Progress is never a conciliation with the Norms.. Understanding is never an isolation from Cross-Borders.. and Love is never a Loneliness nor Greed..!



Sunday, March 1, 2015

Successful Positioning

How to Successfully Position Your Product or Service
    
Ahmed Al Akber
Managing Director
ACK Solutions
ahmed@acksolutions.com
+971 50 316 4956
If your business did one thing well, what would it be? Is that one thing recognized by your customers as something that is done better by your business than by any other? That is what positioning is about – being positioned in the prospect’s mind. Positioning is about fanatical focus on doing one thing really well.

To reinforce your position in the prospect’s mind, you must sacrifice. You must let go of anything that may detract from the core positioning of your product or service in the mind of the prospect.

No company can create its own position. A position is in the mind of the customer. All you try to do is to influence that position. In the classic book Selling The Invisible, Harry Beckwith asserts, “…your positioning is a place, and someone else puts you there: your prospects. Even services that do nothing to market their company have a position. A prospect simply takes what he knows about the company and positions the company accordingly.”

Beckwith goes on to explain the difference between position and a positioning statement:

A position (or statement of position) is a cold-hearted, no-nonsense statement of how you are perceived in the minds of prospects. It is your position.

A positioning statement, by contrast, states how you wish to be perceived. It is the core message you want to deliver in every medium, including elevators and airport waiting areas, to influence the perceptions of your service.

To understand where you are positioned, the best way to start is to ask your current customers what they care about most when it comes to choosing a product or service like yours. These are the critical factors on which they will compare your business to others. Then ask them to rate how your business performs against these critical success factors. Finally, ask them to rate other competing companies along the same lines. How is your business positioned in your customers’ minds?

Doing this has two distinct advantages. The first is a reality check – is your positioning statement believable, or completely out of touch? Are you claiming to be something that your customers don’t perceive you are? Companies fall in this trap all the time. They claim themselves to be the “leading”, “first”, “best”, and other exaggerated superlatives without really being that at all (a lot of the time they also don’t take into account whether prospects care for dealing with the leading, first, or best).

The second advantage is that in understanding where the gaps in your positioning vs. your positioning statement are, you’ll be in a better position to narrow that gap. The trick is to narrow this understanding of how you are positioned, with how you desire your business to be positioned (your positioning statement). Narrowing this gap will bring you closer to what you desire to be.

Take the example of Long Island Trust Company, a bank that Al Ries and Jack Trout wrote about in the marketing classic Positioning: The Battle For Your Mind. A new banking law allowed for less restrictions for big city names like Citibank and Chase Manhattan to enter the Long Island market. Long Island Trust Company was the biggest bank on the island, and stood to lose a lot from the influx of large competitors.

To help develop a competitive position for the Long Island Trust Company, formal positioning research was commissioned to map the prospect’s mind. Prospects were given a set of six attributes and asked to rate them on a scale of 1 to 10. These included: (1) many branches, (2) full range of services, (3) quality of service, (4) large capital, (5) helps Long Island residents, (6) helps Long Island economy.

The results of the first four traditional attributes (traditional reasons for doing business with a particular bank) were not looking good for Long Island Trust Company. In fact, out of six banks that they were compared to, they fared the worst on these first four factors.
However, they fared the best on the last two factors, which were specific to Long Island. This meant Long Island Trust Company had a strength – a better connection to Long Island than the big city banks. So they decided to leverage this strength, developing advertisements that had the following theme:

Why send your money to the city if you live on the Island?

It makes sense to keep you money close to home. Not at a city bank. But at Long Island Trust. Where it can work for Long Island.

After all, we concentrate on developing Long Island. Not Manhattan Island. Or some island off Kuwait.

Ask yourself, who do you think is most concerned about Long Island’s future?

A bank-come-lately with hundreds of other branches in the greater metropolitan areas plus affiliates in five continents?

Or a bank like ours that’s been here for over 50 years and has 33 offices on Long Island.

