Babak's Blog

how we control things

a couple friends were discussing how, amongst a group of four of us, each of us controls conversations and relationships.  it wasn't meant necessarily as a negative, as we often times associate the word "control" but rather was intended to focus on how we influence our environments.  according to them, we each use different styles, strengths and attitudes to do so.  for us, they argued that one uses indifference (or at least the appearance of not caring), another uses intelligence, a 3rd makes people play on his terms, and the fourth tries to overpower others, whether thru excitement or sheer repetition.

it got me thinking that we all have some way we use to affect others.  there are many such styles include:
-humor
-athletic ability
-a victim mentality
-flirting
-physical appearance
-kindness
-guilt
-rank / title in an organization

i'm not about to say which one is the best - though i do think things like playing the victim and making others try to feel guilty are not my favorites. the reality is that people will (and often times need to) use their strengths.  at the same time, having access to a variety of styles and strengths means that one can draw on them at different points, depending on the situation.  some people just don't care about intelligence - for them, the major currency of influence might be sex.  for others, athletic ability might be what allows one person to have a disproportionate amount of influence.

i'm going to start paying a little more attention to how people try to affect others.  again, control isn't a bad thing all the time.  we all want to have influence in one way or another.  if you want a great book on influence, check out robert cialdini's book, influence: science and practice.  it's a great read. in the meantime, just paying attention to the world out there is another great way to learn.

How Snoopy changed my life...

Over the holidays I was watching A Charlie Brown Christmas for the bajillionth time. (Click here if you want to watch it.) Near the beginning of the flick, we see Snoopy, Chuck’s loveable dog, ice-skating – just totally enjoying himself (Snoopy, I mean). Skating in circles, big smile on his, just totally carefree. Then he grabs a bunch of the kids and pulls them along – we see some of them laughing, others screaming, and some others not really knowing what to think.

Later, Charlie Brown feels down when he sees that his own dog is showing the Christmas spirit by putting lights up on his doghouse. Throughout, we Snoopy as this totally carefree character, always seeming to enjoy himself, celebrating life to the fullest. Even when Lucy gets mad at him, he responds with a smile and by licking her face (which, like, totally grosses her out, but that’s a different story…).

It’s been a number of years since I’d watching an animated Charlie Brown feature, and while I read the comics every once in a while, the animated shows are totally different. Perhaps it was the time of the year or where I am in my life, but something about watching this show this time was different for me.

We often associate carefree with someone who is lazy or just doesn’t get much done. And so I quickly realized that I needed to be careful in picking the appropriate words here.

But more than being carefree, Snoopy celebrates life. He is rarely without a smile on his face. Whether it is ice-skating or listening to Linus play the piano, he enjoys where he is and more than that, celebrates the now. At the same time, he enrolls others in playing, as he does by grabbing his fellow ice-skaters and pulling them along. Sure, there’s a reckless abandon to some of his actions, but I’d rather err on reckless abandon with getting others involved than going it solo.

Somehow Snoopy rarely, if ever, complains. Not only that, he adapts quickly. At one point, Lucy tells him that he must take the role of all the animal characters in the performance they are putting together. Snoopy could easily have said, “I am a dog and that’s it all that I am.” Instead, he shows off his best sheep baa, cow moo, and penguin waltz.

As I was thinking about all of this, I caught myself and wondered what I was doing. Is this some silly analysis of an animated, fictional dog? Is this analysis so un-Snoopy-like? Was I like the writer who argued that the character in Robert Frost’s “Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening” was in fact Santa Claus (my 8^th-grade English used to say that this was a perfect example of a situation where just because you can do something doesn’t mean that you should actually do it.)

Am I ridiculous in looking at Snoopy’s personality and characteristics?

And then I realized something. Even if the answer is yes, that doesn’t mean that I can’t use him as a guide, and this is the important part, if it helps me. My point is this – Snoopy has a lot of characteristics that I want for myself – and if it means that I think about how Snoopy behaves in a certain situation and that works for me, then who cares if it is silly, ridiculous, or absurd?

