Happiness, Satisfaction, & Change: Day 3
It Has Finally Happened. . .
There is a backlash against Happiness. Honest.
Coach, consultant, and prolific writer Peter Vajda, Ph.D.–see comments from yesterday–forwarded a Newsweek article titled:
(If Alex sees this, he’ll be snowboarding directly into the Newsweek offices. Someone should warn the editors to look out for a Great Dane in a ski cap!)
I don’t know about you, but I confess I’ve never, ever heard someone say, “I’m tired of being happy. I want to work on some serious misery.”
Well, according to the article, apparently those wild-and-crazy Scots are the exception to the rule:
Psychologist Ed Diener, who has studied happiness for more that 25 years, visited Scotland recently. He explained to members of Parliament and business leaders that it would be valuable to add a national index of happiness to the usual measures of a country’s wealth. Professor Diener explained that such an index would measure things known to increase people’s sense of well-being, e.g., democratic freedoms, health care, the rule of law…
The Scots liked the idea of freedom, good health care, rule of law…but not because they make people happier.
According to Diener: “They said too much happiness might not be such a good thing. They like being dour, and didn’t appreciate being told they should be happier.”
Had the good doctor consulted with me, I would have shared one word which would explain the foundation of all Tartan psycho-social behavior:
Haggis.
Titles Sell, But Don’t Always Reflect the Real Story
The CHO is all about happiness. He’s also about being real. So let’s get to some of the key parts of that Newsweek article.
1. There is an inclination–at least by some in the U.S.–to treat normal sadness as a problem. Worse, there is a portion of the population that simply wants to treat it with drugs. Take a “happy” pill.
But there isn’t one. Yet.
However, young people are being urged by their parents to take anti-depressants although the young people themselves are keenly aware of the normalcy of their situation. That is, something sad happened–so they feel sad!
This is a bit confusing to me. You and I hear about the importance of “authenticity” all the time. Turning our backs on how we are actually doing at a given moment can only cause problems down the road. Sooner or later, suppressed feelings emerge in unhealthy and unexpected ways.
2. The magazine perceives a backlash not against happiness, but against a group of people who insist that we be happier. In fact, according to the article, 85% of Americans say they are pretty happy. Yet there are those who insist that everyone should get even happier.
Peter points out in his comment that many folks have difficulty accurately naming what makes them happy. Yet they are very clear about what other people expect and often adjust behavior accordingly. (BTW: I am a very happy, satisfied guy. But I haven’t a clue what I would do if someone started singing “Don’t Worry, Get Happier!).
3. Citing a study of more than 118,000 people from 96 countries, the article says that the results were clear. The highest levels of happiness are attached to stable, long, contented relationships.
Happiness, Relationships, and Change
When we talk about happiness at work, aren’t we really saying that we want relationships that are mutually respectful, acknowledge our uniqueness, and offer an opportunity to grow?
I’m not sure any of us actually needed statistics to tell us that. But organizations–being organizations–do pay attention to the numbers. So it can’t hurt for employers and managers everywhere to look at the implications:
- If employee satisfaction is related to long-term, contented relationships, then constant re-organizations with a constant churn of co-workers and bosses is counterproductive.
- Change and uncertainty are both normal yet not something that companies–or we as individuals– can control. However, organizations can be deliberate about bringing people together in the midst of change. This captures the inherent nature of existing relationships in order to build a sense of strength at a time when people may be feeling most vulnerable.
- Use the collective experience of those impacted to address issues that will affect them. This is an acknowledgment of respect as well as a satisfying use of individual talents.
Finally:
Jane left a well thought-out comment that you’ll want to check out. At the heart of it is the notion of choice. And one of the choices we have is to surround ourselves with people who have a positive approach to life.
And with that, I am contented. Until the next post
While Alex dons Lederhosen and his new Ride board for a run across the Austrian powder, Happiness is being spread by Steve Roesler of All Things Workplace .
Written by steveroesler Permalink
Karin H. Said,
February 6, 2008 @ 1:45 pm
Hi Steve
Isn’t being able to work with and towards your strengths one of the best ways to ‘be happy’?
I sincerely think it is and don’t even consider it egocentric because when you are happy and enjoying life, work, relationships due to that you start making others happy too.
And I don’t think you ever get tiered of being happy this way ;-)
Karin H. (Keep It Simple Sweetheart, specially in business)
Michael Lee Stallard Said,
February 6, 2008 @ 4:37 pm
Steve,
Thank you for your post and especially for reminding us about haggis. It started my day off with a very hearty laugh.
