Communication

Much has been written about the posting addressed below. Earlier books included: "Games People Play" Eric Bernes, "I'm OK, You're OK" by Harris, et al. My personal experiences with the subject material prompted me to write this posting when I sat through a presentation by someone who treated the topic as a new and revolutionary discovery. The related thouht to be considered when you read the narrative below is that communicatio between "right-brain" dominated and "left-brain" dominated is a struggle and special consideration is necessary or succinct communication will not occur.

After facilitating and teaching management/executive training programs for many years during which it was always stressed that leadership skills (right-brain dominated) and management skills (left-brain dominated) are not the same. Some fortunate individuals possess a balance of the two, but most usually excel in one over the other. The spark of leadership is difficult to instill if not already present, but the skills of implementation can be taught. Management skills are the result of training and experience and can be more easily taught. One example we used to illustrate leadership versus management was Adolph Hitler. There is no doubt of his leadership (albeit misguided) as he "led" the populace of Germany to become the belligerent nation we saw in WWII. Had Hitler possessed equal management skills,(or had not tried to manage the war himself and left that task to others with better management skills) quite possibly much of the world would be speaking German.
Many of our presidents (and military officers) are/were dominant one skill or the other. Ronald Reagan is depicted by many to be the epitome of leadership, but weaker in management abilities. Others use Jimmy Carter as an example of a good manager, (smart, meticulous, member of Mensa, etc.) but lacking in leadership traits. Some political pundits tend to contrast the two present day Republican frontrunners in this light.

The identification of prime examples of either leaders or managers is not a precise science, but business executives have long paid a great deal of money toward evaluating and developing both disciplines, not necessarily at the same time or the same place.

Another tough question we tackled in the afore mentioned seminars was the difference (if any) between morals and ethics.(Just for fun consider that morals are learned as a child, usually from parents and remain essentially the same over our lifetime, while ethics are inculcated when we are adults and are subject to "situational" changes over time.) I've written papers on this murky subject. Interesting topic, but difficult to obtain concensus.

Earnest Mercer
Author: "Skivvy Girl: The Love of a Post WWII Japanese Pleasure Girl"

Noblesse Oblige

I remember going to the SS office to initiate my social security payments.
The pompous (ignorant) clerk stated that I would use up all the money I'd
paid in between five and ten years. Why she told me this, I don't know,
probably it was on her teleprompter menu. I told her what she said was
nonsense, but saw no need to argue with a nitwit. The calculations below
are not mine, but they check out mathematically (if certain variables are
accepted) and this was why I told the clerk what she was spewing was
nonsense. Furthermore, those LWL's(a.k.a. Left Wing Loons) who rail against
changing SS rules to allow the option for partial investment in markets do
so under the NOBLESSE OBLIGE concept that individuals are not capable of
making their own decisions, but must have the omniscient nobles or
government bureaucrats to do so for them.

"Remember, not only did you contribute to Social Security but your employer
did too. It totaled 15% of your income before taxes. If you averaged only
$30K over your working life, that's close to $220,500. If you calculate the
future value of $4,500 per year (yours & your employer's contribution) at a
simple 5% (less than what the govt . pays on the money that it borrows),
after 49 years of working you'd have $892,919.98. If you took out only 3%
per year, you'd receive $26,787.60 per year and it would last better than 30
years (until you're 95 if you retire at age 65) and that's with no interest
paid on that final amount on deposit! If you bought an annuity and it paid
4% per year, you'd have a lifetime income of $2,976.40 per month.

Earnest
Author of "Skivvy Girl: The Love of a Post WWII Japanese Pleasure Girl"
www.earnestmercerbooks.com