discipline and strategy

Lots of people have talked and written enthusiastically - and sometimes even knowledgeably - about strategic thinking. Google the phrase and you'll find almost 1.2 million sites. If you google "disciplined thinking" instead, you'll find less than 30,000 references. Both strategy and discipline are systematic approaches to problem solving and achievement. Why is strategy so much more popular than discipline?

Typically, people use the word "strategic" to describe two kinds of activity: 1) activities that do not seem to serve an immediate purpose that are described as having a value that overrides short-term priorities or 2) activities that yield immediate advantage although they are not part of plans or routines. In other words, strategic is a term that often allows one to have the cake and eat it too - it offers both a reason to stay on task and an excuse to be distracted.

Discipline is a much tougher word. Discipline means accepting a set of rules and practices and applying them in order to discover value, solve problems and make progress. Discipline means giving up the chance to rationalize what you want as being more useful than what you know. Discipline means sitting down to write in order to discover what you have to say rather than waiting for inspiration or opportunity.

Discipline and strategy are not really incompatible. At their best, they work hand in hand with natural neurological processes to create routines that allow us to make good choices quickly. At their best, they allow us to balance strength with flexibility. At their best, they allow us to marry individual insight with collective wisdom. At their best, they work together.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The hypnotic contract

Under what conditions would you allow someone else to tell you what to think?   If you have watched a stage hypnotist, you have seen what looks like one person exercising remarkable control over the thoughts and actions of another. It is fascinating, in part, because we have all seen it happen in real life. Suddenly someone we know seems to be relying on someone else to do the thinking.  Even if the influence is good, it is a little frightening. The secret is that there are no magic words.  In order to lead someone into hypnosis, that person has to be willing to go there. Often the people you see on stage are more than willing. For whatever reasons, they are enthusiastic about giving up self control and allowing someone else to take charge. They know that there are limits to what can happen on stage and they are only agreeing to give up control within those limits. What you see in hypnosis is an agreement between two people. Like all agreements between human beings, it stretches as far
Read more

Good with people

What do you think of when you hear the phrase "good with people?" When a wine is good with steak, it means that both the steak and the wine taste better when enjoyed together. If you are 'good with people' that could mean that both you and they perform better when you work together. "Good with people" should not be confused with charm or grace. Many famous leaders have, in the absence of any obvious charm or eloquence, managed to get people to produce at high levels. Some introverts fail to be influential; some extraverts fail to be effective. The most useful criteria for "good with people" is the performance that results when an individual is working with others: does the sum exceed the total of the parts? Or would they all have been better working from separate cubicles? We are entering the season of networking: it's a perfect time to observe the difference between the people who are working the room and the people who are making the room w
Read more

The fine line between observations, suggestions and commands

I have been watching Tony Robbins this week in the documentary called " I Am Not Your Guru ." You can read a nicely ambivalent review in the Financial Times here.   I think the ambivalence is built into the process, which might be surprising given the loud celebration that characterizes the Date with Destiny in the film. For those of us whose work has evolved from NLP, there are lessons to be learned from modelling the most famous and successful practitioner of NLP (Robbins has far surpassed all the founders by all measures of success). Because he does so much so well, Robbins lets us see how fine the line is between observing and suggesting. Let me explain. Robbins frames his "interventions" both with the exercises and performances we do not see in the film and with his invitations. The film opens with an intervention with a young man who says he is suicidal; it is only later that we see Robbins say he is looking for someone who is suicidal to work with. Since
Read more