Further ads ran as follows: “If times get tough, will the city banks get going? (Back to the city).”

Fifteen months later, the same research was repeated. Long Island Trust Company went from lowest to highest in two of the four traditional attributes, and made solid gains in the other two.

The success in improving the positioning of the Long Island Trust Company is an example from a large, established company. One with large resources. What about smaller companies? How can small companies position themselves in the market?

In my experience, people who sell in small businesses are the most likely to face an inferiority complex. Their business is small, so they link that to their sense of self-worth. “You are small, so you must be lesser in many ways” is what many small business owners think. But there are significant advantages that prospects can benefit from in choosing to work with a small company. Here they are:
  • Greater access to the owner or head of the company. Most large companies bring in their senior most staff on occasion, and usually in the selling process. These senior people tend to disappear once the deal is signed, leaving less experienced staff to fend for themselves and deliver what was promised. In dealing with a small company, customers usually get greater access to the head of the company, who will make sure that the job is done well and customized to fit the need. This is a significant advantage and should not be overlooked!
  • Smaller companies are faster. There is less bureaucracy involved, which means they can make quicker decisions, which in turn means they can serve their clients better. The quicker you can solve a client’s issue, the more money and time you will make or save for the client.
  • Better understanding of customer needs. Small businesses tend to have more face time with their clients, which means they can understand their clients needs better than larger businesses can. Understanding the issues your clients face (and helping to communicate that back to them) is one of the single most valuable things you can do for a client.
  • Excitement. Due to its high capacity for risk, there is a lot of adventure around the innovation, change and challenge of running a small business. You never really know how it will turn out, and this can be very exciting. This will keep your employees excited too, and they in turn will be motivated as their efforts help shape the company, which reflects well on the service they deliver to your clients.
As a small business owner, building these strengths into your marketing is a great way to influence your position in the mind of your customer. It requires focus and attention to detail that takes a lot of work but is worth it in the long run. 

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Between Entrepreneurs and Employees

Steve Jobs
Justin Sullivan / GettySteve Jobs said you need a broad "bag of experiences."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/personality-difference-between-entrepreneurs-and-employees-2015-2#ixzz3SU12xPNu


Around 13% of Americans are starting or running their own companies.
Almost everyone else is an employee.
We may have found out the difference between the two types. 
According to a 2013 Swiss-German study, the difference lies in disposition: While an employee is a specialist, an entrepreneur is a jack-of-all-trades. 
"Entrepreneurs differ from employees in that they must be sufficiently well versed in a whole set of entrepreneurial skills," write Uschi Backes-Gellner of the University of Zurich in Switzerland and Petra Moog of the University of Siegen in Germany. 
On the other hand, they say that employees are "specialists who work for others and whose talents are combined with those of other specialists (employees) by the entrepreneurs."
In their study, Backes-Gellner and Moog analyzed survey data from 2000 German college students. Their analysis showed that people with a broader portfolio of experiences were more likely to have a "disposition toward entrepreneurship." Qualities that predicted against entrepreneurship included a desire for job or income security, as well as, perhaps surprisingly, having an apprenticeship or internship — since those lead to specialization. 
Their study built on a decade's worth of research.
The "jack of all trades" theory first came from Stanford University economist Edward P. Lazear, whose studies of Stanford MBAs show that students who take a broad range of classes and a wider range of jobs are more likely to become entrepreneurs. A follow-up German study replicated those results. 
Backes-Gellner and Moog expanded on that finding by taking in social networks. Their research suggested that entrepreneurs don't just have a diverse set of skills, but they also have a diverse network of relationships — friends, parents, and business contacts that they can call on when launching a business. Findings in network science show that having such a diverse social network is hugely beneficial at a creative level, too, since the more perspectives you're exposed to, the more refined your ideas become.
So it's a double-diversity that leads to entrepreneurship: lots of experiences, lots of contacts. 
"It is the jacks-of-all-trades across a whole portfolio of individual resources and not the masters-of-one who are likely to become entrepreneurs," Backes-Gellner and Moog write. "The mere social butterflies or the mere computer nerds are not likely to become entrepreneurs because they are both too imbalanced and thereby less likely to be successful as entrepreneurs."
The research confirms a lot of folk wisdom about what makes founders function. None other than Steve Jobs used to say that creative people have a more diverse "bag of experiences" than everybody else. In a 1982 speech, the Apple founder told his audience that "if you're gonna make connections which are innovative ... you have to not have the same bag of experiences as everyone else does." 


