You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Purpose’ category.
I found the following simple and powerful, even to the level of organisational change. It goes right to the core of why people do what they do, which impacts everyone in an organisation.
- People always believe they are right ‘by their own method’ i.e. The process they have followed in their heart and mind to choose whatever behaviour they have just enacted. When we can understand those methods for people, we understand them and can support and help them do more of that, if it’s a positive behaviour, or invite them to another place if it’s not
- Ribbons seem to be the world’s view on how we should reward. Awards, money, badges. Ribbons. Yet I have always found the most profound reward I can give someone, without question, is when I have tapped into an element at the core of their being that they would die for and which is at the root of their belief system and I link their behaviour with that. It requires strength, reflection, and courage.
This is all relationship over ribbons as I am seeking their heart and their purpose in life and showing them how they are a light worth shining from the hilltop thanks to their behaviour. It is the tougher path of course as it requires diligence in denial of self method and seeking to understand another’s method and story.
Yours in relationship,
Is it possible!!!???
I read the following blog post and my first feeling was “I’m just trying my hardest to be awesome at ONE thing!” Then I realised that that blog post was a lot about working hard in many areas and getting the most out of ourselves in all the different supporting skills to be the most awesome we can be!
I have to say that it is my belief that finding that one thing to be awesome at is the very thing that should be the focus of our lives. At a professional, which should truly be, a vocational level, I do believe that if we can all find that one thing that sits in our natural set of gifts and resonates with us, then that is truly the thing we should pursue.
It’s true you’ll find in the blog post that in fact the very first point does talk about following your passion. I think though that in addition to that one thing we find our way into, there are always supporting skills and areas we need to work hard at improving, lest we make excuses like “Oh, I’m not like that” when we might very well become like that with a bit of hard work.
I thought the points in the blog were great and of course the main point is that if we work hard enough at anything, we can get better at it and many will do so, who are truly seeking to lead anyway.
What’s on my mind? This SO IS… please do yourself a favour and watch it. It’s so funny and so packed with needed truth.
The world seems to be heading towards a collective groundswell of ‘entitlement mentality’ at break neck speed. Our appreciation for the amazing wanes as familiarity steals our sense of awe. The unfortunate outcome being the selfish outlook that can result and a lack of outward focus and thinking…
“I’ve been inconvenienced or don’t have this or that luxury so SOMEONE’S GONNA PAY AND THAT’S MY RIGHT!”
Ask a dying man on the streets of Calcutta what he considers a luxury… to live.
On your next business flight, or personal trip for a holiday. Stop, look out the window and just say “Wow, look at that, I’m above the clouds. Amazing!” You won’t have to tell your kids to, they’ll already be saying it… they haven’t been as affected by the folly of the entitlement that so many of us in the world enjoy. And hopefully they never will…
And leaders aren’t either.
Thanks to Kirk over at T4D for sharing this. Kirk’s post where he shared this is here: http://kirkweisler.com/t4d/2012/08/03/give-it-second-life-is-amazing/
This post isn’t so much on leadership I’m sorry so I’m taking liberties on this blog. I have no ‘faith’ specific blog yet, but hope to create one soon.
The following post is in response to a show that aired recently on Australian TV called ‘Q and A’ and on it appeared a renowned Scientest/Atheist Dr Richard Dawkins and Cardinal George Pell. Viewable here: http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3469101.htm
Elements of my post are in response to a write up in an article here: http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/dawkins-shades-pell-in-battle-of-belief-20120410-1wlk9.html
I actually found the show to be as I expected. Though maybe that’s because I think my expectations were ‘set correctly’. It’s a media show where two phenomenally intelligent and well respected men were expected to try and debate in two or three minute blocks on questions and topics that have taken thousands of years for other men of mostly greater intelligence to contemplate, reflect on, study and dissect, lather, rinse, and repeat. There was always going to be a lot of ‘tit for tat’ and small stuff. The show as a concept is almost geared towards that and I believe to expect much else is unrealistic. So I didn’t ‘expect’ a great deal I guess you could say.