I want to be more carefree than I am. I want to celebrate life as much as possible. I want to enroll others in things that I celebrate. I want to complain as little as possible. I want to adapt quickly.

For me, those are some of my aspirations. And I see them as generally good. If that means that I look to some fictional and animated beagle to help me be that way more often, I’ll take it.

Perhaps in writing about this, making it public for anyone to see, I am slowly being more like Snoopy.

Now, if you find me sleeping on top of a doghouse, you'll know I've gone a bit too far, but that's a risk I'm willing to take...

The Golden Rule was Slightly Off

My professor David Bradford at Stanford Business School told me something that has stuck with me several years later. He said that the Golden Rule was slightly off. Actually he might even have said it was wrong. Either way, I remember that once he said that, I was curious how he would follow that statement. How do you know the Golden Rule? Off? Wrong? What gives.

Then he explained that the Golden Rule said you should do unto others as you’d have done unto you. But this is not the right way of looking at it. Professor Bradford said that you should do unto others as - (and this is the important part) – as they would prefer to have done unto them.

That’s a big difference. And I think he is/was right. Our actions towards others shouldn’t necessarily be just about what we would prefer; we should be thinking about others and recognize what they want. Whether it’s being self, self-righteous or just plain stubborn, by following the Golden Rule as written, we are not appropriately considering others’ preferences. And I would guess that in many circumstances, what others would want and what I would want would be very different.

But that takes a lot of work to follow this new rule that I coin the Bradford Rule – until he tells me he got the idea from someone else, I’m giving him full credit. But sometimes we don’t know what others want. How can we possibly know what others want? Well, here’s a shocker – we can ASK them. Now, there’s a novel idea. Ma’am, what would you prefer? Sir, how would you like things done?

Now, this isn’t to say that we always defer to others’ desires and give up our preferences, goals, or beliefs. I’m not at all suggesting that. It is more of a shift in perspective – in being able to recognize – no, it’s more than recognition. It is in being to act in a way that acknowledges the differences we have. It is acting in a way that reflects that we are thinking of others. It is acting in a way that reflects that we are thinking at all.

The Bradford Rule – Do unto others as they would prefer to have done unto them.

Amen.

Walking around naked in the gym locker room…

I can only imagine what women’s locker rooms at the gym are like, but I just hope they’re not like the men’s locker room. I’ve never understood why men walk around the locker naked. And not just for a couple seconds, but long stretches of time. Usually after exiting the always-clean Jacuzzi and then basking in the sauna for a quarter hour, they return to the locker room and begin to go about their business butt naked. And not that it really makes much of a difference, but the men who do this fall into at least one of the following categories – overweight, hairy or old. 

Seriously, do these men do this at their homes? Walk around naked, shave naked, sit on a bench and pick the toe-jam out of their feet while in a long discourse to one of their pals about how their hemorrhoids are acting up again. In a brief, and admittedly statistically insignificant, survey of my friends, not a one says (or at least is willing to admit) that they follow this behavior at home. I don’t have to go to the sink too often at the gym – my usual path is usually from the door to the locker and out, with a shower at the end – but in the event I need to wash my hands or I’m shaving in the morning before heading to work, is it really too much to ask that the folks next to me not force me to see their hairy ass as I walk up to the sink?

Other habits I see in the locker defy logic. Shaving is one thing, but does it make sense to shave at 8pm? If you were going on a date, that’d be one thing, but trust me, the guys who are shaving at 8pm at the gym ain’t got a hot date that nite. Then, a couple days, I saw something totally random. A guy puts shaving cream on his face, then, before shaving or washing any of the shaving cream off his face, proceeds to brush his teeth. I don’t know about you, and I’m not a slob, but I usually have a little bit of slobber coming out of my mouth when I brush. Isn’t that going to go onto the shaving cream? Again, seriously, who puts shaving cream on his face, and THEN brushes his teeth. 

