Analytic Vision

Posts Tagged ‘development’

In Time

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 30/10/2017

I invite you to read an article (the first of a new series) that will show you how time management influences the personality: The Timeline. This is a fundamental meta-feature that dominates one’s personality although in different contexts it can vary. “In Time” is its continuation: the detaliation of the first main perception.

In Time (partial association with the perception function, defined by Jung; not to be confused with the monochronicity or the polychronicity from the chronemics)

The timeline, visualized in space, passes through the client’s body or touches him in any way. The classical position is the future in front, the present within and the past behind. But this is rarely observed, the greatest odds are that it will only be found in books. Very often such a perception of the timeline will have a series of very interesting and diverse shapes, such as: vertically from the top of the head to the feet; in front, but without touching the body; a spiral shape around the body; partially vertical and partially horizontal; etc.

Robert Zemeckis’ masterpiece from 2015, The Walk, offers a great depiction of the In Time perception right on its poster:

Usually, it’s considered that the individual that will have an In Time perception over time will have a high capacity to live emotions in that respective context and he will not be able to detach himself/herself. This is not the case though, for example, for people that are in a trauma, and their unconscious defense strategies determine them to have a disassociated behavior, an unfitting description for an In Time perspective. For an objective opinion, an outside person will be needed. In some rare cases, that person will manage to understand certain emotions only by empathizing with someone that is also living those emotions and by observing from the outside, to then (afterward) realize that they can be found within himself/herself. The motivation of someone like that can be stimulated by reminding them to live in the now and by offering them a rich emotional activity or by adopting a “we care” politics.

The distinction has a strong impact on the work context. An In Time behavior will provide the conditioning to do one thing, start to finish, and it will create difficulties when, in that context, the individual is forced to do more things at the same time. The beliefs associated to an In Time perspective are «Do something start to finish and do it well or don’t do it at all »; «If you do more things at the same time, then you cannot do them well ».

Those that use this perspective might have the tendency to consider those that have a Meta Time perspective as shallow because they start doing more things at the same time and don’t finish them, agitated, people that waste their life away with plans without living the joy of just being. From this point of view, a person with an In Time perspective will feel motivated by activities that have a clear and defined beginning, middle and end. They will not accept explanations such as “Do this first and then we’ll see” because there is the risk that this activity will not be carried out in the end. They will have a feeling of paltering if they will not have all the elements presented in an In Time language.

The In Time perception prevents any kind of planning. Those that use it regularly in the work environment will not have a lot of professional achievements, compared to those that have a Meta Time perception in the professional context, as a result of the fact that they cannot manage their time. « Something always comes up! ». A person with an In Time perception will throw away money on time management books and courses, these will not help though, as it will only present foreign and hard to apply perspectives.

In meetings, people with an In Time perspective will regularly be late 15-45 minutes. Almost everytime, never on time, only accidentally or with a great deal of sacrifice. They will set their watch forward to force themselves to make the meetings, they will write it on a scrap of paper (not on an agenda, no way, this is an accessory that does not exist, or is rather empty, for a person that delights in the Perception function) the meetings 20 minutes before they take place because they know they will be late, etc. If someone tells them: « You’re 10 minutes late! » they will very naturally reply: « 10 minutes isn’t late. 10 minutes is exactly on time ». Or they will invoke the «academic quarter». These latenesses can also be based on an associated conviction attributed to an unfortunate experience like « either way most people that I meet either don’t show up or they are late, so why should I be the one that waits? ».

In certain situations, it can be a living nightmare for a Meta Time practitioner to set up a meeting with a person that has an In Time perception. If it is about two people that use the In Time perception, it is highly likely it will be even more frustrating because each of them has his/her own perception of time and they can differ a lot. This will generate answers such as «I can’t tell you now my schedule two days from now. Call me that morning» or «I don’t know what will come up tomorrow. We’ll talk then».

People with an In Time perspective can be excellent: artists, actors, art critics,  anchorpersons, entertainers, politicians, people that work in creation (artistic, publicity) because they manage, by living in the now, to express their reactions in a spontaneous manner. They are absolutely awful as: financial auditors, accountants, engineers, architects, project editors, strategists. Still, they will need an assistant or a staff that have a Meta Time perspective and that they will listen to in order to be able to perform in one of these fields. This way, they will live moment to moment until they will not have the freedom to live in the now anymore. And then they will get frustrated. This is the reason why there are so many «starving artists»: they were unable to partner up with someone that has a «Meta Time» perspective that can support them to highlight their preference to live in the now.

Sentimentally, an In Time perspective offers those that have it the possibility to be involved in the relationship and to live the present moment now with the partner. The In Time perspective on love is that it is wonderful and that it needs to be lived in every moment as it is. This perspective, manifested in an exaggerated manner leads to the «love is blind» phenomenon. Actually, it’s not the love that is blind, but it’s the ones that have an In Time perspective that cannot disassociate what they feel and observe from the outside. Also taking into consideration different combinations with other personality structures, people with the In Time perspective, although they can live and share with others (including through literature and art in general), are also the ones that suffer the greatest disappointments and ask themselves «why?», especially when they do not have a «Meta Time» person as a counselor that can «open their eyes» objectively from the outside. Unfortunately, a lot of people choose to disappoint themselves (after they have deceived themselves) and to draw pejorative conclusions such as «there is no right partner for me», at young ages, up to 30 years old, and that can usually be the result of an In Time perspective focused on negative emotions, without paying attention to the suggestions of people that have a Meta Time perspective.

In Time may also be the favorite behaviour that “shelters” in  sentimental relationships: the mental dependency from the physical dependency of the partner (the partner using In Time accuses the one that uses Meta Time that he/she does not make time for him/her), the abandonment complex and the games from the drama triangle. For a functional long term relationship, each partner needs to have, in a professional context or separately, a Meta Time preference.

Examples of personalities that (might) have had or that have this behavior structure: Mihai Eminescu, Traian Băsescu, Steve Martin, Gwyneth Paltrow.

Translation of the article ”In Time” originally published in Romanian by Ștefan Alexandrescu on the 10th of August 2012 at Discerne. Translated by Ștefan Constantin Bădrăgan, 2017. Originally written in 2007. Updated by Ștefan Alexandrescu at 21.10.2017

Advertisements

Posted in The Art of Respecting Others | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

The Timeline

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 13/10/2017

Motto:

« [The Romanian] is wasteful with time, more so than people from the West. Time is anything for the Romanian but a currency. At the fair, he haggles for hours for whatnots. The same goes for parties, he loses days and nights»; «It is said that [the Romanian] is undisciplined working in the economic field. When at the same time people from the West keep a regular rhythm, like clockwork, the Romanian people knows disorderly work, more like play.The Romanian does not work methodically, but in leaps; he has long periods of rest, and if needed he will work double tides and do slave work »

Constantin Rădulescu Motru (1998)

  

 

The history of the concept

The concept of the timeline was introduced even since Ancient Greece, and William James, one of the parents of modern psychology, has affirmed over a century ago that our perceptions of the events of our lives span over « a string of time ». Therefore, for thousands of years, it has been acknowledged that people had an own representation of time, in themselves. In other words, each person has its own way of representing, storing, and keeping time in their own body.

It was said, at the beginnings of developing the timeline, that, in general, Europeans tend to represent their timeline as passing through them, facing the future, living in the present and with the past behind them. This is classical In Time position.

Americans, on the other hand, represent the timeline in front of them, with the past on the left, the present in front of them and the future on the right. It is the classical Meta Time (Through Time) position.