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/personality-difference-between-entrepreneurs-and-employees-2015-2#ixzz3SU0FCnH9

Thursday, January 29, 2015

Most and Least Racially Tolerant Countries

 
May 15, 2013

When two Swedish economists set out to examine whether economic freedom made people any more or less racist, they knew how they would gauge economic freedom, but they needed to find a way to measure a country's level of racial tolerance. So they turned to something called the World Values Survey, which has been measuring global attitudes and opinions for decades.

Among the dozens of questions that World Values asks, the Swedish economists found one that, they believe, could be a pretty good indicator of tolerance for other races. The survey asked respondents in more than 80 different countries to identify kinds of people they would not want as neighbors. Some respondents, picking from a list, chose "people of a different race." The more frequently that people in a given country say they don't want neighbors from other races, the economists reasoned, the less racially tolerant you could call that society. (The study concluded that economic freedom had no correlation with racial tolerance, but it does appear to correlate with tolerance toward homosexuals.)

Unfortunately, the Swedish economists did not include all of the World Values Survey data in their final research paper. So I went back to the source, compiled the original data and mapped it out on the infographic above. In the bluer countries, fewer people said they would not want neighbors of a different race; in red countries, more people did.

If we treat this data as indicative of racial tolerance, then we might conclude that people in the bluer countries are the least likely to express racist attitudes, while the people in red countries are the most likely.

Compare the results to this map of the world's most and least diverse countries.
Before we dive into the data, a couple of caveats. First, it's entirely likely that some people lied when answering this question; it would be surprising if they hadn't. But the operative question, unanswerable, is whether people in certain countries were more or less likely to answer the question honestly. For example, while the data suggest that Swedes are more racially tolerant than Finns, it's possible that the two groups are equally tolerant but that Finns are just more honest. The willingness to state such a preference out loud, though, might be an indicator of racial attitudes in itself. Second, the survey is not conducted every year; some of the results are very recent and some are several years old, so we're assuming the results are static, which might not be the case.

Here's what the data show:
• Anglo and Latin countries most tolerant. People in the survey were most likely to embrace a racially diverse neighbor in the United Kingdom and its Anglo former colonies (the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) and in Latin America. The only real exceptions were oil-rich Venezuela, where income inequality sometimes breaks along racial lines, and the Dominican Republic, perhaps because of its adjacency to troubled Haiti. Scandinavian countries also scored high.

• India and Jordan by far the least tolerant. In only two of 81 surveyed countries, more than 40 percent of respondents said they would not want a neighbor of a different race. This included 43.5 percent of Indians and 51.4 percent of Jordanian. (Note: World Values’ data for Bangladesh and Hong Kong appear to have been inverted, with in fact only 28.3 and 26.8 percent, respectively, having indicated they would not want a neighbor of a different race. Please see correction at the bottom of this post.)

• Wide, interesting variation across Europe. Immigration and national identity are big, touchy issues in much of Europe, where racial make-ups are changing. Though you might expect the richer, better-educated Western European nations to be more tolerant than those in Eastern Europe, that's not exactly the case. France appeared to be one of the least racially tolerant countries on the continent, with 22.7 percent saying they didn't want a neighbor of another race. Former Soviet states such as Belarus and Latvia scored as more tolerant than much of Europe. Many in the Balkans, perhaps after years of ethnicity-tinged wars, expressed lower racial tolerance.

