is a central source of meaning in our lives. Most of the things that are interesting, important, and human are the result of creativity. What makes us different from apes—our language, values, artistic expression, scientific understanding, and technology—is the result of individual ingenuity that was recognized, rewarded, and transmitted through learning.>

When we're creative, we feel we are living more fully than during the rest of life. The excitement of the artist at the easel or the scientist in the lab comes close to the ideal fulfillment we all hope to get from life, and so rarely do. Perhaps only sex, sports, music, and religious ecstasy—even when these experiences remain fleeting and leave no trace—provide a profound sense of being part of an entity greater than ourselves. But creativity also leaves an outcome that adds to the richness and complexity of the future.>

I have devoted 30 years of research to how creative people live and work, to make more understandable the mysterious process by which they come up with new ideas and new things. Creative individuals are remarkable for their ability to adapt to almost any situation and to make do with whatever is at hand to reach their goals. If I had to express in one word what makes their personalities different from others, it's complexity. They show tendencies of thought and action that in most people are segregated. They contain contradictory extremes; instead of being an "individual," each of them is a "multitude.">

Here are the 10 antithetical traits often present in creative people that are integrated with each other in a dialectical tension.>

1. Creative people have a great deal of physical energy, but they're also often quiet and at rest. They work long hours, with great concentration, while projecting an aura of freshness and enthusiasm. This suggests a superior physical endowment, a genetic advantage. Yet it is surprising how often individuals who in their seventies and eighties exude energy and health remember childhoods plagued by illness. It seems that their energy is internally generated, due more to their focused minds than to the superiority of their genes. >


This does not mean that creative people are hyperactive, always "on." In fact, they rest often and sleep a lot. The important thing is that they control their energy; it's not ruled by the calendar, the dock, an external schedule. When necessary, they can focus it like a laser beam; when not, creative types immediately recharge their batteries. They consider the rhythm of activity followed by idleness or reflection very important for the success of their work. This is not a bio-rhythm inherited with their genes; it was learned by trial and error as a strategy for achieving their goals.>


One manifestation of energy is sexuality. Creative people are paradoxical in this respect also. They seem to have quite a strong dose of eros, or generalized libidinal energy, which some express directly into sexuality. At the same time, a certain spartan celibacy is also a part of their makeup; continence tends to accompany superior achievement. Without eros, it would be difficult to take life on with vigor; without restraint, the energy could easily dissipate.>


2. Creative people tend to be smart yet naive at the same time. How smart they actually are is open to question. It is probably true that what psychologists call the "g factor," meaning a core of general intelligence, is high among people who make important creative contributions. >


The earliest longitudinal study of superior mental abilities, initiated at Stanford University by the psychologist Lewis Terman in 1921, shows rather conclusively that children with very high IQs do well in life, but after a certain point IQ does not seem to be correlated any longer with superior performance in real life. Later studies suggest that the cutoff point is around 120; it might be difficult to do creative work with a lower IQ, but an IQ beyond 120 does not necessarily imply higher creativity.>


Another way of expressing this dialectic is the contrasting poles of wisdom and childishness. As Howard Gardner remarked in his study of the major creative geniuses of this century, a certain immaturity, both emotional and mental, can go hand in hand with deepest insights. Mozart comes immediately to mind.>


Furthermore, people who bring about an acceptable novelty in a domain seem able to use well two opposite ways of thinking: the convergent and the divergent. Convergent thinking is measured by IQ tests, and it involves solving well-defined, rational problems that have one correct answer. Divergent thinking leads to no agreed-upon solution. It involves fluency, or the ability to generate a great quantity of ideas; flexibility, or the ability to switch from one perspective to another; and originality in picking unusual associations of ideas. These are the dimensions of thinking that most creativity tests measure and that most workshops try to enhance.>


Yet there remains the nagging suspicion that at the highest levels of creative achievement the generation of novelty is not the main issue. People often claimed to have had only two or three good ideas in their entire career, but each idea was so generative that it kept them busy for a lifetime of testing, filling out, elaborating, and applying.>


Divergent thinking is not much use without the ability to tell a good idea from a bad one, and this selectivity involves convergent thinking.>


