PART THREE: The Self-Education of a Free-Spirited, Not-Quite-Novice Filmmaker

The final stretch! Or at least the last of the reflections. There will be one final blog post to compare lessons from an MBA to those found in these 10 TED Talks. For those of you who have not read the previous two parts, my introduction:

As a only child, I've been an observer of human behavior and interaction all my life. Such a self-imposed role has a way of leading one to believe themselves more knowledgeable than those who live through the scenarios being observed. Debatable, sure, but I believe my continued education cannot contain simply absorbed information; I must also digest the concepts and put it back out into the world. Any of my professors would tell you that I was always very engaged in class discussions, with no shortage of opinions and unsolicited advice. With no classroom currently available to me, however, I've decided to record my thoughts in this blog based on certain recommended TED Talks.

An article in the Business Insider claimed these 10 TED Talks are worth more than an MBA. Seeing as I love listening to TED Talks and desperately want to pursue my graduate degree, I figured what do I have to loose? Also, while the content I'm reflecting on is geared towards those seeking a Masters in Business Administration and I am simply a Filmmaker seeking a Masters... of something... eventually... I fully intend to own and run my own studio during my lifetime, so I figure the free online education should supplement my aspirations nicely.

To keep a homework-like structure, I'll respond to each video as I see them. Please assume that I will be writing as if you, the reader, have already watched the video.

8) Mike Brady and Dion Drew: Hiring the Unemployable

Info-graphic courtesy of ctbenefitcorp.com

First of all, this concept is so moving to me that it is almost making me a little intimidated to think of what it would take to own and operate a business so profoundly impactful on the lives of my employees. Blimey, it's paralyzing to think of the risks involved starting a business, much less being so successful as to invite more risk. And yet, I'm compelled to know why we haven't explored this option before and why so few companies are Benefit Corporations.

I only just learned of what a Benefit Corporation is when Kickstarter became a Benefit Corporation recently. I read through it and the general premise seemed benign - why wouldn't a corporation report on its ecological and social impacts as a measure of success? But as I listened to this TED Talk, I realized that what I stumbled across was the lovechild of for-profit and non-profit business models. What a great idea - asking companies to consider, measure, reflect, and improve their impact on the environment, their communities, and their causes. For-profit companies all too often have a placeholder charity to mimic what amounts to socially acceptable, and professionally expected, charity donations. But how often can they show the true impact of their efforts? Could they prove their efforts made a difference? When customers and shareholders want to see an investment beyond monetary, Benefit Corporations save the day, and maybe even a little part of our souls. This feels like a collective effort to put the breaks on the idea that being in business means we have to sell out or check out; that we either have to sacrifice our moral fortitude to do what we must to survive the corporate grind, or get trampled by our hesitation to relinquish our integrity. Why must we choose one or the other?

Info-graphic courtesy of www.sse.gov.on.ca

Due to the recent trip of Pope Francis to the United States, I'm particularly riled about this subject. I won't go into details, but I will share with you my short social media rant that was sparked by those who immediately criticized what the pontiff had to say:

"I'm at a loss for words... I'm not even Catholic, but I love this guy. He reminds us to regularly employ and exercise our humanity. He has broadcast a "Compassionate Call-to-Arms", and I, for one, intend to answer the call. Even if someone were not compelled to become active in improving their communities, states, or country, it would at least stand to reason that someone with opposing views would stop for a moment and consider: The Pope has no investment in the outcome of our country. That is to say, while he may have some investment in those who are Catholic and American, and he's certainly concerned for people on the whole, he looses nothing, should we listen or should we ignore him. And that alone should perk up your ears and make you wonder - what's so important? What's so important that he would take the trip overseas to plead to us for OUR OWN well-being? As a massage therapist, I know all too well this interaction, and what makes it impactful to the listener is realizing that they are giving you unsolicited advice. Couple the fact that he is a spiritual leader, a man of honor whose actions mirror his sentiments, and the fact that he is giving freely his time and energy to advocate for what he feels is right - yeah, that warrants a moment's pause and appropriate reflection. Anything less makes you a yapping dog. Before you open your yap, reflect and respond with a well-thought-out rebuttal. He deserves that much."

Similarly, I give far more credence to a company whose goals for economic, ecological, and social improvement are all held accountable by a third party so that those intentions cannot be abused and used solely for promotional purposes. It's unsolicited transparency, and that's the best kind.

I do see one potential abuse with this premise, however: religious fanatics claiming "Benefit Corporation" status as another way to exclude people from their business. Let us remember that our "religious freedom" does not give anyone the right to discriminate; you can, however, tell someone you believe they will be going to hell as you serve them their food. As long as the corporation is being monitored to make sure they are not intentionally discriminating against anyone, I think this may be one of the most brilliant ideas to come from our generation.

Here's a great reference for the differences between corporations. Info-graphic courtesy of www.spcwa.com

9) Brené Brown: The Power of Vulnerability

Info-graphic courtesy of buildalittlebiz.com

I've definitely seen this one before, and it always leaves me a little misty. But let's move on to her points, and she's got several.

In my experience, connection is a huge part of our existence as humans. It's easy to see how connection applies in our personal lives, but it is equally applicable in our professional lives. With the United States shifting away from a product-based economy and into a service-based economy, the quality of our customer service, with our ability to connect with our clients, is paramount. This connection, I agree with Ms. Brown, can only be achieved through authenticity. We are now easily turned off by sales agents who feed us insincere, scripted lines in an effort to satisfy goals imposed on them by their companies who threaten "make it work or loose your income". What kind of environment, nay a clientele, do you invite with such an ultimatum? A hostile environment, and a disengaged clientele. Accepting that "no" is a viable answer for your clients is a great way to earn their trust, but also take the unnecessary pressure off of employees to somehow change clients' minds.