This generalization was later retracted because people can have very different perceptions in different contexts (e.g. In Time relaxing during the weekend, but “very” Meta Time during business hours). All of the other positions derive from these two basic ones, with little variation. According to the way someone perceives it, the timeline it is split into two big categories: In Time and Meta Time.

Some specialists also consider Between Time and/or Across Time, arguing that they cannot be classified as subtypes of one of the above.

Before anything else, it is important to keep in mind that there are no “In Time people” and “Meta Time people”, even though these attitudes are easier to approach concerning an (apparently) dichotomous meta type. The timeline offers important clues as to how a client will think and react in the context for which the timeline was elicited. Throughout one’s life, this perception may change in relation to a lot of factors. People often present both characteristics in different contexts.

  

 

The perception of time in different cultures

For example, in Spain, Italy, Portugal, there is a predominantly In Time perception. There is, in extremes, that ”dolce far niente”, that can be found in Romanians as well. Romanians have a strong inclination towards In Time, even when it comes to projects. Planning is not one of our strong suits, as a people. All this considered, a very interesting phenomenon is happening in Romania right now, from a generational change standpoint. Muşătoiu (2006) shows, in an article that was awarded in the science and technology section of the Young Journalist of 2007 contest, organized by Freedom House and Edipresse AS, how the psychology of the personality is being influenced by technology in Romania and labels the Y generation as multitasking and technological par excellence.

People with a Meta Time perspective are by excellence business people. There is no way that a business freelancer will ever accomplish anything if he or she does not have a Meta Time perspective.

You will rarely find people in leadership positions with an In Time perspective, and they will not remain there for long. Any job that requires that ability to work with more than one schedule, to plan and do more than one thing at a time demands a Meta Time perspective.

Japan, USA, Germany, China offer examples of Meta Time cultures. It is the subjective opinion of the author of this article that it is highly likely that in certain countries before they went under American economic influence, there was a clear and dominant In Time perception 60-90 years ago. With the loans from the American funds, the population started not only to change their mentality towards a new value system, but also their perception of time, from In Time to Meta Time.

By Philmore1q2w3e4r (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Example of complex representation of a timelime by Philmore1q2w3e4r (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

 

NLP and the certification system for the timeline

The timeline, though a self-standing domain, as an accredited form of psychotherapy, has been getting an extraordinary contribution from NLP through research, books, training and presentations for decades now. The timeline is a certification field recognized by the American Board of Psychotherapists. For this one needs forming and licensing, just like any other therapy field. Those that have this accreditation have the right to work as timeline psychotherapists if they have a previous qualification as a psychotherapist, or as HR consultants in organizations.

Some specialists prefer to take a certification offer that includes both neuro linguistic programming and timeline. Training lasts in total, an approximated cumulated 2 weeks and it includes 3 separate levels, after which the trainee gets the right to practice on an international level, and it is also recognized by the American Board of Psychotherapists.

This is a method to deepen the applicative field and in which the student needs to master the qualifications (s)he needs to train in light of his/her professional development:

interpreting the personality according to the way the timeline is visualized;

modifying the perception of the timeline;

therapeutic interventions to resolve past trauma;

planning the personal and professional future using the timeline;

professional career counseling;

personal and professional development and management;

improvement of communication and planning skills.

Definitely useful for a career counselor.

  

 

References

Rădulescu Motru, Constantin (1998). Psihologia poporului român şi alte studii de psihologie socială, Bucureşti, Paideia, pages 24-25, acquired from http://www.scribd.com/doc/47379717/Psihologia-Poporului-Roman at 9.09.2017;

James, William (1890). Principles of Psychology: Volume I, Holt, New York, New York, USA, apud Howard, C. (2003) The NLP & Leadership Master Practitioner Audiotraining (Audio set), Manhattan Beach, California, USA;

Mitrică, Mihai; Nicolae, Crenguţa (26 iunie 2007) Încă un premiu, Business Magazin, acquired from http://www.businessmagazin.ro/actualitate/inca-un-premiu-2512903 at 9.09.2017;

Muşătoiu, Mihai (27 iunie 2006) Generaţia Multitasking, Business Magazin, acquired from http://www.businessmagazin.ro/cover-story/generatia-multitasking-1051639 at 9.09.2017;

Translation of the article ”Linia timpului” originally published in Romanian by Ștefan Alexandrescu at the 6th of August 2012 on Discerne. Translated by Ștefan Constantin Bădrăgan, 2017. Originally written in 2007. Updated by Ștefan Alexandrescu at 9.09.2017

Posted in The Art of Respecting Others | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Film culture

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 24/08/2017

 

Who doesn’t like movies? I have only met 2 people in my whole life which claimed that they didn’t like movies and even them have certainly enjoyed some films.

As with any kind of art, in order to experience it, you must first understand its specific language. There is a certain grammar to making sense of visual images that is being commonly used in films in order to make sense of it all. The grammar might be obvious, but is actually very subtle and we only become aware of it when a rule is broken, in the same manner we become aware of a mistake in somebody’s verbal expression when breaking a grammar rule.

A film culture signifies two different things:

  • watching and deeply understanding a certain large part of what is commonly accepted as movies which made it into film history, have been awarded, acclaimed and stood the test of time

  • the ability to discern the quality of a work without having any context or reference for its understanding

They are interdependent, but can also be independent. Thus, with a proper guide and list, someone can easily go through a list of n “best movies of all times” and learn by reading and assimilating what was already interpreted and expressed about those movies. In the same time, someone can learn to discern the value of a film by watching movies about which (s)he does not read or know anything and trying to discover the meaning, the symbols, the signification by sheer intellectual effort based on the skills of the spectator.

The best way is to do both of them, with precaution. Which are some of the precautions that must be considered when creating an authentic film culture?

  1. Watching must be combined with reading about the respective films, at a certain point, either before or after the viewing. Each viewer should use his or her own capacity of making sense of the spectacle, then compare it to what the analyzers, critics, reviewers and historians have written. Thus, a critical argumentation may start to develop, that would allow the film fan to support his or her views.

  2. The importance of critic must not be underestimated and must not be overestimated. Critics are people who usually have a film culture and make solid arguments by knowing and arguing for what they believe, so they deserve to be read. In the same time, some films don’t get the attention of enough well-prepared critics and can have many negative reviews, which aren’t well (or at all argumented). Critics can be influenced by political context, currents of opinion and own prejudice, not to get into the details that they might change their mind in time.

  3. The fact that one hasn’t understood anything from a movie does not automatically qualify the movie as “bad” or of “low quality”. Such a verdict, without sufficient culture, can in exchange qualify the viewer as a snob ignorant. Therefore, some people, being afraid of not being able to argue their own opinions or being afraid of being judged, never dare to express their negative opinions of films, especially in public.

  4. For understanding certain authors or certain film cultures, or film currents, one must have seen other representative similar work within that vicinity, especially when considering authors which are very cryptic or film literates (such as Andrei Tarkovsky, François Truffaut, Eric Rohmer, Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino). Not being able to understand the work of such authors is normal even for a film literate who starts to “cut his teeth” with such work. Multiple viewings and readings may be required. 

  5. There are currently two large production and distribution systems for national cinematographic industries: Hollywood (USA) and Bollywood (India). Still, films produced and distributed from the European Union make their emphasis, as do Asian films. Therefore, to really have a film culture, one must have a universal, international culture, from all spaces and all times. There can’t be “too independent” or “too foreign” or “too old” films.