I couldn’t agree with you more that life is not always happy. Life, like nature, has its seasons. Parker Palmer’s little book entitled Let Your Life Speak has some beautiful and profound reflections about the seasons of life and what he learned during difficult seasons. I highly recommend it.
This is consistent with my own experience. My wife Katie had two forms of cancer in 2003 and 2004. It was a very difficult season for our family. During that time I had some very down moments yet I also discovered the joy of friendships outside of my family and small circle of friends. Amazon.com published the Amazon Short I wrote about it entitled “Alone No Longer.” Although I would never choose that season, especially for Katie’s sake, it brought us closer together as a family and with our friends. It made me realize that I’m an “achievaholic” who needs some checks and balances in my life. Perhaps that is why people over 50 years of age tend to be the happiest..they’ve learned from experience who they are and who they are not. I mentioned it in another post that the musical The Fantasticks is wonderful show about this dynamic. The Quaker notions of “way closings” and “way openings” in life also reflect this idea of finding our way on the journey of life.
William Jame’s philosophy of pragmatism does too. I’m curious if any of you are aware of other philosophies that reflect this idea. (Just so you know, Katie is in remission, doing just great and has moved on to other challenges such as raising teenage daughters.
Jo Said,
February 6, 2008 @ 4:53 pm
Defensive pessimists and/or people coping with severe threat don’t like being told to be happy. It is a distraction from what they want – which is more control over their circumstances.
I would count myself in this camp for the most part, and though I am into positive psychology in quite a big way, I hadn’t realised how much positive psychology worked until I used the Canadian 2.0 website http://www.inpowr.com. The problem with bad times is we shut down our sense of creativity in order to cope with the threat. The inpowr program helps keep bad stuff in perspective and the pleasure of being able to see bad as bad and good as good, simultaneously, is one of those things that has to be experienced to be believed.
I like Scots actually. Very very funny people. Even if they like being miserable, everyone around them gets a good laugh.
As for contemporary workplaces, the issue might be more how structures are going to change. Every major consulting firm and managerial pundit is making their predictions. The question is what will be next and who is ahead of the curve?
Cheerful post though! Thanks.
Rebecca Said,
February 6, 2008 @ 8:31 pm
There is quite a bit of evidence suggesting that people are inclined, from an early age, to a certain level of happiness, and don’t usually move much from that level, regardless of external circumstances.
So it may be that people who are not inclined to be happy are frustrated by the suggestion that it is a flaw on their part, and comforted by the idea that there are benefits to discontent.
But the article mentions Aristotle as one of those who saw drawbacks to happiness, and I think they are wrong there. My understanding is that Aristotle believed that happiness was the highest good, and the purpose of life.
However, I’d say that the happy should allow the unhappy their anti-happiness backlash if they want it. Poor things.
jackie cameron Said,
February 6, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
Oh no! the great old unhappy dour Scots myth again!!! OK, like any nation we have our grumps but it is certainly not a case of us all being like that. I cannot comment on what the good Doctor was told – and by whom. Though it might be an indication that because people expect us to be that way that somehow we live up ( down ) to expectations. Asking politicians about happiness anyway – what would they know??
Truly – we can be fun. We can laugh. We can mock ourselves ( in fact we are really good at that!) and sometimes grump. Come to Scotland and see for yourselves.
I would add a smiley to this post if i could work out how to do that.
Jackie ( a very happy Scot)
Steve Roesler Said,
February 7, 2008 @ 7:45 am
Karin,
As you know, that’s an area in which I work each day. In 31 years of practice, I’ve found no one without a talent–or multiple talents. Most people I meet don’t start identifying them until they begin to feel a sense of professional frustration and try to discover “why?” Of all the consulting with which I’m involved, helping people pinpoint their genuine, innate talents is the most satisfying.
As for egocentric: What’s egocentric about sharing a gift with an employer, your family, or the world at large?!
Steve Roesler Said,
February 7, 2008 @ 7:53 am
Michael, thank you for sharing that personal story; your wife’s state of remission is received here with great thankfulness.
I smiled when I read your oh-so-true line: “Perhaps that is why people over 50 years of age tend to be the happiest..they’ve learned from experience who they are and who they are not.”
Because much of my professional practice is helping people zero in on their specific talents, your statement is very true. Something I’ve observed and learned along the way is this: It’s important to acknowledge and let go of “who you are not” in order to be able to move ahead with “who you are.”
Thank you for the resources, too, Michael. You’ve added to my reading list…
Steve Roesler Said,
February 7, 2008 @ 8:02 am
Hi, Jo,
You made a statement that, I believe, is very important for people to hear. And that is, in times of stress and change, we all want to exercise more control over our circumstances.