3. Creative people combine playfulness and discipline, or responsibility and irresponsibility. There is no question that a playfully light attitude is typical of creative individuals. But this playfulness doesn't go very far without its antithesis, a quality of doggedness, endurance, perseverance. >


Nina Holton, whose playfully wild germs of ideas are the genesis of her sculpture, is very firm about the importance of hard work: "Tell anybody you're a sculptor and they'll say, 'Oh, how exciting, how wonderful.' And I tend to say, 'What's so wonderful?' It's like being a mason, or a carpenter, half the time. But they don't wish to hear that because they really only imagine the first part, the exciting part. But, as Khrushchev once said, that doesn't fry pancakes, you see. That germ of an idea does not make a sculpture which stands up. It just sits there. So the next stage is the hard work. Can you really translate it into a piece of sculpture?">


Jacob Rabinow, an electrical engineer, uses an interesting mental technique to slow himself down when work on an invention requires more endurance than intuition: "When I have a job that takes a lot of effort, slowly, I pretend I'm in jail. If I'm in jail, time is of no consequence. In other words, if it takes a week to cut this, it'll take a week. What else have I got to do? I'm going to be here for twenty years. See? This is a kind of mental trick. Otherwise you say, 'My God, it's not working,' and then you make mistakes. My way, you say time is of absolutely no consequence.">


Despite the carefree air that many creative people affect, most of them work late into the night and persist when less driven individuals would not. Vasari wrote in 1550 that when Renaissance painter Paolo Uccello was working out the laws of visual perspective, he would walk back and forth all night, muttering to himself: "What a beautiful thing is this perspective!" while his wife called him back to bed with no success.>


4. Creative people alternate between imagination and fantasy, and a rooted sense of reality. Great art and great science involve a leap of imagination into a world that is different from the present. The rest of society often views these new ideas as fantasies without relevance to current reality. And they are right. But the whole point of art and science is to go beyond what we now consider real and create a new reality. At the same time, this "escape" is not into a never-never land. What makes a novel idea creative is that once we see it, sooner or later we recognize that, strange as it is, it is true. >


Most of us assume that artists—musicians, writers, poets, painters—are strong on the fantasy side, whereas scientists, politicians, and businesspeople are realists. This may be true in terms of day-to-day routine activities. But when a person begins to work creatively, all bets are off.>


5. Creative people tend to be both extroverted and introverted. We're usually one or the other, either preferring to be in the thick of crowds or sitting on the sidelines and observing the passing show. In fact, in psychological research, extroversion and introversion are considered the most stable personality traits that differentiate people from each other and that can be reliably measured. Creative individuals, on the other hand, seem to exhibit both traits simultaneously. >

6. Creative people are humble and proud at the same time. It is remarkable to meet a famous person who you expect to be arrogant or supercilious, only to encounter self-deprecation and shyness instead. Yet there are good reasons why this should be so. These individuals are well aware that they stand, in Newton's words, "on the shoulders of giants." Their respect for the area in which they work makes them aware of the long line of previous contributions to it, putting their own in perspective. They're also aware of the role that luck played in their own achievements. And they're usually so focused on future projects and current challenges that past accomplishments, no matter how outstanding, are no longer very interesting to them. At the same time, they know that in comparison with others, they have accomplished a great deal. And this knowledge provides a sense of security, even pride. >

7. Creative people, to an extent, escape rigid gender role stereotyping. When tests of masculinity/femininity are given to young people, over and over one finds that creative and talented girls are more dominant and tough than other girls, and creative boys are more sensitive and less aggressive than their male peers. >


This tendency toward androgyny is sometimes understood in purely sexual terms, and therefore it gets confused with homosexuality. But psychological androgyny is a much wider concept referring to a person's ability to be at the same time aggressive and nurturant, sensitive and rigid, dominant and submissive, regardless of gender. A psychologically androgynous person in effect doubles his or her repertoire of responses. Creative individuals are more likely to have not only the strengths of their own gender but those of the other one, too.>


