Just show up

80% of success is just showing up, according to Woody Allen. Many actors and entrepreneurs put their fame and fortune mainly down to being in the right place at the right time. A colleague recently asked me what I thought was the biggest difficulty in delivering a teaching programme: it’s people not turning up. That is an immediate and irrevocable fail.

By not turning up you’ve robbed yourself of any opportunity to benefit from the event. You’ve missed the meeting at which you could have contributed a novel idea.  You’ve missed the lecture from which you might have been introduced to a novel concept.  You’ve missed making a connection with somebody who could have helped your new venture.

Sure, you can email people later on about your thoughts; you can catch up on the idea from a book; and you can email the useful contact.  But none of these have the immediacy of ‘right place at the right time’. Nor do they have the genuine connection that comes from human contact. Staying home is safe; but safety offers no challenge and no chance for growth.

Only by putting yourself out there – by attending more than merely the compulsory – will you be able to find opportunity. Now go to that lecture.

Another problem with the 'feedback form'

For a teacher or lecturer, praise is not just gratifying but also reassuring. Good, or even adequate, feedback gives the message: “I don’t need to change”. As I mentioned earlier, traditional feedback forms are almost useless. Around 99% of their value comes from the small part devoted to free-text, and from those few who write useful comments.

The second problem with feedback lies deeper, and exists because of a misconception about the role of a lecturer.  A lecturer is there to teach, to challenge, to stimulate thought, and to alter practice. They are not there to entertain.  If you want entertainment then go to the movies.  Lecturers try to impart wisdom that effects long-lasting change.

And yet we judge lectures immediately afterwards. The questions span two domains.  First: did we enjoy it?  What did we think of the audio-visual aids?  Was the presentation clear?  These address the ‘entertainment’ aspects of a lecture.

Second: how useful did we think the lecture was? How much new knowledge did we acquire?  These address the ‘outcome’ of a presentation.  We are asked this directly following a lecture, when it is impossible to make a realistic judgment about its usefulness.

I have attended glamorous, entertaining lectures, which I thought were brilliant and insightful.  I’ve sat through less scintillating talks which I didn’t rate as highly.  But I frequently find that a week, a month, perhaps a year later, it is the second type that have stuck in my mind and changed my practice.

As a lecturer I would prefer if people were to enjoy my talks. But I would be happier still if attendees were stimulated to think, to change, and that there was a long-term benefit for them.

Our current assessment of lecturers is a comedy. We request listener feedback on all the wrong things, and none of the right ones.  Our aim should be right feedback, at the right time.  A month down the line we should be asking, “did that lecture help you? Has it been useful?”. That is the only metric that matters.  But of course that’s difficult and time-consuming. Collecting reams of meaningless data from feedback forms is much, much easier. And I suspect that’s what we’ll stick with.

Would you rather be wanted or needed?

"I love you. I need you. You complete me", cries the princess in the Hollywood fairytale. "I realise now that I need you too. You are the missing piece of me", replies the handsome prince. They embrace. Screen fades. Credits roll.

But believe me, being needed is not glamorous. Ask razor blades, toothpaste, running water, the roof above your head, or your underpants.  A necessity, not deeply desired, is neither a chic nor attractive thing to be.

To be wanted, however - to be a genuine object of desire - is only possible if you are not a necessity. Some desires: a Rolex on the wrist, a Lamborghini in the garage, Michelin starred food on the table, and Eva Longoria (or George Clooney) in the bedroom.  We need none of these.  As soon as 'need' comes into a relationship then the genuine nature of our desire gets altered.

Need also unbalances romantic relationships. "I need you" is a statement that puts pressure on the other. How can you leave someone who needs you?  And why would you want to be with them?  Better by far to be with somebody because you want them, because you choose freely, rather than through something you need from them.

In business or at work it is ideal to be both wanted and needed.  If you have to choose, then be needed. You can't rely on your company to make employment choices based on emotion.

In friendships and romantic relationships it is a thousand times better to be wanted than to be needed. Don't be a necessity; be an object of desire.

Goal-setting approaches: SMART goals

If New Year resolutions are famous for anything, then it's the infrequency with which people stick to them.  The most common goals are: losing weight, saving more money, changing job, getting fit, drinking less alcohol, and spending more time with family.  These ambitions are worthy but unfocused.

SMART is an acronym for particular attributes to help us achieve our targets:

S = Specific. Really be detailed about your objective.  Instead of wanting to "lose weight", try to "lose 8 kilograms".  Wanting to save more money could become saving an extra £25 per week, and changing job would be more specific if it were phrased as moving to a role in the pharmaceutical industry.

M = Measurable. It's only worth shooting for a target if we know when we hit it. Weight lost, money saved, and time spent with family are all measurable. "Getting fit" is not a measurable target, and so needs to be broken down, e.g. be able to run for 20 minutes and do 10 press-ups.

A = Achievable. Wanting to be the next chief of NASA, be able to swim the Atlantic ocean unaided, or become the world's strongest man are all big goals for a year. They are - with the exception of a few people - unachievable. Pick goals that challenge and inspire you, but not ones that are almost certainly impossible.

R = Realistic.  Good goals require some give and take. Effort or time is usually required to achieve them, and other aspects of our lives need to change to accomodate this.  Saving money means eating out less frequently.  Becoming fitter demands time spent working out. Spending more time with family means less time at the office (or at the pub). Are these sacrifices feasible for you? Realism means being sure that your life can adjust around the time, money, or effort you will expend in pursuit of your goal.

T = Time-based.  Set a deadline or a duration. Lose that 5 kg within the next 3 months.  Start the job in the pharmaceutical industry by August this year.  Save an extra £50 per week for 10 weeks. Stop drinking alcohol for an entire month.


Using the SMART acronym a nebulous goal such as "get fit" can become something much more detailed, such as "run 5 kilometres in less than 25 minutes by May 1st".  Such a goal is much more likely to be achieved.  Think about a couple of projects and see if you can turn them into SMART goals.

Improving feedback

In a recent interview I was asked whether I thought I was a good teacher. My feedback scores are usually good, I told the panel, before going on to damage my case by pointing out how useless this sort of feedback is.

After any lecture, I ensure the audience receive feedback forms.  These are anonymous. There is usually a 1-10 scale for areas such as: clarity of presentation, usefulness of topic, and quality of audio-visual aids. A free text box at the bottom is designed to encourage additional comments.

Most people fill in the forms, but only a much smaller group write anything in the free text box.  And of this second group, it’s an even smaller sub-section that write anything actionable.

The scores are almost useless – what does it mean if someone gives me a 7 out of 10 for my clarity of presentation? We know that people give higher ratings to lecturers they like. Most students give a 7 or 8 out of 10 to a lecture that they consider “average”. Students like to circle the numbers because it’s easy.  Lecturers like it as well – “look, I’m averaging 8.3 for the usefulness of my lectures”. Of course if scores are consistently in the bottom end of the range then it’s time to take a hard look at your lecturing style.

The meaningful feedback is all from the small blank box at the bottom. It’s ego-pleasing to read “great lecture”, or “good overheads”, but that doesn’t help me improve. What I relish are the very small group who put in the effort to write what they think I could realistically do to improve. I don’t always agree with them, but actionable suggestions are by far the most valuable part of the entire form.

Feedback is the quickest way for us to improve. But it needs to be relevant, thoughtful and actionable, not just a tick-box scoring sheet.

Next time you’re in the audience filling out a feedback form, put the effort into that free text box – what did you like, what did you think could be better? And when you hand out forms to your audience then give an incentive for them to fill in the free text. I’ve offered a prize for the most useful comment, given specific time at the end of a talk for people to write, or said how much I’d value their genuine thoughts.

Your improvement from feedback will come from the occasionally painful specifics, not from the stultifying satisfaction of seeing all your forms with those lovely pen rings around the 8’s and 9’s.

How to have a healthy lifestyle

Your friend exercises for an hour a day, eats in moderation, drinks no alcohol or coffee, and looks disgustedly at you when you smoke.  "You have such a healthy lifestyle", people tell him.

But suppose he doesn't bother to read books or newspapers, stay in touch with current affairs, spend time with friends and family, or take breaks from his routine to relax, spend time in nature, or meditate.  Is he still living a healthy lifestyle?

The western world fixates on physical exercise and diet as the measures by which we judge someone's approach to health. This narrow view ignores other aspects of life.  Even the World Health Organisation states: "There is no health without mental health".

A holistic approach to health should address four domains:

1. Physical health, including training for strength, cardiovascular conditioning, and flexibility; not smoking; and eating a balanced diet.

2. Mental health - by this I mean not the psychiatric definition, but the fitness of our brain: reading, learning, solving puzzles, and challenging our mind.

3. Psychological health - simply being happy. There's no prescription for this - whatever works for you is what you should do. Spend time with friends, do art, dance, travel, exercise, cooking....

4. Spiritual health. Whether your spiritual batteries are recharged by meditation, prayer, communing with nature, yoga, or tantric sex, it is important to make space for this in your life.

A healthy lifestyle should not be a struggle, but it needs to be holistic. We are multi-layered beings, and our approach to health must include more than just looking after the body.  Start today - in fact right now - by picking something from each area that you can begin or extend over the next few months.

Don't speak to yourself like that

In English it’s common to describe a behaviour or an action as ‘unacceptable’. This language is unhelpful.  First, we have already judged the action. Second, we close our mind to deeper examination of the motives and reasons underlying it.  Last, we pursue denial if we describe something as unacceptable: it’s the easiest way to brush difficulties under our radar, similar to describing brutal criminals as ‘animals’.

When we accept an action, behaviour or event, we are able to hold it in our mind, examine it, and engage with it.  Unable to accept something, we create barriers and form judgments on no more than a superficial emotional response.

So don’t casually condemn something as unacceptable.  Make the mental effort to accept it, understand it and act from a position of knowledge instead of prejudice.

Come on, be honest...

Most people think truthfulness is a virtue.  When asked, the majority rate their honesty as ‘above average’. In surveys where people report how many lies they tell each day the number is usually between 2 and 6.

Ironically, although perhaps understandably, this perception is not true. The lies we recollect are lies that are big, or where another will be hurt if the truth comes out.  The small day-to-day dishonesty of white lies, harmless lies, and unkept promises gets forgotten in the fog of what we consider normal life. We lie constantly.  And we underestimate our untruths by at least a half: for every lie we tell somebody else, we lie to ourselves as well.

“I’m going for a run tomorrow”

“Yeah, sure, I’ll meet you at 1030”

“I’m only having one beer tonight”

“The report will be done by tomorrow morning”

Does it matter if we don’t go for a run?  If we turn up at 1045, have a couple more beers, or the report isn’t ready until the afternoon?  Really – does it?

If we value honesty then an unkept promise is as good as a lie. And the lies we tell to ourselves are as damaging as the lies we tell to others.  When you break that commitment to have the report ready by the morning then you break 2 agreements: the one with the recipient, and the one with yourself.

Over the years we have broken so many promises to ourselves – lied to ourselves so often – we’ve learned that we can’t trust our own word.  Before we complain about the dishonesty of others we should focus on our own honesty. Integrity begins at home.  Keeping agreements you make with yourself is the first step.

Only say that you’ll do something if you genuinely plan to and believe that you will do it.  Keep commitments to others. Be honest with others. But even before that, make sure that you keep commitments to yourself.