• The Middle East not so tolerant. Immigration is also a big issue in this region, particularly in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which often absorb economic migrants from poorer neighbors.

• Racial tolerance low in diverse Asian countries. Nations such as Indonesia and the Philippines, where many racial groups often jockey for influence and have complicated histories with one another, showed more skepticism of diversity. This was also true, to a lesser extent, in China and Kyrgyzstan. There were similar trends in parts of sub-Saharan Africa.

• South Korea, not very tolerant, is an outlier. Although the country is rich, well-educated, peaceful and ethnically homogenous – all trends that appear to coincide with racial tolerance – more than one in three South Koreans said they do not want a neighbor of a different race. This may have to do with Korea's particular view of its own racial-national identity as unique – studied by scholars such as B.R. Myers – and with the influx of Southeast Asian neighbors and the nation's long-held tensions with Japan.

• Pakistan, remarkably tolerant, also an outlier. Although the country has a number of factors that coincide with racial intolerance – sectarian violence, its location in the least-tolerant region of the world, low economic and human development indices – only 6.5 percent of Pakistanis objected to a neighbor of a different race. This would appear to suggest Pakistanis are more racially tolerant than even the Germans or the Dutch.

Update: I've heard some version of one question from an overwhelming number of readers: "I've met lots of Indians and Americans and found the former more racially tolerant than the latter. How can these results possibly be correct?" I'd suggest three possible explanations for this, some combination of which may or may not be true.

First, both India and the U.S. are enormous countries; anecdotal interactions are not representative of the whole, particularly given that people who are wealthy enough to travel internationally may be likely to encounter some subsets of these respective populations more than others.

Second, the survey question gets to internal, personal preferences; what the respondents want. One person's experiences hanging out with Americans or Indians, in addition to being anecdotal, only tell you about their outward behavior. Both of those ways of observing racial attitudes might suggest something about racial tolerance, but they're different indicators that measure different things, which could help explain how one might contradict the other.

Third, the survey question is a way of judging racial tolerance but, like many social science metrics, is indirect and imperfect. I cited the hypothetical about Swedes and Finns at the top of this post, noting that perhaps some people are just more honest about their racial tolerance than others. It's entirely possible that we're seeing some version of this effect in the U.S.-India comparison; maybe, for example, Americans are conditioned by their education and media to keep these sorts of racial preferences private, i.e. to lie about them on surveys, in a way that Indians might not be. That difference would be interesting in itself, but alas there is no survey question for honesty.

Correction: This post originally indicated that, according to the World Values Survey, 71.7 percent of Bangladeshis and 71.8 percent of Hong Kongers had said that they would not want a neighbor of a different race. In fact, those numbers appear to be substantially lower, 28.3 percent and 26.8 percent, respectively. In both cases, World Values appears to have erroneously posted the incorrect data on its Web site. Ashirul Amin, posting at the Tufts University Fletcher School’s emerging markets blog, looked into the data for Bangladesh and discovered the mistake. My thanks to Amin, who is Bangladeshi and was able to read the original questionnaire, for pointing this out. His analysis is worth reading in full, but here’s his conclusion:
The short answer is, yes, someone did fat finger this big time. "Yes" and "No" got swapped in the second round of the survey, which means that 28.3% of Bangladeshis said they wouldn’t want neighbors of a different race – not 71.7%.
26K Facebook likers and 2.5K Tweeters, take note.
Amin adds, “Bangladeshis are a tolerant bunch — it’s ok to come visit.” The error in the Hong Kong data, first discovered by Chinese-speaking users on Reddit, was flagged by Engadget Chinese editor Richard Lai. Ng Chun Hung, a University of Hong Kong professor who was the principal investigator on World Values' survey there, confirmed via e-mail that the data had been transposed on the survey company's Web site. He added that he has written the World Values Survey team to alert it to this and ask it to remove the faulty data. My thanks to him, as well as to Lai and the Reddit users who dug through original Chinese-language survey forms to demonstrate the error.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/15/a-fascinating-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-racially-tolerant-countries/