I can only imagine what happens in the women’s locker room…Then again, I’m guessing women were better off not knowing what happens in men’s locker rooms, so perhaps I’d be better off not knowing either…

On Decision Making...

There’s an expression that is often used to describe MBA’s – analysis paralysis. It describe a situation where someone is so caught up in analyzing that he can’t make a decision. He is paralyzed in the state of analysis. Whether it is the results of the analysis that paralyze someone or more often, it is the need to continue analyzing, the result is a lack of decision-making. The latter arises because, in business and in life, there is a seemingly endless amount of information to be analyzed.

At some point, though, you have to say that while you will never have perfection information (because it simply doesn’t exist and the world continues to change every second), a decision has to be made. The question then becomes, at what point do you have enough information to make an adequate decision. Those who suffer from analysis paralysis are often heard describing new items they need to analyze. Their “enough information” never seems to be enough.

For some decisions, we don’t need much information. Do we need to fill our car with gas? A decision like that is simply a matter of weighing a few different factors – how much gas do you currently have in the tank, where is the closest gas station, where is a gas station with a lower price, what are my time constraints? Sometimes we are low on gas and we drive by a cheap gas station and decide to fill up. Other times we push the limit and cause ourselves stress hoping we don’t run out of gas.

Many decisions in life are generally this simple – there aren’t too many factors and even if you push off a decision, the repercussions aren’t too severe. And there is a relatively quick window that forces a decision (in the prior case, an emptying gas tank).

The issue arise with larger bigger or more complex decisions – how do you know that you have enough information, have analyzed the appropriate factors and to a sufficient extent. At the same time, some situations require quick decision-making (where it’s not so much about making the perfect or right decision but rather about making a decision and going with it without worrying about how a different situation might have turned out) whereas some situations are better suited towards longer analysis where the consequences of making a poor decision are big. Even then, however, getting caught in analysis paralysis could lead to a non-decision, which, generally speaking, is worse than a bad decision.

Decision-making relates in some ways to judgment, which is a topic for another time, but it often characterizes successful people from unsuccessful people. It might not be so binary – it might simply distinguish great success with good success. In the business world, decision-making is an important responsibility for senior management. Recognizing the key issues that need to be grappled with, identifying the relevant information, and making a decision in a timely manner. In life, we all face big decisions – who to marry, which profession to enter and which job to take, etc.

In my experience those whom I consider successful share several characteristics.

Make decisions definitively and with purpose.

Don’t look back.

Don’t try to make a perfect decision.

Have seen a lot – even if the situation is new, can analyze quickly and/or compare to other situations.

What’s more interesting to me, and it relates to the characteristics of successful people, is how do people develop those skills, how do they become people who can make great decisions in a timely manner.

This is just the beginning of the conversation…

Life's Seasons

My sister Mitra talks about this idea of there being a season for different things. She talks about in the context of periods of time in our lives – sometimes we focus on school for many years, other times we can be hanging out and having fun, then building a career or family is where our efforts are. It doesn’t have to be a super-long time – maybe it’s just a period of a few months where we train for a marathon, or perhaps it takes a few months to initiate a job change.

And just because it’s the season for something, that doesn’t mean nothing else happens. It’s more about where our focus and emphasis is, where the majority of one’s mindshare is.

Having completed a couple Ironman triathlons, I know that, like many of my friends who have done the same, when I’m training for an Ironman, it dominates my thoughts. That’s not surprising given that I would typically train 2-3 hours a day, longer on the weekends, comprising 10 or so workouts in a week. Add to that the need to eat right and sleep well, not to mention that despite the food and sleep, I always seem to be exhausted in the middle of my training months. And because I’m so busy with training and everything around it, I don’t get out as much as I might have, am not as up on what’s going on in the world, and don’t get to see my friends as much as either one of us would like. But I do this consciously, intentionally, and without regret, because the finish line (no pun intended) is something I deem worthwhile, something I deem worth the price I have to pay.