8. Creative people are both rebellious and conservative. It is impossible to be creative without having first internalized an area of culture. So it's difficult to see how a person can be creative without being both traditional and conservative and at the same time rebellious and iconoclastic. Being only traditional leaves an area unchanged; constantly taking chances without regard to what has been valued in the past rarely leads to novelty that is accepted as an improvement. The artist Eva Zeisel, who says that the folk tradition in which she works is "her home," nevertheless produces ceramics that were recognized by the Museum of Modern Art as masterpieces of contemporary design. This is what she says about innovation for its own sake: >


"This idea to create something is not my aim. To be different is a negative motive, and no creative thought or created thing grows out of a negative impulse. A negative impulse is always frustrating. And to be different means 'not like this' and 'not like that.' And the 'not like'—that's why postmodernism, with the prefix of 'post,' couldn't work. No negative impulse can work, can produce any happy creation. Only a positive one.">


But the willingness to take risks, to break with the safety of tradition, is also necessary. The economist George Stigler is very emphatic in this regard: "I'd say one of the most common failures of able people is a lack of nerve. They'll play safe games. In innovation, you have to play a less safe game, if it's going to be interesting. It's not predictable that it'll go well.">


9. Most creative people are very passionate about their work, yet they can be extremely objective about it as well. Without the passion, we soon lose interest in a difficult task. Yet without being objective about it, our work is not very good and lacks credibility. Here is how the historian Natalie Davis puts it: >


"I think it is very important to find a way to be detached from what you write, so that you can't be so identified with your work that you can't accept criticism and response, and that is the danger of having as much affect as I do. But I am aware of that and of when I think it is particularly important to detach oneself from the work, and that is something where age really does help.">


10. Creative people's openness and sensitivity often exposes them to suffering and pain, yet also to a great deal of enjoyment. Most would agree with Rabinow's words: "Inventors have a low threshold of pain. Things bother them." A badly designed machine causes pain to an inventive engineer, just as the creative writer is hurt when reading bad prose. >


Being alone at the forefront of a discipline also leaves you exposed and vulnerable. Eminence invites criticism and often vicious attacks. When an artist has invested years in making a sculpture, or a scientist in developing a theory, it is devastating if nobody cares.>
Deep interest and involvement in obscure subjects often goes unrewarded, or even brings on ridicule. Divergent thinking is often perceived as deviant by the majority, and so the creative person may feel isolated and misunderstood.>


Perhaps the most difficult thing for creative individuals to bear is the sense of loss and emptiness they experience when, for some reason, they cannot work. This is especially painful when a person feels his or her creativity drying out.>


Yet when a person is working in the area of his of her expertise, worries and cares fall away, replaced by a sense of bliss. Perhaps the most important quality, the one that is most consistently present in all creative individuals, is the ability to enjoy the process of creation for its own sake. Without this trait, poets would give up striving for perfection and would write commercial jingles, economists would work for banks where they would earn at least twice as much as they do at universities, and physicists would stop doing basic research and join industrial laboratories where the conditions are better and the expectations more predictable.>


From Creativity: The Work and Lives of 91 Eminent People, by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, published by HarperCollins, 1996.>

Psychology Today, Jul/Aug 96Last Reviewed 14 Oct 2008Article ID: 1095

***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Saturday, November 29, 2008

Briefing: Holding on to happiness in hard times

The Week
News & Opinion
Friday, December 5, 2008


Briefing: Holding on to happiness in hard times

With economists projecting a gloomy Christmas and an even gloomier 2009, new research offers clues into how a dispirited nation can hold on to some optimism. Is there a cure for the blues?

When did happiness become a subject for science?
Philosophers have been on the case for centuries. But in the past decade, a burgeoning field of study known as “positive psychology” has sought to redirect scientific attention from humanity’s psychological ills to its psychological successes. More than 200 colleges now offer courses in positive psychology, which seeks to maximize happiness both for individuals and for society at large. “The focus on pathology,” writes University of Pennsylvania psychologist Martin Seligman, “results in a model of the human being lacking the positive features which make life worth living.”

So what makes us happy?
The short answer, most experts agree, is our fellow humans. “We are basically social animals, and most of our enjoyment comes from other people,” says British social scientist Richard Layard. But it’s not that simple. Studies suggest that our socially derived happiness is also predicated on material well-being. In fact, poverty is a leading indicator of unhappiness both in people and in nations. Likewise, emotionally rewarding, well-compensated work is a key component of self-esteem. Little wonder, then, that massive economic dislocation—the kind that leads to widespread unemployment and poverty—is known as a “depression.”