  6. No matter how hard one tries, one cannot see in a lifetime all the movies which are well worth from the history, especially considering each year more movies are being produced than the year before and it’s impossible to even to keep the pace with what’s new and interesting, not to mention the classics that in some cases can even be viewed for free on the internet. Therefore, it makes sense to reduce the number of “bad” movies and increase the possibilities of watching better movies. If someone only watches commercial films and gets used to it as a normality, that person will not be able to appreciate the values of a good quality film. Watching better films (such as masterpieces, classics) makes the bad quality movies obvious like the darkness disappears with the light.

  7. The quality of a film must be judged taking into consideration the genre or genres it can be framed into. Understanding genres and differences between them is key in judging it as a value in itself. By watching the classics of the genre (for example, “The Godfather” for crime, “Gone With the Wind” for love story and “The Maltese Falcon” for film noir), you can have a frame of reference in judging an individual work. Sensible comparison of films is allowed on basis of genres, authors, currents, story line and format. Foolish comparison between films happens when someone considers “a drama is better than a music-hall” or “a thriller is better than a horror”.

  8. The quality of a film must not be confounded with the emotions it depicts or instills. For example, some women might dislike horrors because they get scared, but that doesn’t mean the movie has a low quality. A historical drama may instill sadness, as a war movie may instill rage, but calling the movie “ugly” doesn’t make it bad. For example, some people (especially Italians) have the idea of judging the quality of a movie as being “beautiful” vs “ugly”, in terms of the content, not of the quality of the representation. Considering this, it is important to remember that art doesn’t necessarily have to cover beauty. Art can be used to represent truth and truth isn’t always beautiful or pleasant to look at.

  9. There is a difference between film tastes and film opinions. For example, some people might have a taste for a certain film culture, or genre, or author and they will be likely to consider some work more interesting and valuable on that criteria. A film opinion, on the other hand, must always be an educated film opinion of a person owning a film culture. “De gustibus et coloribus non disputandum” can’t be sensibly used as a pretext to avoid contradiction when talking about a specific film.

  10. The informative value of a film must not be mistaken for its artistic value. For example, a docudrama may be a very interesting factual reconstruction of a historical era, and a very boring movie. In the same way, a very exciting history film may be an utterly wrongful mystification of actual truth. One must remember that film served and continues to serve as means of propaganda, brainwashing and one must consider the value of the representation, not the value of the content. Often (and even more in the last years in film festivals), films are judged exclusively by their daring content and not by the inner artistic value of the depiction.

Which are the advantages of gaining a film culture?

Films offer you the possibilities of voyaging in places and times you haven’t been before. They explain to you how some systems work in order for you to better understand the reality. Films offer you the experience of a spectacle, with emotions which you wouldn’t otherwise feel. Films offer you the possibility to learn from the lives of others, real or imaginary people, to find models which are inaccessible directly. Movies also convey powerful, beautiful, abstract messages using audiovisual means of expression that may inspire you, move you, change you. Understanding some movies can also prevent you from being manipulated by propaganda, commercial work. This experience can run as a bridge between you and people who work in art and extend your perception of the conceptual, immaterial world: what lies beyond words, facts and objective reality. In the movie world, one can find the inspiration and the models (s)he could not get in the real world and use them as a stepping stone to success.

What are the consequences of choosing films whimsically, remaining ignorant towards this form of art? Here are some of the common consequences of not truly developing a film culture. These are not life threatening, but they make for a lesser thrive.

Ignorance in appreciating movies can be manifested:

by overly enthusiastically appreciating what most rightfully consider rubbish

by over criticism of work which isn’t understood

by the inability to give an honest impression based on arguments after viewing a film

by the lack of ability or will to follow the narrative story of a movie, forgetting anything in a short time after watching it

by watching movies as a mere entertainment, thus discarding their artistic potential, without thinking of considering it

by watching only films from a certain culture, period of time, genre, author and discounting other possibilities

by adopting the ideas of the majority without thinking for oneself

by saying a general or vague thing about a movie when asked for an honest, in-depth opinion

by overly criticising the author for not doing the movie the way you wanted it him to (it’s his movie, not yours)

through judging the quality of the movie by its content, its genre or the way one may feel when watching the film

by avoiding to see new movies being scared of not being as good as those you already know

by criticising the authors of a movie for not doing a good enough adaptation (original literature will in most cases be better than movie depictions)

by being overly attached to or opposed to the value of a movie being “old”. Time creates strange effects for different people: some exaggerate the “timeless perspective” creating a positive aura around a film that didn’t exist when it was released or by unjustifiably comparing it to the modern means.

Psychologists came tot he conclusion that some films are well worth watching because of the discussions they generate for people around day to day topics: what are the views, the perspectives, the considerations of a certain person on the topic of how a certain character behaved? This way, movies can be used as a factor for connection, encouraging debate and knowledge.

How do you relate to movies? Do you have a film culture? How much time do you allocate reading about films before seeing them or after seeing them? How much do you talk about your conclusions about those movies with other people?

Posted in Film | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

10 Useful Skills That Will Make You A Better Entrepreneur

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 31/07/2017

 

Working as a consultant for entrepreneurs is exciting and stressful in the same time. I know, because I’ve done it for years. So I decided to share some of my observations that might come as very useful for entrepreneurs and not only.

Not having these skills will not ruin you, but it would certainly slow you down. This is not an exhaustive list, just a “top of my mind” approach that I think would be very precious especially for those in the beginning of the road that make the leap from freelancing to entrepreneurship.

  1. Creating rules based on your principles. Any company is similar to the entrepreneur which creates it. In the beginning, especially if you don’t have a lot of employees, it will be easy to express how other people should behave, act or think concerning your business in order to respect what you want to create. Principles are like a lighthouse in the dark and in the night. In the beginning, they might be clear and easy. But the best way to share them is to express them as laying foundations for the rules: not too many, not too few, but clear for everybody. Once set, everyone must respect them. You must respect them the best. In the same time, it is important to train this skill, because your principles evolve and so do you.

  2. Express gratitude. Train yourself to use any anniversary, any opportunity in order to thank people which have made a contribution. Thank your clients after buying from you. Thank your collaborators for doing a good work. Thank your employees for reaching the goals. Thank your partners for supporting you. If you believe in God, keep this in mind: do not wish for God to give you how much you can take! You can take and have as much as you want as a burden in this life. Whatever you want, God can give you. But, in order to keep it, you must remember to be satisfied with less and with more, to take any success as a gift from God and not as a merit. The gratitude is a key skill for an entrepreneur.

  3. Recognize the teachable people. There are no real incompetents, only people who don’t manifest or have lost the capacity to learn. Therefore, choose wisely to work with only those people who can be taught. Do not hope that giving chances to seemingly talented people will make them fly and become stars. Most oftenly, the people you like the most are not those which necesarrily perform the best. Welcome the people who you choose to improve their careeer working with you!

  4. Train yourself to make distinctions between options, possibilities, opportunities and probabilities. All might sound similar, but they are very different. Anything is possible until you have to chose options. Those options must be at least probable. Between the options which are probable, you have to prioritize your opportunities and decide wether you want to choose them or create them. But remember, whatever you do, your options must not only be possible, but probable also! Many young professionals start their entrepreneurship career doing business plans like they did during faculty, but fail miserably. Know your territory and act upon that knowledge!

  5. Constantly develop yourself. What happens when the one thing that you are able to do for your clients is the thing that stops you the most from developing yourself? The competition will likely take over in a matter of time. You need to constantly be a source for re-invention. Working for your own development should not be in a competition with working for your customers or with your employees. Time for yourself to develop is also needed in order to enhance your business.