Having said that I enjoyed the arguments back and forth and thought Dr Dawkins presented his points as well as he could as did Cardinal Pell – from a completely ‘sit back and analyse the argument objectively standpoint. That’s not to say both made gaffs and ‘mistakes’ in representing their views and beliefs. What human wouldn’t in the lights of a live studio audience and a nation salivating at a prominent believer vs non believer battle to the death (where one believes that wouldn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things anyway!)… I only believe they missed a wonderful opportunity to open with a musical score of Eye of the Tiger. As an aside, how fascinating that for such a topic as faith and ‘why’ we are here that it is such an event that it only needs two panellists vs the norm to keep it interesting and ‘worthwhile’. Maybe it alludes in some ways to the level of interest and potential ‘search and hunger’ most of us are on to truly know ‘why’… let’s explore some of that…
I think whoever wrote the article for The Age strikes me as an atheist (I guess they had to be either! Or I guess a fence sitter) despite maybe trying to present otherwise… giving ‘battler points’ to Pell but seemingly intent on handing the bout to Dawkins – was it necessary to do either. I guess the mainstream news media consumers want a judge’s decision, even if on points.
However, the major miss of the article and Dr Dawkins for me, among many more ‘points’ on both sides, was dismissing the question of ‘why’ we are here by simply calling it silly. Really?! Maybe Pell missed his chance on that but from my perspective asking ‘why’ things happen is the basis of most of what I learned in Science, yet on possibly the biggest question of all that science should/could seek to answer, as I believe governs faith AND science, Dawkins chooses to ‘escape’ by simply labelling that question as ‘silly’. For a man of such intelligence, that flawed me though I guess it’s an easy out to claim that isn’t a worthy scientific question to ask. To me though, that’s a bit silly itself and the biggest dodge of the night. Maybe the fact he has no answer for this particular ‘Why did this happen’ question that his science can prove that he dismisses it until he has one, like so many other areas of science that still yet evade us. Though in other such scientific areas, I doubt he would simply throw it out as ‘silly’ if not seeking simply to try and make a point… again, back to where I began and tit for tat. Remember back to the time of the Wright brothers, on one side of the world what was being taught about flight… it’s impossible, as on the other side of the world the Wright brothers were ‘creating’ that science. Interesting.
I know scientists who have a strong faith and religious who know their science in fact I’m sure JP II at one point actually commented on the importance of science. For me I see science and faith as complimentary partners in explanation and understanding… the paradox of opposites so present all around us, summer and winter, autumn and spring, the seed dies to give new life, good and evil, the truly great leader serves, men and women (a beautiful mystery of opposites)… AND ultimately… how’s and why’s.
Essentially science gets you most of the way but faith finishes the job as Dawkins himself could only assert he has no scientific way to disprove the existence of God. Have to grant him kudos for remaining ‘scientific’ on that point. Though given it seemed he could only feebly try and avoid the question of ‘why’ by simply calling it silly… I know which I find the more believable truth from my own journey and experience… though I’ve been ‘open minded’ enough to consider those things science is yet to prove… thank goodness the Wright brothers did the same. I could go on but this is already probably fairly rough and flawed in composition and I only wanted to add further thought and comment on a/some key point(s) I saw that were missed or hopefully give it some more rounding.
I think Fr Chris Ryan MGL, has posted some great, far more theologically based and deeper level thoughts himself here: http://frchrisryanmgl.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/beyond-qanda-insights-into-atheism-and-faith-with-nikki-gemmell/
I finish with a comment on how this sits in my view of leadership. No leader fears a discussion on the deeper topics as that is where we connect at a deeper level. If we can truly seek to understand someone and what they believe. Whether we agree with it or not, if handled right, a greater ability to lead results as we seek to…
Today’s post is after reflecting on something that good friend Kirk Weisler posted over at T4D http://kirkweisler.com/t4d/2012/03/01/do-you-need-to-close-the-account. I understand the risk Kirk presents and wanted to reflect on this myself. A picture he posted effuses “If you allow people to make more withdrawals than deposits in ur (sic.) life, You will be out of balance and in the negative! Know when to close the account” ~ christie williams
… unless you do all you can to ensure your bank always has enough funds.
For me this one is always a tough one to process and comment on as it can sound very self righteous and I also believe Kirk is reflecting on a certain type of person who seems to have made up their mind to never be reached, never be encouraged and it seems those types may well need to have their ‘account closed’ as that may be the best wake up call to actually help them change. Please understand my reply is not and never intended to be finger pointing. As always, we journey together and I share about this to get us thinking and to be challenged. Read on…
I think we always need to stop and ask the question – what is under the surface of these people (one reply referred to them as ‘energy vampires’ and it’s true we’ve all come across them) – and can they be loved to ‘angeldom’. And even if they can’t, shouldn’t I still love anyway.
I believe the only place to begin is always, at the beginning. The beginning for them, what is their story and why do choose this behaviour. As life-giving people, dare I say ‘Christian’, I think we need to take care that we don’t turn our backs on those who truly need the life we have to give. “I can do all things…”. Yet, as Kirk has illustrated, we also need to be so careful about our own attitude lest we fall ourselves. Particularly hard for those determined to ‘suck’, excuse the expression.
I heard it put beautifully the other day by a very wise man Richard Rohr. Let me try and put it here. He said when we respond in a way that confirms behaviour in someone who is down on themselves, down on the world, angry about it all, we simply confirm their condition. We give them the right to continue that way and we say “Yes, the world is a bad place and I have nothing better for you.” Which of course encourages them to repeat the behaviour. When we can show that despite the way they are treating us or talking to us, we can still love and completely ignore the ‘test’ they are giving us in their attitude and behaviour, we communicate that there is actually goodness in the world and I have some of it for you.
I don’t deny that exposing ourselves too often to too many people like this can be a tough gig and we need to be so careful that we remain with a full cup of goodness to share and be poured out for all – other positive AND negative people. I think this is the essence of what you are saying Kirk. But the lesson I’ve learned and seek to live from all those who have done this in great ways is that it is often the least of those around us that need us to be with them the most… and not to give up on them. But wow, it’s hard sometimes and I wish I were stronger for the challenge and better at it. What did Jim Rohn say “Don’t wish that life (insert: or other people) were easier, wish that you were better.”
Which is why we need to visit the well daily to replenish so we can go out and give again. The well of our family, our friends, our quiet time of contemplation.
I just wanted to also include a reflection that I read just the other day that possibly has a link here, see what you think. Understand that I share it as much to challenge myself as anyone. And whether you ‘believe’ or not I don’t think matters if truly here to be challenged and grow. If you don’t believe, then replace the word ‘Christians’ with ‘good people’ and it will work for you .
It gets a bit heady, just so you know, but my understanding is we are here to challenge ourselves and I found it a wonderful personal challenge. It’s also an example in the ‘extreme’ but it’s all degrees of brokenness for different people…
From: “A Presence that Disturbs” Anthony J Gittins
“Genesis House in Chicago is a place of welcome and support for women trying to escape from prostitution. It is a place where many volunteers and employees first began to understand how unjust and unforgiving some Christians and a certain type of Christianity can be. If human beings do not experience love and thus are not yet able to love others, then to judge them guilty of sin is to be guilty of sinful judgements oneself. In fact, if due to abuse or abandonment a person ahs not experienced love, such a person cannot be morally guilty of failing to love others. The axiom ‘nemo dat quod non habet’ (“One cannot give what one has not first received or possessed”) applies as much to love as it does to anything else. To condemn victimised and unloved persons because they do not meet public standards of behaviour is to add insult to injury…
… only when one of the women of Genesis House, “Teddy Bear” by name, broken by abuse, drugs, and prostitution, discovered that she had found a sanctuary where she was accepted unconditionally could she begin to find the peace and healing she craved. But in her case the ravages were too deep, and her broken body could not live with her rekindled spirit. Yet when she died at thirty-one, she did know what it was to love her neighbour because she had at last begun to love herself.”
Share some of the love you have to give with those who need it most, then get around those who can fill you again … then go back for more and…
We only become the person we have to,
based on what we have said we would do
or as a result of those challenges that are a natural part of life which we have to face.
We fail to become what we need to
due to the things we give up on
or by not choosing a direction at all
let alone one that challenges us more than our current circumstances.
This explains why so many who experience massive natural challenge in their life,
through tragedy out of their control,
if they manage to get through it well,
tend to be people who others look to and praise,
saying “What an amazing person of great strength.”
To be like them and become great people too,
without the ‘blessing’ of tragedy,
we must seek the tougher paths and strong directions,
or else we will waste our life,
never asking of ourselves to ‘become someone’.
Mark Wellman, paralysed from the waist down, atop El Capitan
Let’s do the world a favour and become someone. Let’s