BLAME: A way to discharge pain and discomfort.

Similarly, if the environment is hostile, with punishment an assured result of failure, then an employee will more likely keep that failure to themselves. It creates a shame culture that perpetuates bad behavior and poor performance because it does not encourage improvement. Brown surmises that vulnerability is at the heart of shame. So how do we work past shame so that we may interact honestly? I believe we must invite the vulnerability of others. To expect vulnerability without offering it in return seems dubious at best. But to offer your truth shows your vulnerability and it invites vulnerability in return. There's no guarantee, however, that vulnerability will follow. For me, this is where courage must be embraced in order to continue being vulnerable: confront those who would attack your vulnerability. When attacked, I would advise you to not retaliate, but confront. This will, again, invite them to join you in an authentic exchange, which can become an authentic relationship.

It is appreciated that Brown applies her findings to our current social, religious, and political state. I totally agree that we'd respect people a lot more if they just took a moment, admit they were wrong, and then make an effort to remedy the mistake. Watching instead those who are fearful turn "everything that is uncertain, certain" is upsetting and disheartening. Discourse should be the safe space where people can grow, reflect, and develop ideas, not shutting down and blocking out ideas. In this way, I am very grateful for my upbringing. My mother always encouraged honesty and requested that I talk with her, even if it was uncomfortable. Now, no one is perfect, and sometimes you can't speak honestly immediately; feelings and being able to articulate those feelings are two entirely different beasts. But even being forthright about not being able to articulate your feelings yet is better than shutting down and letting fear rule. No, we're not perfect, but practicing vulnerability is a great journey with joyous rewards.

Info-graphic courtesy of americanexpress.tumbler.com

10) Yves Morieux: How Too Many Rules at Work Keep You From Getting Things Done

For this one, you have to go directly to Ted.com to see the video. This seems, to me, the only TED Talk about our system of management. I imagine with any generation, there are certain expectations. Creating clarity, accountability, and measurement in the workplace seems second-nature in business today. Part of that expectation is because companies are expected to report their findings to their shareholders or to the banks that finance their company. So, is it our system of management that is inefficient, or our system of financing companies? A circular argument, I'm sure. The real question is - how do we improve efficiency? I believe the answer lies in our hiring practices and in our retention of employees. I've also been watching a series of videos on Lynda.com called Small Business Secrets. The subject of hiring is particularly interesting. Apparently, human resources, which overseas hiring, is the most expensive cost a small business can have, so it is imperative that small businesses take their time when hiring. Rushing to employ someone who either performs poorly, quits or is terminated too soon, can sink a ship before it reaches the sea.

Just as Morieux is saying that constant monitoring slows down the process, so too does hiring someone ill-suited to the role. If you hire someone competent and ready to get involved, which you should be able to decipher from the hiring process, then little monitoring should be necessary. Similarly, if the company is geared toward retaining employees, not using them up and tossing them out, then I believe trust and loyalty emerges, and it goes both ways; employees trust each other and their managers because the managers have invited their trust. A friend of mine once told me that the way he gets his employees to do what he wants is by asking them, not commanding them. This way they don't feel bossed but rather invited. It also gives employees the opportunity to maybe suggest something better, which refers back to an idea posed in TED Talk #5 from this article - see my reflection on that talk in PART TWO. 

Retention of employees also hinges on providing them with something more than just money. Both the Small Business Secrets series and my own personal experience has told me that benefits and compensation of time and energy is rarely satisfying to be simply monetary and health-related. Tuition reimbursement, paid training, paid time off, even the opportunity to have monthly pot-luck lunches has boosted my own enjoyment of my work because it showed my employers genuinely cared about my satisfaction at work. Money is not the only way to value your employees' time, and health care is not the only support they need.

Ultimately, the greatest message from Morieux, in my opinion, is we must examine and improve our system of productivity, not the people in the system. This mentality seems a great way to invite innovation, but also keeps fresh the question of efficiency. For example, recently at work I submitted an expense report for travel. There were two parts to it, however; cash that needed to be refunded from student spending and money owed to one of the faculty members. The middleman who approves the report before it is seen by an auditor asked why I didn't just repay the faculty member with the cash, arguing that it was easier on their end. The concern, as it was posed to me, was "what do I tell an auditor if s/he has a question about what happened". Well, since I clearly resolved each issue individually, the answer to any questions is also clear. If I had taken the initiative to pay the faculty member first, then answering those questions becomes a lot more difficult AND if the charges are not approved, then the faculty member would be responsible for a refund that could have been avoided by doing... exactly what I did. This example shows how I learned of her need for efficiency, but she also got to see how her need for efficiency would have created more work and questions of ethics besides. But because the nature of our confrontation was focused on the system, not on the person, we were able to improve efficiency, regardless of who is doing the work.

Well, this is the end of PART THREE. Stay tuned! I'll be doing one final blog to delve into what is involved with an MBA and how that relates specifically to the lessons of these 10 TED Talks. 

But let me finish with these questions for you:

1) What was your reaction to these videos?
2) Could you identify with the concepts? Why or why not?
3) How is this relevant to Business Administration or Entrepreneurship?

Leave your comments below! As Liz Gilbert would say, "Let's keep the conversation going!"

Cheers,
*~K~*