  6. How much do you allow yourself and others to act authentic in a relationship? Find and recognize the other people’s values, beliefs and convictions. Beliefs are convictions we believe to be true. Attitudes are collections of beliefs and values around a certain topic. There isn’t such a things as a “non-value” or “anti-value”, there are only different beliefs, values and attitudes. Erach person is motivated by different scopes and if you learn to discover those asking specific questions (such as some from LAB profile), it is worth to use them and to link them with each of the important actions that need to be taken for your business plans to work. Values lead to motivation. Motivation leads to vision. Vision leads to strategy. Why? Because where there’s a will, there’s a way. If the strategy does not take into consideration the values of the employees, it will be a difficult to implement strategy.

  7. Use the faults of the employees in the favor of the teams. Knowing that a certain person has a low performance in a certain area means that you know not to delegate to that person something (s)he might do which is wrong. Creating teams taking into consideration both their strong points and their weak points is a service that you can do creating the kind of complementarity that the collaborators could and should appreciate.

  8. Constantly shape in your mind the model of the best entrepreneur that you can be. How does that feel? What does this model do? How do you see him or her? Remember, it’s a model, it’s not Superman, it doesn’t have to be perfect. Practice in your mind what you would do in different types of situations: with your employees, with the clients, with the partners. Put yourself in the shoes of people who need to make difficult decisions. What’s worth doing to become such an entrepreneur? What is it important to giv up in order to become this model?

  9. How do you manage to diplomatically tell the truth and be convincing without lying? Practice rethorics and argumentation. What’s worth doing in oder to prove that you are right? Sometimes, it’s not enough top be right. It also depends how you say it. Having different reframing strategies in order to make each person think in his/her way is required, because not everybody will be convinced by the same arguments. In business, it doesn’t matter so much who is right, it matters what makes things profitable. Also, please keep in mynd, what others perceive as a message matters, not what we intend to transmit.

  10. Serve your clients, for their own good, don’t please them. Politicians, coaches and psychologists may oftenly be “punished” for actually serving those who chose them. Pleasing the clients is something which others can do very easily, but it takes some courage to educate your clients to recognize their own deep needs and to be glad they are actually served by what you are offering.

Posted in Analytic & Critic Vision Over... | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

What is Schema Dynamics Programming

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 06/07/2017

 

The terminology

“Schema” comes from schema therapy and refers to the maladaptive schemas taxonomy developed by Jeffrey Young, Ph.D. and his collaborators since the ’80s. It is the problem-oriented component of the field, using psychometric questionnaires developed and tested by scientists to evaluate which are the schemas and modes which pathologically influence the emotions, the thoughts, the behavior and the language of the people. Schemas are triggered by traumas, most likely from childhood and, through complications, when activated, may generate discomfort, stress, challenge, failure and ultimately, psychiatric illness.

Dynamics” comes from “Spiral Dynamics”, a field founded in the ’70s by Clare Graves, Ph.D., and it refers to the multiple values levels layered in the personality, which may be changing in time. It is the results-driven component of the field, using advanced psychometric testing developed by professional researchers in order to discover which type of potential and perspective is enabled in order to support the transformational development of the individuals and societies.

Programming” comes from “Neuro-Linguistic Programming” (NLP), the field developed by Richard Bandler and John Grinder, Ph.D. starting in the ’70s, centered on using complex practical processes in order to provide with models of excellence. Although sometimes presented as a pseudoscience, some fields of NLP, such as metaprograms and values have been psychometrically tested as scientifically valid models of correctly structuring the language, behavior and personality.

ST (schema therapy) and NLP (neuro-linguistic programming) have both common roots in Gestalt therapy.

In some NLP Master Practitioner training, the Spiral Dynamics model is studied.

 

Positioning

What are the characteristics of Schema Dynamics Programming? How is SDP different from:

  • Psychotherapy?

  • NLP (neuro-linguistic programming)?

  • Spiral Dynamics?

  • ST (schema therapy)?

  • Coaching?

SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) provides the client with a flexible set of processes for personal transformation. This enables the functions of both psychotherapy and coaching: it works both for the traumas in the past and the goals in the future.

SDP provides a directed structure. The schema dynamic programmer knows how to recognize and measure the results of the changes when dealing with personal issues, professional goals, past, present and future. The structure is directed in the sense that the schema dynamic programmer uses both descriptive complex maps and tools to knows where the client is, knows where (s)he wants to go and, after considering the available options (tools, processes, techniques), chooses one or several procedures to follow and monitor.

To merely give an example, as a difference to coaching, the schema dynamic programmer may offer his/her opinion, contradict the client and give advice if necessary. The schema dynamic programmer is focused on practical exercises and homework which require a solid amount of effort (emotional, and even physical and logistic) from the client. This work is both oriented to the past and the future and it does not accept the personality of the client as a given, but as a starting point in the work done, which is a mere effect of life experiences and environment and may be subject to change.

Using this strategic approach, with the appropriate approach, issues such as introversion, panic attacks, PTSD, psychosomatization, phobias, alixitimy, allergies, emotional stress response, abandonment, mistrust, emotional deprivation, entitlement, abandonment and others (to name just a few) can be completely and ultimately removed and replaced with functional systems within the subconscious and the conscious.

As a set of tools oriented towards professional growth, SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) can provide clients with life-changing experiences which enable them to advance in the Spiral Dynamics model within months (in stead of years) and achieve professional and personal benefits such as:

  • job and career change and performance;

  • happy marriages;

  • increased revenues;

  • status change.

SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) focuses, as ST (schema therapy) does as well, on both emotional and cognitive-rational aspects of the change, but where ST (schema therapy) insists on working with modes (especially considering the psychiatric interventions), SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) insists on working with metaprograms. Where ST (schema therapy) insists on working with imagery, SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) has its own, much more effective and advanced process, designed by its founder. Such processes are similar to several NLP techniques but different from all of them, and it does not necessarily involve trance/hypnosis. NLP is also more focused on fast solving of the surface issues, which may work in alleviating effects but not always causes. For example, a metaprogram change can be successful for a healthy adult, but may be undone if at the root of the metaprogram change there is a maladaptive schema caused by an abusive trauma from the past.

Where ST (schema therapy) insists on analysis, SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) insists on homework and delegating as much of the change work to the client, once (s)he earns the skills and learns the processes a model for personal change. While psychotherapy generally insists on the necessity of the process being administered by a state-approved specialist, the SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) processes can be easy, independently learned and applied by each client, provided (s)he has the appropriate personality and skills inclinations. In this sense, SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) is nearer to coaching. While the client is encouraged to use for the self some of the processes, (s)he is not encouraged to become a schema dynamic programmer with other people without proper supervision.

Spiral Dynamics offers a deep conceptual framework which many of the psychologists and psychiatrists are not aware of and not even most of the coaches. On this foundation, an important SDP premise is that almost any NLP-type process can be run, focusing on developing skills and attitudes, once the maladaptive schemas have started to change in intensity. Thus, Spiral Dynamics offers not only a strategic measuring tool, but also a chart, a map of transformations, a clear direction of development once the client is freed from many of the startling issues and also some tools, for most advanced knowledge.