Many of my friends tell me that we are living such different lives, because most of them are married and have at least 1 child. As such, with a spouse, full-time job, and child, they don’t have the time that I do – as busy as I am, I know that in general, I have much more discretionary time than do most of my friends. When you think of responsibilities such as a child, mortgage and spouse, I know that mine pale in comparison. And so when we speak on the phone, they often tell me how different our lives are, how they would love to be able to train as much as I do. I tell them that while they may be jealous of what I do, I am jealous of what they do and have – a happily married life. Don’t get me wrong, I love my life right now, but, in a good way, there are components of my friends’ lives that I want for myself. Perhaps living vicariously through one another helps us stay connected.

Bringing this back to the concept of seasons – perhaps the past few years, the season has been for me to have the single life – to be able to make decisions that, while they affect my parents and sisters in a certain way, I could make for myself. I have been able to start a magazine, dabble in a variety of ventures, and have the flexibility in time and commitments to train for an Ironman and some ultra-distance cycling events.

As Mitra describes things, the season for all this stuff for me might be longer than she would normally think of, and perhaps longer than she would prefer, but there is no definition of a season that constrains how long or short it is. It is important to be aware of how we are spending our time, of being able to step back and evaluate what season we are in and what season we want to be in. When those two converge, that’s a great thing.

I think Mitra tends to think of seasons as more natural cycles, that while you can affect them, there is a flow to them. Not that life is pre-destined, but in general, our twenties are more about exploring and defining ourselves, our thirties are about building our families and careers, our forties (not that I’m there yet) are about taking those things that are important to us to another level. And so on. Of course, the key word is that these are generalizations – not everyone does nor should follow this “schedule.” 

In retrospect, it is often easier to see what the seasons were in our past – as we think about certain periods of our lives. And so what of the present and the future? We can certainly anticipate things that are possible. And of course we are never in full control of everything around us, but we do have choices in how we act and react.

Life certainly seems to have its seasons. And some seasons seem to last longer (or shorter) than we would prefer.  Enjoying those seasons and taking advantage of them is what I try to focus on. Changes happen, so you can either lament the fact that the tree is barren or enjoy the change in the colors and recognize that the leaves will reappear in the spring.

O.B.O.-ing

OBO is something you see when someone is selling something, for example, “$900 obo.” It means “or best offer” – which in this case means the person  will sell the item for $900 but will consider the best offer if it’s less than $900.

From there, I’ve come to think of O.B.O. in a different context, specifically when people don’t commit to plans. Say you ask someone to join you for an event or to come to a party you’re throwing. If their response is flimsy and they hem and haw but don’t give a real answer, instead preferring to hedge whether they will actually show up – well, this is what I refer to as obo-ing. Regardless of their reasons for not committing, often times, what they are really thinking is, “Thanks for the offer and I may actually come but I want to leave all my options open in case I get invited to something better.”

This is O.B.O.-ing. And for the recipient, it’s really annoying. It’s actually a form of an insult, whether or not a person being non-committal admits it. Because in hedging their answer, they are implicitly saying that there might be someone else out there who they might be invited to join and who they would rather hang out with than you.

O.BO.-ing was highly prevalent in business school. You see, in business school, people want to be in the in-crowd. And as a result, they operate in a constant state of fear. Fear of not being included or invited. Fear of missing a legendary evening, that supposed once-in-a-lifetime nite that people talk about for ages. Well, the reality is that those nites rarely exist. Sometimes, it’s simply wanting to be feel wanted, to be on the “A”-list. In the “to” line of the email. And to be earlier in the list of names in the “to” line.

So, as a result, MBA’s are renown for being non-committal. Yes, I may join you for dinner, but if a group I deem as more socially superior, influential, etc. invites me, then I reserve the right to not officially be flaking on your dinner because I’ve never actually committed 100% to your dinner.