Thursday, January 8, 2015

Con/struct


Cape town-based designer Justin Plunkett has reinterpreted his professional familiarity with advertising and marketing as a series of digitally-formed architectural photographs. ‘con/struct’ examines the influence of brands and commercialization on lifestyle and architecture, particularly cultural icons like churches, skyscrapers and shopping malls. while applauding the ingenuity and creative spirit that undoubtedly goes into the media, he exposes its potential repercussions on our urban landscape.

je suis Musluman; je suis Charlie


Sarkozy: "It is a War on Civilization.."
....
I cordially and epistemically understand such a notion..
Prophecies of Huntington were only few decades ago..
Regretfully, decline of Islam is within, not by being stranger to others.....

All Muslims share the guilt of this long term destructive radicalism..
Starting by the parents who are genuinely incapable to raise kids..!!
....
I have no appetite to witness the coming decade..!!


Sarkozy: "It is a War on Civilization.."
....
I cordially and epistemically understand such a notion..
Prophecies of Huntington were only few decades ago..
Regretfully, decline of Islam is within, not by being stranger to others..
All Muslims share the guilt of this long term destructive radicalism..
Starting by the parents who are genuinely incapable to raise kids..!!
....
I have no appetite to witness the coming decade..!!
....

Any Coincidences..!!??
A 100 years journey of odd arrogant ignorant extremism..


 
Between West and East; the Middle East is torn between Pragmatism and Rationalism.. Most of the Middle Eastern can neither understand or taste Comedy, Philosophy or Folklore of the West, nor the East.. People should stop claiming they are all alike, because they are not.. The gap is further widening fast; in unrecoverable manner.. So just be yourself, stay within your own skin and abandon unhealthy unrealistic dreams.. Only then; you will share "Humanity" with others..!

 

The End of a Time..!!

Friday, December 12, 2014

Top 10 Lies of Entrepreneurs (and Investors)


By Guy Kawasaki
Read these two sets of top ten lies: one of entrepreneurs and one of investors, so that you know what not to say and what not to believe.

Top Ten Lies of Entrepreneurs
  1. "Our projections are conservative."
  2. "Jupiter says our market will be $50 billion in ten years."
  3. "Several Fortune 500 companies are set to do business with us."
  4. "No one else can do what we're doing."
  5. "Hurry up because other investors are about to do our deal."
  6. "Our product will go viral."
  7. "The large companies in our market are too big, dumb, and slow to compete with us."
  8. "Our management team is proven."
  9. "We filed patents so our intellectual property is protected."
  10. "All we have to do is get 1% of the market."
The average number of these ten lies that I hear in most pitches is ten. At the very least, tell investors new lies.

Top Ten Lies of Investors
  1. "I liked your company, but my partners didn't."
  2. "We are patient investors who want to help you build a great company."
  3. "If you get a lead, we'll invest too."
  4. "There are no companies in our portfolio that conflict with what you're doing."
  5. "Show us some traction, and we'll invest."
  6. "We love to co-invest with other firms."
  7. "We're investing in your team."
  8. "We have lots of bandwidth to dedicate to your company."
  9. "This is a plain, vanilla term sheet."
  10. "We will get other companies in our portfolio to work with you."

Do you know what the difference is between the lies of entrepreneurs and the lies of investors? The investors have money.

It's not all bad news. Think of everything that an entrepreneur needs (tech ones, anyway), and you'll see that most things are free or cheap.
Marketing: use blogs and social media to promote your products.

Tools: most tools are Open Source and free. Microsoft offers free versions of applications like Word, Excel and PowerPoint in the cloud!

Infrastructure: More cloud goodness-you don't have to buy servers anymore.