 

A unified theory of personality psychology

For several decades, clinical psychology and organizational or positive psychology have insisted on different aspects of the human psyche:

  • interpreting the past (retrospection) vs predicting the future (prospection);

  • problems vs. goals;

  • why vs. how;

  • reflective analysis vs. active experience (exercise);

  • addictions vs virtues;

  • learning vs. growing;

  • abstract vs. concrete;

  • personal vs. professional;

  • body vs. mind;

  • solving vs. developing;

  • issues vs. potential;

  • negative vs. positive;

  • mistakes vs. performance;

  • comprehension vs. action;

  • reparation vs. fine-tuning performance;

  • emotions vs. reason;

  • awareness for insight vs. awareness for decision/action;

  • static vs. dynamic; 

  • treating vs training;

  • obstacles vs resources’

  • linear thinking (Aristotelian) vs. systemic thinking (non-Aristotelian);

  • diffusiveness vs. focus;

  • deliberate slowness vs. witty quickness;

  • cautious desurgency vs. exuberant surgency;

  • relationship vs. task;

  • pain vs. excitement;

  • long term vs. medium/short term;

  • acceptance vs. change;

  • diagnosis vs. enhancement;

  • tense strictness vs. moderate willingness;

  • guiding vs. directing;

  • assessment vs. evaluation;

  • teaching vs. knowing;

  • floating vs. flying

and so on.

 

Differentiating for the future

SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) is not the only mixed approach available. It may even not be the best. But it works, and it will be tested of how well it works in comparison to any of the separate components to which it is compared.

SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) is being developed by Ștefan Alexandrescu as a groundbreaking new field with its own applications and is NOT in direct competition with ST (schema therapy), Spiral Dynamics and NLP. It is important that this field would support the development and most especially, the research of these 3 original fields, on which it is grounded. It is not intended as a substitute, but as an alternative, as an enhancer, as a continuation, as it is different from all of the above mentioned.

However, SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) does clearly enter in competition with:

  • regular psychotherapy

  • coaching

Regular psychotherapists and coaches which lack skills and knowledge in all of these three fields are not accredited, nor advised, nor recommended to clients. As SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) is a practical field, the researchers are challenged to devise experimental tests and projects to compare the effectiveness of SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) with either regular psychotherapy and coaching. SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming) is simply different and superior, through techniques, skills and results to regular psychotherapy and coaching. This is not a marketing statement, it is simply a reflection of the reality, based on the obtained. And it’s getting better and better, steady and slowly.

People who are interested in learning these skills are advised to contact Ștefan Alexandrescu directly.

The theoretical component of Schema Dynamics Programming also integrates models from transactional analysis, positive psychology, multiple intelligences, motivational psychology and from landmark specialists such as Jeffrey Young, Clare Graves, Abraham Maslow, Robert Dilts, Anthony Robbins, David McClelland, W. Gerrod Parrot, Robert Plutchick, Brian Tracy (correlating research to be determined) and could be correlated in the future with several other theories. You may download here a synthesis pdf.

Copyright © Ștefan Alexandrescu, 2017. None of the contents of this page can be reproduced without the written express consent of Ștefan Alexandrescu. No exceptions allowed.

If you liked this article, please also read this:

Schema Dynamics Programming with Stefan Alexandrescu (25.12.2016)

How to Live a Perfect Life. Part I. (31.10.2017)

How to Live a Perfect Life, part II. The First 4 Out of 12 Steps, In the Right Order (13.11.2016)

How to Live a Perfect Life, part III. Steps 5-8 Out of 12, In the Right Order (17.11.2016)

How to Live a Perfect Life, Last Part. Steps 9-12 Out of 12, In the Right Order (21.11.2016)

PS: Thanks to Diana Andreea Bădrăgan.

Posted in Debug Your Mind | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Some differences between working hard and working SMART

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 27/06/2017

What is the difference between efficiency and effectiveness?

Efficiency is putting the ladder on the wall and climbing it down the other side of the wall as fast as possible. Effectiveness is knowing on which wall to put the ladder.

Some people learn in life, either by experience or modeling, to cherish the hard work. While this is important and certainly correlated with positive outcomes, it’s certainly not the most important.

Some people hear “strategy” and understand “procedure” or “technique”, hear “planning” and hear “lack of liberty” because some of the most relevant representations of these have been expressed in an extreme way.

Some people consider experience as a relevant source of learning. Hard work, trying and failing, persevering on one’s own path is currently mantra for many. Still, it is, for other people the poorest form of learning.

So if running after some unrelenting standards must be a very precious value in order to ensure quality, it seems weird that some of those who promote them (despite the qualities and advantages it defers to consumers of their products and services) are so tired, bored, unnerved and tense. Something doesn’t quite add up.

There is no need for conflict. Things can be done fast and best. You may learn through modeling more effective than through experience – if you have the right models (finding them requires skill). You may plan and enjoy your life. You may strategize and find opportunities that allow you creatively move in freedom. You may work enough and intelligently. Providing best quality can be a rewarding experience during the process. Want to know how to get there? Here it is some advice I find useful.

  1. Ask yourself every day or as often as possible: what little change, added to the baseline of my performance, can make an outstanding difference?
  2. What other perspective can this be seen from?
  3. How are others succeeding and why? What can be replicated?
  4. What is the proper structure for getting the results envisioned?
  5. How will this be mostly done in 5 years?
  6. Who has the proper experience, results and motivation to take in consideration as a model?
  7. How do you see yourself from the outside when having the goal completed? Backtrack from that moment: what will you be doing a week earlier, a month earlier?
  8. How is seeing the bigger picture helping you with deciding differently?
  9. How is this working plan helping you today with the perfect plan you mean to do tomorrow?
  10. How does changing the people you work with/for support you in making a bigger impact with fewer efforts?
  11. What other useful, important things might you be doing with your efforts if you’d have more time?
  12. How could the people you are working with/for make your work/life easier?
  13. What other people could you choose to work with/for and how could you find them?
  14. What other goals might be more worthy of your efforts?
  15. How would changing the challenges you confront support you to develop yourself?
  16. Who wold get an award for doing what you are already doing?
  17. What would make you able to choose better?
  18. In what context is the kind of hard work you do more appreciated or featured?
  19. Who would benefit the most from your efforts?
  20. Who would care more about your deeper intentions?
  21. How could you reinvent your work?

How do you think about your efforts now? Do they seem more intelligent? Now, that you will be able to do smarter work, you may choose if and in which directions you prefer to work hard.

What does SMART mean in goal management?

Specific

Measurable

Achievable

Realistic

Time-limited

For example take in consideration such a table that can be used in order to detail and support any goal formulation, to make sure it can be measured in tasks, time and units, therefore making it achievable in a realistic timeframe set.

How could I improve this goal, working smarter and less, using just some of the questions I recommended?

  • I could use an application which would correct my errors as I type (such as https://www.grammarly.com/)
  • I could record my voice reading the content of an article and delegate to someone to transcribe it.
  • I could delegate the translation into English from Romanian of several articles I already wrote
  • I could write useful copy to promote my services as posts which would also make interesting reading
  • I could write useful articles for my clients
  • Make a plan of how many clients do I want to gain using my articles on this blog
  • Use the time saved to serve existing customers and develop strategies to find new ones

 

SMART goal

Motivation

Tasks

Time-limited

What?

Why?

What specifically?

How much? (for each article)

Publish 2 posts/month on Analytic Vision, monthly, covering by 2018 all the subjects in the Excel file (24 posts/year)

 

Contribution

Support

Professionalism

Enjoyment

1. update excel ideas file 1. 5 mins
2. design structure 2. 5 mins
3. create content 3. 20-90 mins
4. check content 4. 10-20 mins
5. publish content 5. 10 mins
6. share content 6. 2 mins

Posted in Debug Your Mind | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Schema Dynamics Programming with Stefan Alexandrescu

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 25/12/2016


woman-570883_1920

Psychologists have worked for more than 100 years in order to find explanations for how the human mind and personality works, to heal the problems hidden deep inside of us. Personal development fields such as neuro-linguistic programming and transactional analysis have come up with effective and efficient solutions for breakthrough to success. Clinical psychology and development of excellence have been long time separated. Now there is a possibility to unite the best of both world: heal the suffering mind and personality and drive it to success and performance.