Indeed, a key to living a peaceful and satisfying life is identifying where we can exercise control, then acting; and where we don’t have control, then finding peace with that part of the situation.
I appreciate the web resource, Jo. I hope others will give it a look as well.
Steve Roesler Said,
February 7, 2008 @ 8:37 am
OK, Jackie, you get the prize for being the first Scot to weigh in and defend the collective clan honour.
I had thought that my close friend, Duncan Cumming, would be ranting here by now. Apparently he’s decided to torture me with his silence.
Hmm. I hadn’t thought about the fact that part of the conclusion was based on interaction with politicians. You’ve thrown down the “gauntlet of validity” regarding the source:-)
michael cardus Said,
February 7, 2008 @ 3:25 pm
I liked the comment about people looking for a “happy pill”
The backlash is that people do not understand that chronic happiness is what one should strive for. THe acute happiness can not last long. Addtionally a happines philosophy – people are lacking what happiness is or feels like. Sometimes we become lost in the consumer and fictious consumer “buy me and be happy” culture.
Galba Bright of Tune up your EQ Said,
February 8, 2008 @ 1:47 am
Hello Steve:
With respect to Karin’s comment, I feel it’s my duty to discover and share my talent.
Steve Roesler Said,
February 8, 2008 @ 6:30 am
Michael, your closing sentence highlights the real enemy of true happiness; namely, “there is something out there which, if I have it, will make me happy.” Like my iPhone:-)
Yet I believe that those who are committed to genuine satisfaction and contentment would focus on truths that transcend the material and temporal. In the absence of that, there will always be dissatisfaction because of a need for “more. . .” (fill in the blanks).
Steve Roesler Said,
February 8, 2008 @ 6:31 am
Well, Galba, that’s a powerful one-liner.
No lack of personal responsibility there!
Kevin Carson Said,
February 9, 2008 @ 9:54 am
A large part of the backlash is against cynical management using fake “happiness” as a demeaning gimmick for manipulating their workers. I’m talking about Fish!, which is usually intended to manipulating workers into being “happy” about being screwed. At the understaffed shithole of a hospital where I work, the Fish! banners went up and Fish! slogans started appearing on the memos at about the same time HR hired a consultant to oversee a series of brutal and heartless downsizings, treating the ones laid off like shit (told without warning to collect their stuff and escorted from the building by Security), and leaving the rest of us doing the work of two people. “The beatings will continue until morale improves.”
Nutster Said,
February 9, 2008 @ 10:21 pm
Can anyone truly say they are “happy”? Sure. They can say it. Is it true? Who knows. There is no way to measure happiness. I fervently believe that people can identify the things that bring them happiness each day….if they WANT to look for them. Like most things, you can find anything you are looking for.
I tire of the debate. I would like everyone to be happIER. I also know that other people’s business is other people’s business and others don’t really care what I would like….they care about what they like.
This is why I throw the HappyUP!!! concept out there. If you want to be happIER, it will require change. For the most part, people don’t change without a conscious effort. If you want to be sadDER, look for the things that make you sad, and dwell on them. It will work. If you want to be madDER, look for the things that make you mad and dwell on those. If you want to be happIER, look for the things that make you happy (HappyUP!!!’s), and dwell on those.
Life is about the choices that individuals make. It is not my place to tell anyone what to choose….I just stick options out there and give people permission to make a choice that they may not think they have.
Steve Roesler Said,
February 11, 2008 @ 4:43 pm
Kevin,
It’s clear that you’ve been the recipient of a poorly executed (ooh, probably shouldn’t have used that word) project that mixed the developmental “Fish!” with the timing of a downsizing. I don’t know the details but, unfortunately, this is not even uncommon.
There are many organizations out there (including one hospital near me) that hang banners with cute slogans and “declare victory” in some area of organization effectiveness that will impress customers, board members, or the public in general. Equally unfortunate is this: the actual gap between what is intended and what is real becomes widened as a result of the ingenuous declaration.
I wish you the best as you wrestle with this real-life, organizational facade.
Steve Roesler Said,
February 11, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
Waddup, Nutster?
Indeed, it’s all about one’s choices. Period. That’s how we started off the series and that’s always my advice to people (although they may still choose to be some other kind of -er).
A satisfying life is not about how you “control” it. It’s not within our control.
How we respond to it is.
Thanks for underscoring that point…
Jim Stroup Said,
February 11, 2008 @ 7:55 pm
Hi Steve,
Another winner, here, and an interesting string of comments.
As for happiness, it has always seemed to me one of those things that is trivialized by being made a specific – especially an isolated – aim in life. If you do that, you never seem to attain it.