Sounds high school-esque? Yes, it is. And it’s definitely not solely in business school that you see this behavior (and of course, as with everything, it’s not universal among all MBAs, just more common than the general public). I remember this came up with everything from who was in your ski house in tahoe, and who your roommates were 2^nd year. And of course, which dinner party you went to on Friday nite. 

In my experience it is present in environments where there are multiple “cool” groups, where type-A personalities are the norm and as a result, most members in the group are used to be in the in-crowd. Folks who OBO may have some close friends but often times, they have a bunch of friends in different circles. That’s what creates the tension to OBO. And part of the reason they have friends in different circles is so that they not miss out on something cool. I’d even say it’s more the fear of missing something than the “upside” of having participated in it – though there is certainly some social equity that is gained by being able to say that you were a part of that something – but usually only if some people you know and whose opinions you care about were not able to do so. This creates bragging rights and makes you different/special.

The only minor solution I developed to deal with O.B.O.-ing was, in times when some sort of cash outlay was necessary, to tell people that they needed to provide an answer by a certain time. That usually got them committed one way or another. And if they did find an alternative event, they were committed and on the hook for whatever payment was agreed upon.

O.B.O.-ing. Hmm….

The Problem with Sarcasm...

I should state at the very beginning that I am and always have been a very sarcastic individual. My family is known for giving each other a hard time so I grew up with it. And then living in

New York

for a couple years, well, yea, that makes you a bit more sarcastic. Plus, I like sarcasm. I think it’s a fun way to show your sense of humor.

But there’s a problem with sarcasm. And it’s really pretty simple. Sarcasm is a form of humor that requires someone to know you for them to get that you’re being sarcastic. Since sarcasm typically is used to poke fun at someone or something, the seriousness of the intent of a person’s comment can come off as being mean, when in fact it was intended to be a play on what’s said.

And herein lies the problem. Oftentimes, people mistake someone who is being sarcastic to be someone who is serious and rude or mean. For a stranger to the sarcastic individual, it could be a very natural reaction. At the very least, it can cause confusion on whether someone is being serious or not. What I’ve also found is that people who are highly sarcastic are also those who get comfortable with strangers quite quickly, and in so doing, feel that it’s okay to be sarcastic. But again, oftentimes, the strangers may take a while to feel comfortable with someone else. And so, sarcastic folks can alienate others quite quickly.

Sarcasm also doesn’t transfer well when written. It’s really hard to gauge tone and intent in an email. Sarcasm is best delivered with a change in tone and often a change in body language.

I’ve thought about this often because I’ve gotten myself into trouble a bunch of times when I’ve just recently meant someone and then made a sarcastic comment which my new “friend” didn’t get because they thought I was serious, not kidding. And so, I’ve tried to be less sarcastic over time.

This came up today because Faith Hill has been criticized for her reaction at the Country Music Awards last night; she didn’t win best singer and so since she was backstage, she raised her arms, looked at the camera and said “What?” and then ran off camera. Now, many people think she was just joking, claiming that it’s not her personality and that she has done this before.

When I saw the video myself, I really didn’t know – mostly because she had a pretty dark look in her when she looked in the camera. But I’m a Faith Hill fan and so I just chalk that up to being able to look intense. And so, there’s the problem. Even for someone who is a fan but doesn’t necessarily know her that well, it’s hard to tell.

And so sarcasm is causing a bit of annoying press for her.

Then there’s John Kerry who recently made the brilliant comment that if you don’t get a good education that you’ll be sent off to Iraq.  He meant it as a joke, but the press had a field day with him.

I’m a big believer that to every joke there is a bit of seriousness. The question is just how much seriousness. And that’s something that is often unclear with sarcastic humor. 

The best piece of advice...

The best piece of advice I ever received came from my father.

“Follow your heart

Trust your instincts

Do what is right.”

It’s written on a piece of paper that I have carried in my wallet since he mailed it to me (in the pre-mainstream email days) after I went away to college. For a while, I thought it was a cool thing to do – carrying that piece of paper in my wallet. I could show off to friends and to random folks that I had something in my wallet from so long ago. And it got longer each day. My dad would tell me that I should put it in a safe place in the event that I lost my wallet. But my point was that I’ve always carried the piece of paper in my wallet. It isn’t nearly as noble, nor as cool, if you simply saved the note. Carrying it on me every day was the point.

And then one day, I pulled out those tattered pieces of paper – years of being in my wallet slowly eroded the paper’s strength and quality – and I sat back to really read that note.

There was more to the note than this quote. The note started,

“Dear Babak,

On your departure day, this is what I meant to tell you. You may have thought the same.”

The piece of advice came next, followed by “Love, Dad.”

In some ways, the note is typical of my father. Love and caring clouded slightly by a hint of formality. Well, it’s a bit typical of him when it comes to the written word – whether on paper or email. In person, he is one of the warmest people I’ve ever met.

More on this later.

Back to that piece of advice.

That day that I really read the quote, I realized several things that I had never really thought of, at least not consciously. For starters, as cerebral an individual as I am and no doubt was when I left for college (to MIT), his advice was particularly apt – he didn’t tell me to follow my head, but rather my heart. It is the heart that guides as much as the brain is important and as much as the brain likes to tell us what should be the way. I know it is true of many cultures, but no doubt Persians are a particularly passion people.  In particular, Persian men are known for their passion. Not that I necessarily tended to think about what I should do, but it was an important reminder to keep in mind as I ventured off to college to begin life as an adult.

The second line sounds similar to the first, but it adds something new. The heart may lead, but trusting my instincts makes me think of moments of decision.  Being passionate is one thing, making decisions on what your gut tells you is another.

Finally, doing what is right. While being passionate and trusting your gut is one thing, it is important to keep yourself in check. Your heart may want to do one thing but your brain can help you determine what is right.

So what is right? My ethics are different than yours whose may be different than someone else’s.  But inherent in my dad’s advice was the knowledge that he had raised an individual with strong ethics.

And herein lies what I’ve always found so interesting about this piece of advice. While many people tell stories that begin, “My dad is used to always tell me…” or “growing up, what I used to always hear at home was…”, I can’t really think of any stories like these. I honestly don’t recall my dad giving me advice when I was growing up. Somewhere, somehow, I learned and developed a sense of ethics, a sense of the better way to do things, but my dad was more of a reserved individual when it came to giving up advice. In general, both my parents allowed my sisters and me to make decisions for ourselves, particularly the bigger and more important decisions – where to go to college, what area of work to pursue, who to date.  I know they had their opinions (Persians are also known for having strong opinions and for sharing those opinions), but they tended to keep those in check most of the time.

Levels of crazy

we all have different things that we consider crazy.  and i realized that it's all relative.  as a member of the l.a. triathlon club, i often have conversations with people who are training for or have completed an ironman triathlon.  amongst member of the club (and beyond to some extent), the ironman is the ultimate goal.  that's obviously a personal goal and not one i place any judgment on.  but the fact is that while a challenge, many members of the club want to do an ironman. at the same time, there are many people in the world who think that doing a triathlon is pretty nutty.  for other running a 5-k is crazy. but if you talk with member of my triathlon club, they would think a 5-k is a relatively easy training run. 

and this is where i realized that everything is relative. i've always loved cycling and have been fascinated by ultra-distance cycling since i was a teenager.  so now that i'm training for some ultra-distance events (typically 200 miles or longer), some of my friends in the club think that i'm crazy, that they could never envision being on a bike for 10/15/20 hours.  yet these are the very same people who will get up at 4:30 in the morning to head out to a race in which they might jump in the freezing cold ocean for the first leg of their triathlon....

and so this is what i refer to as levels of crazy.  friends of mine who are doing something that most of the population has no desire to even consider doing are all of a sudden calling someone else crazy. it's all relative. 

and often times, it's merely a matter of perspective...