Questions for you

  • How would it be for you to find out what holds you back to access your full potential and succeed?

  • How can you confront, heal and solve your traumas?

  • Do you want to find the deep psychological and emotional roots of your problems?

  • Are you ready to confront a profound truth about who you are and and how to get yourself out of your way?

  • Have you implemented powerful changes using fields such as psychotherapy, coaching, personal development consulting but only up to one point?

If your answer to any of these questions is “YES”, then this will interest you.

Please read the following lines, as the world they open up might amazingly transform your life!

A revolutionary approach

My name is Ștefan Alexandrescu and I worked one on one with hundreds of customers since 2004. I have always been interested in finding out why some of the people who came to me for various problems or goals succeeded after just 2-3 sessions and some needed tens of sessions. Now I found out and everything else I knew fitted in like a puzzle.

The key I was missing was offered to my by schema therapy, but I found something even better. Using advanced techniques that I tested and developed in working with clients, I have found out what some might call ”the Holy Grail” of psychology and personal development. I have developed an integrative approach using schema therapy conceptualization and homework, Spiral Dynamics theory, NLP techniques and various correlations with other psychological theories that is unique.

Answers for you

I have so far worked with 6 customers in 2016 and after tens of individual sessions I have come to some amazing results.

  • Do you also want to know and deeply understand how your personality works inside out?

  • Do you also wish to unveil the deepest roots of all your sidetracks that cover your potential?

  • Do you want to set your path straight to a powerful future that will fulfill your goals and talents?

  • Do you also want to embark on a journey confronting all the fears, limiting beliefs, uncovered traumas and inner conflicts in order to break through of them?

  • Do you want to find out what has been keeping you from becoming who you were meant to be?

If your answer to any of these questions is “yes”, then please keep reading, because I am going to present you how and what.

The questionnaires

The first thing you need to do is to complete several tests (psychometric questionnaires), totaling a few hundreds of questions. These will require a lot of concentration and a state of introspection. Based on your answers at those questions, you will have to send me the results and I will calculate your scores, make a few correlations and offer you a free evaluation.

When we meet, either face to face or through Skype, the evaluation must be done with the results open (all the Excel and PDF files), so that you have a full understanding of how the model of interpretation works for you.

The tests I will give you will have identified a detailed list of:

  • your strong points, in skills, talents and personality traits

  • your main weak points, that hold you down from reaching higher goals

  • how these are correlated with your experience and manifestations

These tests work within the correlations between various theories from NLP, transactional analysis, Spiral Dynamics, schema therapy and classical psychology.

The tests can be done for free in a variety of forms. The first consulting session of brief, general interpretation of these profiles is provided fully free of charge, with no strings attached. If you decide that you want to start a journey of deep transformation, a program tailored specifically for your needs awaits you. The program is designed to be flexible and very efficient. It will require time, money and effort, but I promise you it will be one of the best investments you have ever done in your life if you choose to go through it.

You have now the chance to be part of the second wave of clients using this integrated approach between personal development for excellence and clinical psychology. This has already provided amazing results for clients in just a matter of months! Please inquire further if you want to know more about the consulting activity of Stefan Alexandrescu in 2016.

This isn’t for you if:

  • you cannot allocate at least 2 hour/week or 1 hour/week for the consulting session and at least 3-4 times more for homework (journals, letters, goal formulations, lists, questionnaires)

  • you think 50 euros/hour for a program that can change your life in a few months is too much

  • you are afraid to confront yourself, discover yourself in depth

  • you don’t care about what happens to you in the future

  • it’s OK to postpone your goals, happiness, fulfillment or healing time and again

  • you don’t have the discipline to invest the efforts into your development

with the likely results that:

  • you will try to fix surface issues (effects) which will appear in your life in various ways, with little chance to approach the deep roots

  • you will try to fix behaviors (effects) in stead of beliefs, emotions and experiences (causes)

  • the problems will cost you more than solving them

  • feel this sounds great, but you don’t have a few hours to complete the questionnaires

This is a difficult and challenging process. Not everyone is up for it. Are you ready? I can promise you this:

  • you will unveil painful memories

  • you will understand the mechanisms of faulty behaviors that endanger your life as you know it

  • you will experience intense negative emotions

  • you will feel disappointed towards people in your life

  • you might try to find excuses to interrupt the process

with the likely effect that in the end:

  • you will have deep insights

  • you will be able to choose in the present what is appropriate for you

  • you will understand and accept yourself and others

  • you will experience the power of forgiveness

  • you will train the skills you need to perform

  • you will become a better parent

  • you will be able to heal deep wounds in the past that restrain you from being yourself.

Start now!

The first steps are to get in touch with me, receive the questionnaires, complete them, let me score them and receive your free evaluation!

Find out more! Get in touch NOW! This is for you!

Ștefan Alexandrescu

0040 729 034 883

stefan [dot] alexandrescu [at] yahoo ]dot] com

Copyright © Ștefan Alexandrescu, 2016

Posted in Analytic & Critic Vision Over... | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

13 Hints – How to Separate Value from Mind Bugging In Webinars

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 26/11/2016

In the past years, putting together the increase of internet bandwidth supporting high definition instant live video streaming, the increasing capacities of server streaming for thousands of people, together with the price falling for hardware technology, internet access (even on mobile devices) and data centers services, more and more learning companies develop business models centered on webinars in multiple formats which promise to deliver some free information to the watchers/listeners and some sort of attractive special offer.

In my experience, such webinars can be somewhere between money-making & life changing to an utter waste of time listening to some charlatan’s bogus.

There are certain programs which facilitate access to various learning workshops providing practical blueprints with videos, audios, workbooks, transcripts, forms, procedures, tables and so on.

webinar

Of course, many people might be convinced to spend some time with these stuff, but I’m going to give you some suggestions about how to not lose too much time with this stuff while also getting most out of such opportunities. What you might not know about most of these:

  1. Most webinars are promised to last a certain amount of time. They usually last double, but if you stay till the end, you may find the real offer with special discount.
  2. Very many of the programs offered for hundreds of dollars can be found on the same website with a special significant discount, such just a few tens of dollars or even just 1 $. Of course, if you don’t know how to look for it or don’t at least try to close the page and see if you are tempted in that moment with a lower offer, you get taxed more. For example, I participated in a webinar where they were selling a course for 279$ and I found it at 1 $ while browsing on the web for it during the webinar. Another program was being offered at 999 $ and was later offered for 50 $ after a month for those who didn’t buy it initially.
  3. Some of what you learn can really make you a lot of money and change your life, IF you apply those things. But, basically, when you subscribe to a webinar you find out that there’s about 80% promotion and 20 % content because a webinar is essentially a 2-3 hour-commercial
  4. If you subscribed for the webinar and bothered appearing just for 5 minutes, most trainers will send you the replay to watch/listen whenever you want to, like for example on your dumbphone. This is a very good and practical idea especially if you are not convinced you want to buy whatever that person is selling you. In the same time, it must be said that by doing so, you are guaranteed to miss the time-limited offer at the end of the webinar.
  5. Theoretically, you have the opportunity to ask some questions during the live webinar, but there are chances that from thousands of people attending and hundreds asking questions, yours wouldn’t be answered unless they are very good and posted multiple times or by different people.
  6. Many of them have nothing to do with the advertised subject, they are just a bunch of shitty hocus-pocus new age mindbabble since the time of “The Secret”. I though people grew up and overcame that fashion, but apparently there are still thousands of suckers hoarding in thinking that through visualization they are going to mind-bend the universe.
  7. The most practical things I found are the entrepreneurship, marketing and social media oriented contents which practically show you how to organize business around consulting and training. I suggest you take some of those things, apply them and share them with your customers.
  8. When the topic is not oriented on something concrete about business or sales, there are some things to be taken from the amount of psychobabble, but it must be clearly discerned and that takes very much time. So be prepared to take some notes and not get bored with the rest of the content which might be confusing or useless. Watching/listening to a webinar DOES require some present and active knowledge about the topic, otherwise you might just believe everything the presenter is telling, which in most cases can be very dangerous.
  9. All the payments must also be done through PayPal or ClickBank. If the page you are directed to only obligates you to buy with your card, something might be wrong. Before deciding to buy, check the name of the program being advertised together with “scam”, “fraud” or “hoax” together. See what you find. Some of these stuff are just pyramidal schemes, working on the principle: step 1. give something small and valuable step 2. make people think there is more 3. repeat steps 1 &2 indefinitely until the buyers run out of money.
  10. If you are smart and know a little bit more about the subject, you can implement some valuable ideas without buying the whole program. Or you could use the presentation as a model and learn from the selling skills of the presenter and use them in your own experience.
  11. Whatever the topic of interest is, you may find free recorded and valuable webinars on video.google.com . Also, look for similar topics in MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses). You might get a similar or better content for free. Find some MOOCs appropriate for you searching on customized keywords here: https://www.mooc-list.com/
  12. The most serious and well-planned online trainings do offer the access to a closed community, usually on Facebook, where you can interact with other participants and with trainers, ask questions and create business opportunities. I think this is one of the most important features, if you have time to access it.
  13. Find out if there is a return policy. Usually, there is something like if you don’t like what you find, you get a full or a partial refund in 7 or 10 days, so hurry up and check if you like what you found. If not, get your money back! Usually, the process takes a few days, so don’t last until the last days, because even if you send the request within time, if it’s not process you might lose the money you want to get back. Some companies retain something like 10-15 % for comission processing or stuff like that, some reimburse you the full payment. Also, don’t use this loophole to abuse the system! If the content is truly helpful, respect the work and pay the money.

Stefan Alexandrescu

consultant in personal and professional development

0040 729 034 883

Posted in Debug Your Mind | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Fight with My Dark Side, part II

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 18/05/2013

This article is a direct follow up to this one and to this one. Please read them in order to follow the logical connections. Also, at the end of this article, you have a list of recommended articles in direct connection to the present subject . 

6. Less Losing in details / Hyper-analysis

Losing myself in details with a too inefficient, stuffy style of splitting the hairs in an overlong in-depth analysis surely negatively impacted my concision. This has become an issue for me first in 2009 – which is also the year I have started the blog “Analytic Vision”. Of course, my analytic capacity is a good quality, but anything used in excess – just as it is my case with persuasion & judgement, damages my reputation. So, starting 2009, I have been constantly striving – and succeeding to decrease my over-analysis. In 2009, this perceived weakness was on the 5th position (11 points). Now, it’s on the 12th position (5,5 points). Twice as better. In the same time, my analytic capacity, as a strength, has almost the same number of points (11.5, compared to 11) as in 2009, and twice as much as in 2008. So this is a clear proof I have improved a defect, while keeping the quality of the strength.

I have succeeded this on writing shorter, more conclusion-focused articles and doing a lot of synthesis.

7. More Discounting of others

Unfortunately, on this aspect, things are not better. In stead, they are worse and have been getting worse since 2009. That is, I started by lack of adaptation to the group and bringing negative energy to the fact I am mismatching others, with lack of diplomacy, cynicism, incisiveness, radicalism, sharpness, disrespect and even disdain. Sometimes I’m rushing into others’ reality, I’m talking too loud or too fast or simply too aggressive for them, or using brutal frankness. All of these makes my integration difficult especially in Romania. I mismatch others’ expectations of what I’m supposed to do, I often have unpredictable behaviour, I say unexpected things and make surprises to other people. This is often considered as a weakness, as a thing which people simply hate about me. This was, in 2012, the 3rd negative aspect in the top, with 20 points (5 times more than in 2006).

I especially have lack of tolerance and acceptance with people who waste my time with non-sense, aberrations, stupidities, small talk and minor, passing, irrelevant details. In some of these cases, I use irony, which may be considered as malice. Of course, it is my right to select the people I’m spending my time with, but there’s no need from my part to be malicious with them. This is an aspect in my communication which deserves being corrected.

I have prejudices and I make assumptions as everyone does. Sometimes, I may not be so clear to explain how I have reached those assumptions/prejudices, but in case anyone wishes to investigate, I can argue it. Therefore, I know a lot of stuff about people, and I write and I talk about it with certitude. Some people might not like it, for different reasons.

This is an important issue for me, because one of my declarative values is respect. In 2012, after finishing the 360 degrees analysis for the 2011 evaluation of feed-backs, I have officially declared war on this weakness on my blog. I have done nothing to work on this. Therefore, the results show me this has grown in the impression of others.

8. More  formalism.

I have especially published an article on this here.

9. More Disorder

I have promised in the article from March that I’d return upon this subject.

The attribute organisation as a strength has kept its place (9th position) and its points. Disorder has gone, as a negative attribute, from the 7th position (9 points) to worse: the 5th position (11 points).

I have a messy room and a chaotic agenda. My schedule was less planned in 2012 compared to 2011. I wanted to study GTD (getting things done), but I haven’t. I wanted to buy a tablet, but I haven’t. I wanted to learn how to use software for organizing my activities, but I haven’t. It all remained at a low level, so much that people actually perceived a worsening about me.

10. Useless theories & impractical dreams

I have come to a new definition of idealism: idealism is the creativity other people see when you don’t have money to put your ideas into practice.

People have generally considered me 50% more idealist (seeing things which aren’t there) in 2012 than in 2011. That is, from the 9 th place with 6,5 points, it has been raised to the 8th position, with 8 points. Still, it is better than in 2006 and 2010. In comparison to 2011, I had bigger plans for 2012, which didn’t come true. They didn’t come true because I decided to put more energy into writing, editing, publishing – articles and books, from which I haven’t gained enough money. For example, not even now, half a year after I published “Căile persuasiunii în negociere/The Persuasion’s Ways to Negotiation”, a book I have long talked about (for example, on this Romanian blog) , I still haven’t recovered the money invested in this project (approx. 700 euros).

My perseverance in writing, even if losing money, is inexplicable financially or practically, otherwise than a long-term investment, for which I expect to see some real results only in 2013 – that means that the results will be noticed only in the 2014 evaluation.

As a general conclusion to the series of articles from this spring about my personal brand evaluation for 2012 (feed-backs collected in October-December 2012 and analysed in March-May 2013), I had 50 % rate of success in the set goals for improving weaknesses and 70% rate of success in improving strengths, which gives me a 60 % success rate, in connection to what I set as a goal. The real success rate is 68 % though, because I have also accomplished other things which weren’t my goals. I am satisfied. This is the way personal development is done step by step, year by year.

It is a process of strategic gathering feed-back, recording it, understanding it, labeling it and transform it from qualitative information to quantitative information, than analysing it, drawing conclusions and setting new goals.