But if you seek to realize a goal of some comprehensible value to you and/or (especially or) others, happiness just seems to pull up alongside and accompany the project.
It’s like the old story about companies not really being in business to provide particular products or services, but to make a profit. If the latter is their sole goal, they rarely attain it durably, but if providing a real, meaningful service or product to customers is the (sustainably managed) aim, then profits tend to appear.
Not that money equals happiness, mind you.
Thanks for another fascinating post!
Steve Roesler Said,
February 11, 2008 @ 8:39 pm
Jim, I do, indeed, “get” what you are proposing regarding happiness.
When one starts focusing on the external–”When I get this…I will be happy,” it’s a never-ending spiral. There’s always something else to get, do, own. . .
But when one decides to define one’s sense of internal happiness as a result of:
1. Deciding what is important and what isn’t
2. Deciding to simply “be happy” as a result of living the life one chooses
3. Understanding what is not in one’s control and accepting it
. . .then there is a contentment to which one can also apply the word “happiness.”
Thanks for visiting here at Alex’s place!
Kevin Carson Said,
February 11, 2008 @ 11:02 pm
Steve Roesler,
Unfortunately, that’s the pattern with a lot of things besides Fish!. It’s what usually happens with any sort of management fad. For example, just for laughs I looked into the Continuous Quality Improvement binder, and found a geological cross section of every fossilized Kwality fad of the past fifteen years. And they didn’t have a clue what any of them meant, even when they were mouthing the jargon and putting the slogans on every bulletin board in the hospital.
For example, every bulletin board is now covered with graphs applying the Deming Cycle (PDCA) to every statistical problem imaginable, but their approach to reducing variation is what Deming dismissed as “slogans and exhortations” and “revival meetings”: in other words, the behavioral work of trying to elicit greater effort and dedication from the workforce, without addressing the structural causes of process variation (and posting this stuff at the same time as a brutal downsizing didn’t do a whole lot to promote another of Deming’s big points, “driving out fear.”).
The main cause of staph infections, falls, med errors, and other complications is chronic understaffing. There’s a direct statistical correlation between the number of patients per nurse and a patient’s likelihood of dying of a hospital-acquired complication. But management’s approach to solving all these problems is to do everything BUT increased staffing: slogans, posters, in-service meetings, new tracking forms and paperwork that take even more time from direct patient care, and in general more and more management committees and featherbedding and more micromanagement of production workers. They don’t seem to understand the problem isn’t with us, it’s with THEM.
What’s worse, the costs of such complications from understaffing greatly exceed the apparent savings in labor cost from deliberate downsizing. It’s just another example of the MBA Disease: gutting an organization’s human capital and stripping its assets in order to inflate the short-term profit (and to game their own stock options and bonuses), at the expense of long-term productivity. They’re basically grabbing and looting everything they can get their filthy hands on, and leaving a hollow shell for the next resume carpetbagger who takes their place.
Steve Roesler Said,
February 11, 2008 @ 11:18 pm
Kevin,
Having spent the past 2 years tending to family members in hospital, you have struck a (sour) chord here.
During my father’s numerous hospitalizations which involved 3 separate amputations, I finally could not leave him at all. We had a family member there at all times. Why? Because every time he needed something, including pain medication or help with bodily functions, we went to the nurses’ station since no one responded to the call button. There were no nurses. Only a large banner (I’m not making this up) that said “Total Excellence in Operations.”
Maybe they meant that their surgeries were totally successful (but the patients died later from neglect).
On a Kwality note (now you’ve really got me revved up): A long-time client with a new CEO just resurrected all of the highly-trained internal quality mavens for a much-need, legitimate initiative. Really. It’s long overdue and actually desired by the employee population.
Oh. I forgot to mention that these folks were trained 15 years ago but the effort seemed too much for the executives at the time, so they declared victory before anyone had to actually do anything.
I think the CHO has his work cut out for him at his particular location:-)
Kevin Carson Said,
February 12, 2008 @ 9:02 am
Wow, deja vu. I’d already noted how the repeated downsizings had increased the stress level for us workers, but when my mom went in for hip repair and rehab in 2005, I found out just how horrible things were from the patient’s side.
The statistic, I believe, is that for every extra patient added to a nurse’s workload beyond the first four, the risk of dying from complications goes up by 7%. I witnessed firsthand the reason for this. The nurses there commonly had seven or eight patients apiece, and spent every minute of the day running, hopelessly behind and trying to catch up. They often stayed over two or three hours to catch up their paperwork after the official end of their shift. Dressings didn’t get changed, meds were sometimes hours late or missed altogether, and they literally didn’t have time to stop for a minute to follow up on a question or request, let alone having the time and peace of mind to notice things or pass them on to the person who needed to be aware of them.
That hospital is a lawsuit waiting to happen, and I can say without reservation that the management (who have spent so much money on smarmy mission, vision, and values statements about the sacred duty of providing “extraordinary patient care”) are filthy, criminal scum. Sometimes all that keeps me going is muttering “God damn J.H. [Chief Operating Officer] to hell. God damn J.H. to hell” under my breath throughout a whole shift.
But from what I hear and from what I’ve seen working at other hospitals, it’s pretty much the same everywhere. Corporate America has been taken over by criminal filth, and I’m only half facetious when I say I’d like to see the bleeding heads of every billionaire and Fortune 500 CEO in America impaled on pikes along Wall Street.
Kevin Carson Said,
February 12, 2008 @ 9:13 am
P.S. You write:
“Maybe they meant that their surgeries were totally successful (but the patients died later from neglect).”
Again, deja vu. The management here spent close to a million $$ on a Da Vinci surgical robot at the same time they were downsizing staff to catastrophic levels to “save money.” So I guess the idea was to have high-tech gizmos out of the Jetsons to impress the fraction of a percent of patients who could actually benefit them, after which they could experience the delightfully squalid Third World conditions of the Postoperative Care ward, where they might go five days without a bath or shit the bed waitng 45 minutes for a bedpan.
And BTW, an OR nurse told me those surgical robots did nothing that couldn’t be handled just as well by scrubbing in an extra nurse to hold a camera or scalpel or whatever. But the extra nurse wouldn’t be nearly as impressive to the gullible public, in those smarmy TV commercials they love to run with the soft lighting and elevator music.
Back from Austria Said,
February 12, 2008 @ 11:17 am
[...] Happiness, Satisfaction, & Change: Day 3 [...]
HR Wench Said,
February 12, 2008 @ 11:46 pm
Being allowed to be in a bad mood makes me happy. Give me my space!
On another note – I LOVE Scotland and Scottish people. They totally rule. Just like Grounds Keeper Willy says, “If it’s not Scottish, it’s CRAP!”
A view on Scots - and happiness : Jackie Cameron - Coaching and Personal Development Said,
February 13, 2008 @ 7:39 pm
[...] found this post last week over at the Chief Happiness Officer [...]
Steve Roesler Said,
February 14, 2008 @ 4:55 am
Ah, Kevin,
If only we could get a little soft lighting and elevator music while in hospital. . .:-)
Steve Roesler Said,
February 14, 2008 @ 5:04 am
Dear HR Wench,
Well, it appears that the originally quoted”research” and the ensuing “discussions” have caused a Caledonian coronary.
May the spirit of Groundskeeper Willie allow true Scots everywhere the space to revel in the happiness of a bad mood:-)
John Connell Said,
February 14, 2008 @ 1:15 pm
Always dangerous to generalize, of course, but if there is one thing that most Scots do well, it is the capacity not to take themselves, individually or as a nation, at all seriously (as Jackie hinted at above).
For me, being Scottish (and, yes, I am a Scot) is little to do with geographical accidents of birth or family history and much to do with an attitude of mind. Do you want to be Scottish? Then….be Scottish. But don’t take yourself too seriously, and don’t step across that line where you begin to seek happiness for the sake of happiness – rather, seek to make your life worthwhile, contribute to the common good, maintain the trust of your family and friends, have an occasional drink (go on, you know you want to), don’t get neurotic about health and fitness, exercise your irony muscles whenever you can, and laugh out loud whenever there’s a bloody good reason to do so.
Maybe the guy who spoke to the Parliament just took himself a little too seriously?
Steve Roesler Said,
February 14, 2008 @ 2:19 pm
Well put, John.
Now if I could only find out who is laughing all the way to the bank with this one: http://scottishlaird.com/ :-)
Adrian Sie Said,
March 4, 2008 @ 9:38 am
On the subject of Scots and happiness, there is an excellent book by Bill Duncan called “the Wee Book of Calvin” – the natural Scottish response to such things as “A Little Book of Joy” and other sickly tokens to sentimentality.
In this book, instead of mindless aphorisms you get little mirthless nuggets such as:
“Be happy while yer liven fer yer a lang time deed”
- as offered up by the author’s grandparents and their generation.
Very funny, of course. And the author does not mock his ancestors, he just points out that times were different, were hard, that society did not allow men to express themselves emotionally.
Steve Roesler Said,
March 4, 2008 @ 3:25 pm
Thanks for the resource, Adrian.
I’m going to look this one up during the next visit to the bookstore.