How does money affect happiness?
There is no universal answer: A hedge fund manager and a Tibetan monk provide two very different models of satisfaction. But most experts agree that the correlation is direct—up to a point. Poor people become happier as they escape poverty, studies have shown, but once people are free from privation, the tie between money and happiness begins to fray. Wealth in America grew dramatically in the second half of the 20th century, but surveys found that Americans on average were no happier. One study found that the “happiness benefits” of money peaked at the modest income of $20,000. Middle-class and affluent people who seek more wealth are often stuck on what psychologists call a “hedonic treadmill”—a perpetual pursuit of material goods, which reduces the available time for personal relationships and yields minimal emotional rewards. The kick of owning a big house or a giant flat-screen television tends to be short-lived, as these possessions become the next, unexciting norm.

Then why do we pursue wealth?
In order to have a “positional” advantage over a rival, whether that be a brother-in-law, the loudmouth who lives across the street, or some imaginary “other.” Surveys have shown that most people would be happy making less money, but on one condition: that everyone else made even less. In fact, most people prefer that scenario to one in which their income rises but everyone else’s income rises more. In other words, it’s not how much we have that counts. It’s how much we have compared to how much the Joneses have. That could explain why people in more egalitarian societies generally report higher levels of satisfaction with their lives. Scandinavian countries with large social safety nets consistently score highest on the happiness scale.

Where does that leave us?
Even within a robust, sometimes shaky system of capitalism, psychologists believe that increased happiness is attainable. Distilled to its most basic level, positive psychology encourages people to strive for “mindfulness”—living in the moment, recognizing the beauty of nature, and appreciating the positive aspects of our lives. Research has also shown that happiness is enhanced by optimism; religious faith; acts of generosity and altruism such as community service; and work or hobbies that produce a frequent experience of “flow’’—a state of total engagement.

So happiness is in our control?
Not entirely. The word “happiness” shares an etymological root with “happenstance” (and “haphazard”), suggesting that fate determines our lot in life. In fact, research suggests that genes dictate perhaps half of an individual’s capacity for happiness, so biological factors beyond our control play a big role. Brain images reveal, for instance, that people with higher levels of activity in their left prefrontal cortex tend to be happier. In one study, brain images even enabled researchers to predict which babies were more likely to cry when their mothers left the room, based on the levels of prefrontal activity in the babies’ brains.

Can we be happier?
Within limits, it would seem. Researchers now postulate that each individual has a “set point” for happiness, which is essentially a default position. Deviations from that point tend to be short-lived, with the subject soon reverting to his or her norm no matter what life-altering change has occurred. Within a year of major life-altering experiences, writes Jonathan Haidt, author of The Happiness Hypothesis, “lottery winners and paraplegics have both, on average, returned most of the way to their baseline levels of happiness.” What does this mean for people encountering tough economic times? Chances are, experts say, that other than those who are truly devastated, most people will retain their basic outlook. The happy among us will find cause to stay upbeat. As for the unhappy souls—what’s one more downer?

Happiness as national policy
While technocrats the world over try to boost their nations’ Gross Domestic Product (GDP),the government of Bhutan is publicly dedicated to increasing GDH—Gross Domestic Happiness. The policy has four pillars: equitable and sustainable economic growth; environmental conservation; cultural preservation; and good government. But Bhutan is not the only nation focused on happiness as a matter of national policy. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, encouraged by fellow Labor Party member and renowned happiness scholar Richard Layard, has shown interest in using happiness studies to advance “well being” in the U.K. Layard argues for teaching “happiness skills” in school and for curtailing advertising that targets children, in an attempt to stifle envy and greed. The nub of his approach, though, involves an aggressive program of income redistribution—since, he says, “an extra pound or dollar gives more happiness to poor people than to the rich.” Of course that leaves unaddressed the unhappiness caused when taxes are raised to make that possible.

http://www.theweek.com/article/index/91094/3/Briefing_Holding_on_to_happiness_in_hard_times

News & Opinion
Friday, December 5, 2008
}



Briefing: Holding on to happiness in hard times