If you liked this article, please also read:

4 +, 4 – (14.01.2012)

Personal Development Goals in 2012 (08.03.2012)

Cine eşti tu şi cum te vezi în oglindă (15.05.2011)

My Personal Development Goals Evaluation For 2012 (30/03/2013)

About My Excessive Formalism & the So-Called “Lack of Empathy” (12/05/2013)

The Fight with My Dark Side (15.05.2013)

Posted in Analytic & Critic Vision Over... | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

The Fight with My Dark Side

Posted by Ştefan Alexandrescu on 15/05/2013

Each person has a certain dark side. Each of us has weaknesses, which are labeled as such by others. Looking in the mirror others provide for us is always a difficult exercise. Fighting the image of the mirror is always an illusion. Any change must come from the inside. This is the rock of personal development: working on your weaknesses and improving them. Generally, it is easier to emphasize the positive attributes and to get them noticed. It is easier and better to turn on light than to fight with the dark. But there is virtue also in confronting oneself.  This article is about how I practically used my methodology for 360 degrees evaluation for self growth, a year ago.

About a year ago, I have stated here[en, blog] that I will change/improve some things with me, overall, based on the 360 degrees annual evaluation[en, blog]. Last year, in the fall, I have done the 360 degrees evaluation for 2012, so I now have a pretty good overall picture on what I have accomplished in the 8 months which have passed from March 2012 till November 2012. Although I did my homework and I completed the little research, I haven’t made time to share with you the results in such an organized fashion as I had done it for the 2011 evaluation here [en, pdf].

I have written this article due to the transparency that I preach – do what I say and say what I do. Therefore, let’s take my accomplishments and failures in terms of the year 2012, in rapport to what I’ve assumed as a target in front of everyone. I have marked in red the failures and with green the successes. This is NOT the top of my strengths and weaknesses. This article follows the results of my goals in the order declared last year. This is part two – how I’ve overcome some of my weaknesses.For reasons of length, this article is separated in two parts.

I want to point out that each year, I ask other people to give me their feed-back about me. Each year, I completely change the set of people I’m asking, with some few minor exceptions. But the overall view on my main strengths and weaknesses remain the same. So my research is consistent.

I have marked with red the targets which I haven’t succeeded to attain and with green the targets I attained.

1. Less Hurry Up

It’s no mystery that I have the Hurry-Up driver [blog, ro]. More precisely, people say about me:

  • too much distress, tension, aggitation, anxiety, unrestness, irascibility;
  • hastiness, precipitation, imperiosity, impatience, impulsiveness;
  • rush, on the run, eyes on the watch, expeditive style, hurry (in walking, eating, talking, answering; learning, writing, promoting & presenting myself);
  • exaltation, excess of zeal, lack of measure, histrionism;
  • listening style: interrupting people, interviening over them, not letting others speak, completing other people’s sentences;
  • innefective time management: delaying in the last moment, being late, eating too little, sleep self-depravation.

But the good news is that in 2012, the centralized results for this weakness show a significant improvement in the number of points, although not in the position. Although this remains in top 5 negative attributes, it is better than ever in the past 5 years, as number of points. 

Maybe I have learned to take breaks, who knows?

2. Less Annoying persistence

The annoying persistence is the expression I use to describe what many people have reproached me for years: not knowing when to stop when trying to convince someone of something, not knowing the limit when trying to sell an idea, a product, a service.

Fortunately, in 2012, I have attained a significantly better result as a score and as a position for this negative attribute in order to congratulate myself. Still, this is not merely a result of my self-control, but also (partially) a result of the fact that generally, I have really been less perseverent. Dropping the perseverance also meant dropping the annoying persistence.

I do have to say that writing a book about a subject also makes you more profficient in that certain subject. While writing my first book about persuasion, I have become a more efficient communicator. In 2011 and 2010, the annoying persistence was my 2nd weakness, with 20, respectively 17 points. In 2012, it was my 10th weakness, with only 6 points. It is also better than ever. Mission achieved. In 2012, I knew when to stop better than before. At least, this is what results from my little research on what people who know me have said.

3. Less Pride

The so-called complex of superiority, pride is still a main problem for me, but it has dropped as importance in 2012 compared to 2011. Still, in 2012, it had more points than in 2008. .

As a difference compared to other previous years, people haven’t said about me:

  • arrogance;

  • advanced/technical language/not on everybody’s understanding/hard to get to;

  • superiority complex/superior attitude/infatuation/looking down on people/talking down to people;

  • too good self-image;

  • big ego;

  • imposing over other people;

  • constant need for affirmation;

  • desire to impress;

  • applying etiquettes;

  • selfishness;

  • pride.

In stead, in 2012, they have said about me:

  • egocentrism & self-centeredness;

  • lack of tolerance/acceptance to others’ imperfections;

  • prejudices/assumptions;

  • disturbing presence by showing intelligence/showing off as smart/didactic attitude/telling others what to do;

  • Not taking care of parents.

So it seems that I wasn’t perceived as badly in 2012 as during some of the previous years. But let’s also take some of this kind of feed-back, to clear up some issues.

I am a freelancer, working by myself. I am doing the promotion, the sale, the execution, the delivering, the cashing and the administration of every product or service that I create and offer. I live by myself. I don’t have any girlfriend, wife or kids. And I have been raised as a sole child. Of course I’m self-centered! Who else could I be centered around?!?

It is true, I don’t take care of my parents, that is I don’t make enough money to send them some. They still help me now. But let’s get real: how many 27 years old Romanian men financially accomplish to financially take care of their parents?

This is not to say I’m not proud. Au contraire. But it has improved between 2010-2012. And I strive for it to improve for 2013 too. Not majorly, but slightly.

4. More Scattered attention

This downside has become worse, in comparison to 2011. In 2011, it was on the 10th position with 6 points, as a weakness. In 2012, it was on the 9th position, with 6.5 points as a weakness. The results from the passed year are better than in 2006, 2009 and 2011, but worse than in 2008 and 2011.

People have still noticed about me in 2012 that I have lack of priority in my multitasking and that I sometimes become an airhead lost in diversity, who scatters his attention in too many (parallel) fields / areas / tasks / directions. And in 2012, even more than in 2011.

For 2013, my goal is to push it, if possible, on place 11, and make sure that I am considered more focused. How? Of course, by concentrating more on the same thing and less on running after all sorts of other things in the same time. I want to hear, in exchange,

people telling me how much they appreciate my variate knowledge and experience and the interdisciplinary approach I provide in my trainings and writings. It seems that there is still a long way till then.

I have succeeded to be more disorganized, more unfocused by starting more projects than in 2011 and finishing less.

5. Less Inflexibility

I have to trumpet this a a great success. 7 years ago, when I first started to make this 360 degrees evaluation, my inflexibility/stubbornness/rigidity (in attitude and beliefs) was considered my top nr. 1. weakness (with 20 points). Now, it’s on the 11th place, and it has been on a constant improving lane since 2010. It has never reached the 11th position.

I have succeeded to treat my inflexibility as a weakness by using this process of 360 degrees evaluation and taking into consideration all the feed-back I received, especially that for which I asked.

If you liked this article, please also read:

4 +, 4 – (14.01.2012)

Personal Development Goals in 2012 (08.03.2012)

Cine eşti tu şi cum te vezi în oglindă (15.05.2011)

My Personal Development Goals Evaluation For 2012 (30/03/2013)

About My Excessive Formalism & the So-Called “Lack of Empathy” (12/05/2013)

 

Posted in Analytic & Critic Vision Over... | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: