Understanding the impact of frequency of 'responding'

Source: http://thisisindexed.com

My eyes light up every time someone talks about 'responding'.

Suppose, in the above graph, you replace the word Stimulus with Execution. And suppose, likewise, we also replace the phrase 'rioting in the streets' with 'quality execution at the workplace'. Or perhaps use a bigger buzz-phrase 'innovation in the organization'... Yes, we get how 'responding' affects the execution of plans.

Too much of it, and there's disturbance instead of execution. Too little of it, and there's almost nothing happening.

Formula for relationship building?

Image Source: michellelaurie.com

Formula is that have no formula but do all that has good chances of building one.

Since we are talking about a phenomenon between two individuals, it involves interaction. If you initiate a conversation, you would require a response or an acknowledgement, right? If the other person initiates, in all likelihood, it would move further only if you respond or acknowledge.

If you initiate but there's no response, you can't forget. Following up might be necessary. Or even meeting up.

In different situations, Cockpit will aid in keeping that important conversation going.

This is not the end of the book;

On the backside of the jacket of This is Not the End of the Book, is a quote from Umberto Eco:

The book is like the spoon: once invented, it cannot be bettered.

It struck me like lightening and I just picked it up.

Am halfway through the book and, needless to say, it mesmerizes me by the way it surprises me every second page.

A notable thing is the book is in the shape of a deep deep conversation between Umberto Eco and Jean-Claude Carriere curated by Jean Philippe de Tonnac. And the most notable thing is, a thought by Eco is followed by/responded to by a thought from Jean-Claude and then followed by another thought from Eco and so on. It feels like once Eco speaks, Jean-Claude naturally responds. Once Jean-Claude speaks, Eco naturally responds. The conversation unfolds like the feet of a walker. After one foot lands, another foot naturally takes a step accordingly.

Isn't it how you would love to respond? Isn't it how you would like others to respond to you? Wouldn't you want to remember to respond, so that you respond in the way you would love to respond?

Why Dhoni doesn't care? And why we don't care either?

Alright, so I (perhaps we all) didn't like Dhoni's fielding of questions in yesterday's press conference. People expect a slightly different response from the cricket-mad country's captain cool, arguably the greatest captain India's had.

I asked myself what would I have done. What would most others have done if they were in exactly the same spot as Dhoni is?

To respond to an initiative or a question (very often a challenging one) in the 'right' spirit, one needs to care for it in the first place. But care isn't necessarily instinctual any more. In the current times, to care means to have the courage to care, and the memory to care. Courage causes indigestion, and memory now resides in the hard-drive of the laptop in front of which of one sits and does amazing things.

When (the loss of) crores and crores of money rest on a few words, it's always tempting to let go of the words and the courage required to utter those words. Considering the monetary stakes, it's easy to let go of courage to care for the sentiments of fans all around, courage to match the on-field show of strength in a helicopter shot, courage perhaps to lose even the captaincy of the team one's created, one which has achieved so much.

So I don't have any solution to Dhoni's dilemma. I don't have solutions to any of your situations which require courage to care to respond.

But if care for you is more a matter of (inadequacy or loss of) memory - meaning you find it difficult to remember to care to respond - trying Cockpit might not be a bad idea.

For all you know, you've always had the courage but just not enough specific memory to care to respond. Courage + Cockpit-aided Response is perhaps what the world desperately needs.

Image source: rediff.com

What hurts, more?

If getting things done involves more than one person, invariably it involves asking questions, seeking responses and responding. The greatest training I sense, we need, is for responding.

I've been not been the greatest responder born. Sometimes I've hated myself for the clumsiness I've displayed in responding. For a long time I never realized 'not responding' really really hurts. Even when, concurrently, I bore the brunt of non-responders.

But whatever I've observed, when I've responded well, I've gotten better at getting things done. Sure it isn't all perfect, and as responders all need to improve, I've had better luck with work when I've responded promptly and more decisively.

For politically motivated or game theoretically charged people, it's a different game. But even to understand that aspect of people and getting things from them, we need to respond in earnestness and monitor ourselves and their responses and then make our moves.