Search Results

Having to choose between the human faults of Envy and Greed, most of us would instinctively reject both as negative traits - and we've all grown on numerous stories and metaphors explaining why we should avoid either one of them. But a while ago, reading For the Win, by Cory Doctorow (highly recommended book, highly recommended author) I ran into a paragraph (regarding economics of gaming) that boiled down to the following: Greed is about wanting to have what others have and you think has value. Envy is about wanting to have what others have and others think has value. For the Win, Cory Doctorow And this made me realize that yet again, "forces of evil" (Greed and Envy in this case) can be used for good. You can use Greed - to see how others are - and wish to be like them. You can use Envy - to see how others wish to be - and learn what to wish for. Get it! Got it? Good...

(פורסם לראשונה באנגלית בפברואר 2020.) (נכתב חלקית במגדר נשי, בגלל קשיי השפה שלי. מתייחס לנשים וגברים כאחת.) הנה שלוש שאלות, שממש קל לענות עליהן, שכשמצרפים את התשובות עליהן, יעזרו לכם לבחון את דעתכם על חברי הצוות שלכם: אם יכולתם לשבט את חברת הצוות, כך שיהיו בצוות שתיים כמוה - הייתם משבטים אותה? אם חברת הצוות הייתה אומרת לכם שהיא עוזבת מחר - הייתם מוטרדים - או נושמים לרווחה? אם הייתם מקימים צוות חדש, ויכולתם לבחור את מי שאתם רוצים - הייתם בוחרים בה? עוד שאלה שהתחרתה על מקום ברשימה הקצרה הזו: אם חברת הצוות תעזוב את הצוות - כמה חשוב יהיה להחליף אותו? כמה קשה להחליף אותו? מה אתם חושבים?

When trying to assess the value of team members, here are a number of questions that can be easily answered - and when aggregated, will easily indicate the value you assign to them. If you could "clone" this person, and have another one just the same - would you? If this person told you they are leaving tomorrow, would you be more anxious - or more relieved? If you were to built a new team from scratch, and could pick anyone - would you pick this person? Another question competing for a place on this short list is: If this person left the team - how critical would it be to replace them? How hard would it be to replace them? Thoughts?

“Focusing is about saying No.” - Steve Jobs, WWDC '97 A while ago (first half of 2019), I presented to a forum at work - and it was one of the most frustrating presentations I had. A project I was involved with was in bad shape, we were in a bad place, and this presentation was supposed to be a turning point - where we'd kickoff the process taking us out of crisis-with-no-hope mode, to a plan leading to the tunnel leading to the light. We've prepared. We've prepared the presentation. We've prepared the story. We've prepared the key audience members. Or so we thought. Soon after I started the presentation, I realized that something was wrong. It's as if all the things prepared, all the pre-packaged messages we "fed" the stakeholders upfront - vanished into thin air. They forgot everything. The audience failed to grasp my point. Not upfront, and not in the live session. Now, I've had bad presentations in the past. But this was something different. On a different scale. This session... Well - to put it gently - it was "challenging". Arguments took place. Frustrations were voiced. Voices were raised. That in itself is not a problem. The problem was that the message - the key takeaway from the presentation - was obscured, and many in the audience missed it, as a result of the bad preparation and worse presentation - and the turmoil that followed. So we were no closer to solving the problem than we were before the session - possibly even farther away. Instead of the session being a first step in building the ladder to take us out of the hole we've been in - we ended up digging a deeper hole. After the session, trying to regroup, numerous reactions (mine, and of colleagues) were "What wen't wrong? we've prepared everything and everyone so carefully. How did things mess up? Why did people in the audience who have been informed upfront of the details, forget everything, and react surprised?" This was so counter-productive. We've spent some hours trying to figure this out. And then it dawned on us. It's not them - it's us (or in this case - me). If your audience didn't understand you, it means *you* (well, I...) weren't clear. I didn't focus. I wasn't clear. I had too many things to say. I had no clarity in my message. This was a breakthrough in the damage-control and recovery process. Once we owned up - as soon as we said "No matter how well I prepared; if they didn't understand - it means I failed to convey the message" - it was the first step to fixing the problem. And it got us going on to hectic 24-hour-round-the-clock frenzy of work - and we got that ladder in place, and got our project (and ourselves) out of the hole, and on to the right track. This crisis - and the realization it led to - actually ended up filling us with positive energies, propelling our project forward, on the right track, leading it to the right location. (* The next day, a worried colleague asked me "Are you ok? How do you feel?" and my answer was "I feel like I just drank cold, super-bitter coffee. It leaves a horrible taste in your mouth - but it fills you with energies..." *)

People install apps for relationships, not for information. I don't have the numbers, but... The general sentiment is that statistics for app installation and removal can be quite disappointing. People won't look for your app. And if they look for it, they'll have a hard time finding it. If if they find it, it'll behard to convince them to install it. The good news is If they install it - they'll try it. But then, trouble starts again... If they try it - it'll be very hard to convicne them to try it again. And if they don't use it regulalry, they'll either remove it - of forget it. Leading me to the conclusion that: People install apps for relationships, not for information. They'll install and use and keep using an app - if-and-only-if there's a relationship going on here, between the app/business/etc - and the end user...

Is it better to attend a prestigious school? Is it better to intern at a prestigious firm? (If you must read a Hebrew translation, you can find it here. I must say I believe the English text flows better.) And if the answer is "Yes" - why? When searching for an answer, I found that most answers (except for those published by the institutes themselves) point at the amazing Networking the prestigious institutes have, and focus less on the quality of training/education the place offers (it's not that these points were ignored - but they were less emphasized than one would expect). I'd like to offer an alternate answer. From listening to people attending such institutes and observing them in the day-to-day (in a casual manner, not scientifically) - I'd like to propose that the most valuable such institutes offer is one of self-improvement. Since these prestigious places have a reputation to keep, they work hard to do so - and one of the methods they use most - is make you work hard - and then work harder - and then work harder... And possibly that's the real value of these places - the drive of the institute to prove it's better, makes it make you work extra hard - and so teaches you to work extra hard. To drive yourself to break boundaries you didn't have to before, and possibly didn't think you could. After you learn you can work harder than you thought, you (hopefully) learn to do so over and over - and believe you can do it - no matter what "it" is. And you can do things faster, better and using less resources. And you outdo yourself over and over and over again. Paving your way for achieving more and more. Because To Do Well, You Must Outdo Yourself.

(The Hebrew version was published in October) We all know or remember that situation... Someone told us something - and we were offended. Outwardly, we may have "let it go", but deep inside - we were offended. It may have been constructive criticism, maybe an intended insult - and maybe they weren't even talking to us. But we took it personally, and were offended. And then someone (else) who's opinion we value told us: "What do you care what they say?" And I want to ask - and propose an answer to - the following question: Why do we care? why can't we simply ignore any criticism? The Sages speak positively and with high regard about people "...who are insulted and do not insult" - and I ask why should such people be valued? Wouldn't it be better to credit those who totally ignore insults altogether? Well, I'd like to offer the following (unfounded) answer: The fact we care about what people say to us - is an important developmental mechanism. The mere fact we care what people say to us/about us is a built-in mechanism that drives us to continuously try to improve ourselves - to become better than we were. Because even if the criticism/feedback/insult is unjustified, the can motivate us change for the better. And at the end-of-the-day - that is (or should be) one of our most important goals: to be better today than we were yesterday. And tomorrow - better than we were today. To always be moving forward - and never be standing still. Good luck! TL;DR; I theorize we were created/evolved with a built-in self-improvement mechanism, which is fueled by input (feedback/criticism/insults)

(The English version was published in November'19) כולנו מכירים/זוכרים את הסיטואציה... מישהו אמר לנו משהו - ונעלבנו. אולי כלפי חוץ ״החלקנו״ את זה, אבל עמוק בפנים - נעלבנו. אולי ביקורת בונה, אולי סתם ביקורת, אולי עלבון, ואולי אפילו לא דיברו אלינו. אבל אנחנו ״לקחנו ללב״, ונעלבנו. ואז מישהו (אחר) יקר לנו אמר לנו ״מה אכפת לך מה הם אומרים? ...״ ואני רוצה לשאול (וגם להציע תשובה) - באמת למה אכפת לנו? למה אנחנו לא מסוגלים פשוט מאוד להתעלם מכל ביקורת? חז״ל (מסכת שבת) משבחים את ״הנעלבים ואינם עולבים״ - ואני שואל למה? האם לא היה עדיף לשבח את מי שמלכתחילה לא נעלב? את מי שלא איכפת לו ממה שאומרים לו? אני רוצה להציע את התשובה (הלא מבוססת) הבאה: העובדה שאיכפת לנו היא מנגנון התפתחותי חשוב. עצם העובדה שאיכפת לנו ממה שאומרים, מהווה מנגנון מובנה שמחייב אותנו לנסות ולהישתפר. כי אפילו אם הביקורת/משוב/עלבון לא מדוייקים, הם יכולים להניע אותנו לנסות להיות טובים יותר. וזו בסופו של דבר אחת המטרות החשובות ביותר שלנו - להיות היום - טובים משהיינו אתמול. ולהיות מחר - טובים משהיינו היום. להיום מהלכים - ולא להיות עומדים. בהצלחה!

It was our anniversary earlier this month. We decided to spend the weekend in Jerusalem - and visit The Kotel (a.k.a. The Wailing Wall). Only pictures.

(* For an English version, click here) פורסם לראשונה באנגלית, בשנת 2016. פורסם מחדש - ובעברית - בעקבות השראה שקיבלתי מבת של חברים. בהצלחה! כל כך הרבה מחקר, כל כך הרבה כסף וכל כך הרבה תיאוריות. האנושות כולה הייתה (ועודנה) מסוקרנת לגבי מה מייחד אנשים מצליחים? מהי אותה תכונה, מרכיב סודי - ״טריק״ - שמבדיל אנשים שמצליחים מאלו שנכשלים. לא מאמינים? פשוט תגגלו ״למה אנשים מצליחים״ (או שילוב אחר של מילים נרדפות), ותקבלו עשרות או מאות אלפי תוצאות אפשריות (ובאנגלית, עוד הרבה יותר תוצאות). הנה ה״טריק״, התכונה, הסיכום - במשפט אחד פשוט: ההבדל היחיד שקיים בין אנשים שמצליחים לאנשים שנכשלים הוא שאנשים שהצליחו, המשיכו לנסות (*). תקראו את המשפט שוב. ו-נסו שוב. ושוב. ואם עדיין לא הצלחתם, הדבר היחיד והמשמעותי ביותר שתוכלו לעשות בכדי להצליח - הוא להמשיך לנסות. נתחו את הכישלונות שלכם. שפרו את המאמצים שלכם. לימדו מהטעויות שלכם. אבל יותר מכל דבר אחר, הכי חשוב - המשיכו לנסות! כפי שטוען כי תומאס אלווה אדיסון אמר כשסוף סוף פיתח נורה עובדת - לאחר 10,000 כישלונות: לא נכשלתי. מצאתי זה עתה 10,000 שיטות שלא עובדות. (*) לצורך הדיון, נתעלם מאנשים ש"הצליחו במכה ראשונה". אומנם, יש שמועות שאנשים כאילו קיימים, אבל נתעלם מהם... #philosophy

After listening to the audio book "21 Lessons for the 21st Century" by Yuval Noah Harari (YNH), I found myself thinking. That's no surprise - YNH writes in a way that whether you like it or not - you will find yourself thinking... I enjoyed the thought-provoking insights on so many of the topics, found the anecdotes fascinating, the questions challenging - but was left with a feeling that many of the criticisms offered - from YNH's vast knowledge - weren't "tight" enough, though I could not challenge them myself - and to make things worse - I felt the questions he raised were much better than the answers he offered. So, I did what most people do when encountering a challenge. I called my father. I asked him if he could get hold of a copy, read it - and review it. I won't bore you with why I felt my Dad's the right person to review the book. But I will qualify this with one of my Dad's favorite saying "oh well, what do I know???" (typically said right after he totally wowed you with some amazing piece of knowledge. More on that in another blog post part 1 and part 2). So here goes... I've just finished reading Yuval Harari’s 21st Century thoughts, and enjoyed the recap of all the fantasies and uselessnesses of religious and national master narratives, especially since they don't seem to unify the species to deal intelligently (or at all) with the ostensible big 3 catastrophes currently barreling unstoppably towards us:   algorithmic control of our minds via merging of info and bio technologies and climate changes. But then religious and nationalist ‘stories’ never did stop or mute the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse — just helped homo sap huddle together when/if surviving them. It’s from a secular, globalizing, non to anti nationalist/ religious view. And since it was written in Hebrew initially (before world wide english translation) it obviously engages in the very arrogance it accuses jews, Judaism and Zionism of... grouping zionism with fascism and communism when (1) jews were the victims of both [and ‘secular’ jews participants in the red versions] while (2) insisting it’s jewish arrogance to think themselves ‘chosen’ or even important to human history (let alone central to creation’s) while being barely 0.2% of the species. This conflict of belief and behavior of course is nothing new, anywhere, and he has lots of nice slams on all the known versions of master narratives uniting the species into opposing groups thereby preventing the species in all from dealing with the big 3 train wrecks we’re beginning to participate with. The last chapters deal with humility (preaching to predominant ‘chosen’ religions and nations) and urging us AS INDIVIDUALS (apparently his default setting) to practice meditation to assume control over our consciousnesses/minds (not the same as brain or intelligence of course) before algorithms run by big techs and governments do it for us. How’s that for fun? Bottom Line? Surely worth reading. But - take it with a grain of salt. And don't base any mission-critical decisions solely on his conclusions or recommendation.

Once, a very smart person said "The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry" (attributed to Robert Burns). Things don't always go as planned. And even if they do go as planned - the plans are not always perfect. So you'll fail. You will make mistakes. And if you won't make a mistake, you'll see someone else making a mistake. You're not expected not to fail. You are expected to always learn from mistakes - no matter who made them (but especially if you made them). And you are expected to be one of the driving forces for improvement and fixing - instead of "What can we do so that next time I better understand the schedule?" - which leaves someone else the responsibility to propose how you can fix your mistakes - try "I propose that next time I'll check upfront what is the schedule - would that help? Or would that be annoying?". Instead of pointing out what brick is missing - place an alternate brick in the wall.