People: callous for me to say, but in a recession, people are free or cheap.

Office space: what office space? You can work out of your garage (like David Hewlett and Bill Packard) or just form a virtual team.
The bottom line is this is one of the cheapest times to be an entrepreneur, so go into your garage and start prototyping.
***
Guy Kawasaki is the author of Enchantment: The Art of Changing Hearts, Minds, and Actions. He is also the co-founder of Alltop.com, an "online magazine rack" of popular topics on the web, and a founding partner at Garage Technology Ventures.  Previously, he was the chief evangelist of Apple. Kawasaki is the author of nine other books including Reality Check, The Art of the Start, Rules for Revolutionaries, How to Drive Your Competition Crazy, Selling the Dream, and The Macintosh Way. Kawasaki has a BA from Stanford University and an MBA from UCLA as well as an honorary doctorate from Babson College.

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

The $7 Israeli device that just might change the world forever

Screen Shot 2014-09-02 at 11.27.58 PM
 
The $7 device is loaded with Google’s Android 4.4 operating system. Plug it into the USB port of any old laptop or desktop, and you’ve got a personal computer.
 
If you can put data on a USB drive, why not put an entire operating system on a stick?
It’s a simple but brilliant idea. Nissan Bahar of Israel and Francesco (Franky) Imbesi of Italy are making it happen in remote places of the world where computers aren’t a dime a dozen. They discovered that five billion people, or 70% of the world’s population, have no access to personal computing, and they intend to change that. 
 
The $7 Keepod thumb drive is loaded with a unique version of Google’s Android 4.4 operating system. Plug it into the USB port of any old laptop, netbook or desktop, and – voila! – you’ve got a personal computer with your own password-protected settings, programs and files.
 
Bahar and Imbesi have introduced the Keepod (Hebrew for “porcupine” but with obvious wordplay in English) to a school in the Mathare slums of Nairobi, Kenya, through a partnership with the organization LiveInSlums. They use refurbished computers that would otherwise clog landfills.
“We’re breaking a few paradigms in the world of computing and digital devices,” says Bahar.
 
“There are a lot of initiatives for bringing computers to developing countries, but it’s impossible to bring a laptop per person. There’s not enough material in the world for that. Our approach is that instead of providing a personal computer, we use shared computers and provide a stick with an operating system on it so you have your own PC environment on a shared computer.”
 
He likens the model to public transport. “Not everyone can have a shiny car, so you hop on a bus.”
The other paradigm-smashing aspect of Keepod is the notion that fancier is better. Bahar maintains that using basic pre-owned computers without hard drives solves lots of cyber-security problems.
 
“Instead of manufacturing cheap computers — which will never be cheap enough — we reuse old computers. In the US alone, 85,000 computers are thrown out every single day. We can give a big percentage of them a new life with Keepod in Nairobi or anywhere else, and that one computer can serve 25 to 30 people every week. Why continue to manufacture cheap hardware when you have all this material available? It’s an ecosystem of ideas and things together.”
 
Principles ahead of profit
Bahar and Inbesi come from a background in information security and enterprise solutions.
“We started selling to banks and telecos across Europe, and then about a year ago we started to think how to leverage this technology to do something better than selling it to executives,” says the 38-year-old Israeli.  
 

Sunday, December 7, 2014

4 Steps To Increasing Your Emotional Agility

English: Robert Plutchik's Wheel of Emotions
English: Robert Plutchik’s Wheel of Emotions (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

:
It may be cliché but the saying that “attitude is contagious” is true. How you, your team, or your leader shows up is everything—inspiring or depressing, happy or sad, tense or terse. Managing emotions and applying them to the right situation is critical to expression, communication, and mission success.

Navigating relationships is a necessity everywhere in life as divergent interests and scarce resources are always at play, and it requires strong situational awareness to know when to zig instead of zag depending on the personalities you’re dealing with.

To navigate the chaos of communication and relationships requires emotional agility , or the ability to apply the right emotion to the right person in the right situation at the right time. Here’s how:
Understand the situation. Context is everything. To be situationally aware is to interpret the inter- and intra-personal emotions within a group and to integrate your understanding of both with any previously held schemas so as to anticipate the situation’s outcome. Four questions to consider in developing your situational awareness are:
  • Who is involved? Why?
  • What is the activity or situation? Why?
  • When does the activity take place? Why?
  • Where will the activity occur? Why?
The key to the above four questions is to follow-up each one with a “why?” This way, you force your brain to search for an answer to the context, thus forcing yourself to interpret and anticipate situational dynamics.

Empathize with others. You probably never thought you’d be reading an article on emotions written by a former Navy SEAL , but the truth is, mission success often depended on the strength of relationships we had with our governmental and civilian counterparts. More so, nobody likes working with people who don’t understand him or her. To be empathetic is to understand the other person’s issue from his or her perspective; it does not mean just being “nice” and is not synonymous with “sympathy.” Being nice is just that—a state of solitary being—as derived from one’s own individual state, and has nothing to do with understanding the other person. Sympathy puts the other person’s feelings first but can come across ambiguously at times.

Here’s an easy way to tell the difference between empathy and sympathy : Empathy begins with “you” statements and reflect the other person’s viewpoint, whereas sympathy begins with “I” or “my” statements and project one’s own perspective. If you want to maximize your emotional agility agility, let the other person know you understand by focusing on them.

Interpret your emotions. The difference between memorable leaders and forgettable leaders is self-awareness. Self-awareness is what allows you to take your own emotional temperature and see what is too much or not enough and make adjustments.  Without self-awareness, there is no emotional throttle control and the propensity for poor behavior or misconduct just increases. Of course, there is a right way and a wrong way to express oneself. Throwing a temper tantrum in public only makes people want to work against you rather than with you. To test the waters and see how hot or cold you’re running, try this:
  • Every day for the next next week, write down the strongest emotion you felt for that day along with how your physiology changed (i.e. increased heart rate, shallow breathing, sweaty palms?). Include any follow-on thoughts that transpired afterward. Next, identify the source that caused that feeling and ask yourself why? Why did [the stimulus] cause you to feel the way you did? Keep asking yourself why over and over until the feeling has subsided. Playing the “why game” of emotion forces your brain to search for reason and subdue the peril of emotionally based decisions.
Connect the dots between all three. The extrapolation of the above three elements—situation, others, and you—is at the crux of emotional agility, as this allows you to scale up or scale back the right emotion for the moment based on the context of the situation.
Some people need a pat on the back while others need a kick in the back(side), and your emotional agility to navigate different situations and know when to turn the heat up (or down) is determinant of how effective you are as a leader.

Jeff is a personal coach, CrossLeader at the McChrystal Group, board member of  SEAL Future Fund, and author of the forthcoming Navigating Chaos: How to Find Certainty in Uncertain Situations
 

Saturday, November 29, 2014

Miracle Of Life

 
Published on Oct 2, 2014
We often hear by our parents that each one of us is a miracle, but honestly, we truly are. The chain reaction of events that take place leading to pregnancy and birth is nothing short of mind-blowing. This absolutely stunning animation created by Silvio Falcinelli (RenderingCG) and music by Hans Zimmer & Lisa Gerrard.
 

 
 
Published on Sep 7, 2014
Embryogenesis is the process by which the embryo forms and develops. In mammals, the term refers chiefly to early stages of prenatal development, whereas the terms fetus and fetal development describe later stages.
 
 

Friday, November 28, 2014

Ultimate Mixtures

The Egyptian Legacy of the Ultimate Mixtures..

A romantic spot in Cairo;
Agha Khan's AlAzhar Park, next to mosque and shrine of Sayyedah Fatima, daughter of Sayyed Husain bin Ali, PBUT..
 
 
 
 I had been there: