What is Failure Anyway?
By: Nan S. Russell
Does it surprise you that only 400 cokes were sold the first year; Albert Einstein's Ph.D. dissertation was rejected; Henry Ford had two bankruptcies before his famous success; or Ulysses S. Grant was working as a handyman, written off as a failure, eight years before becoming President of the United States?
Rodin couldn't get into art school on three occasions yet became a great sculptor; Abraham Lincoln lost seven elections before winning the Presidency; Babe Ruth stuck out 1,330 times in route to hitting 714 home runs; and Oprah Winfrey publicly failed several diet attempts before becoming an inspiration for looking great after fifty.
Setbacks, disappoints, rejections and unsuccessful attempts were not failures to these people. They were steps to their success. That's the difference between people who are winning at working and people who aren't. How you deal with your setbacks (big or small) will determine your results. You see, failure is not the lack of success. Failure is staying down when you trip or stumble. It's giving up, checking out, or shutting down.
I wasn't a failure when I was fired from my first professional job, although for awhile I felt like one, and I could have been if I'd lost my confidence and given up on my career aspirations. I wasn't a failure when I was passed over for a coveted promotion I'd worked years for, but I could have been if I'd let that setback determine my future. And I wasn't a failure every time I pitched an idea that got turned down, but I could have been if I'd stopped pitching ideas.
You see, in twenty years in management, for every "yes" I've gotten in my career that's visible, there's least five "no's" that aren't. For every success I've achieved, there's at least as many misses. Yet when we look at other people's successes, we miss the struggles, frustrations and disappointments that came before them, so we think their success was easy.
How you view your disappointments, falls, and setbacks will impact your success. Do you see them as stepping stones or brick walls? People who are winning at working live Ralph Waldo Emerson's words, "Men succeed when they realize that their failures are the preparation for their victories."
People who are winning at working don't blame others for what's happened to them, and they don't use other people's definitions for success and failure. They use their own. They know it's not failing to miss their mark, change paths, re-assess goals, try something new or adjust direction. To them, failure happens when they stop trying to achieve their personal best.
© 2005 Nan S. Russell. All rights reserved. Sign up to receive Nan's free biweekly eColumn at www.winningatworking.com. Nan Russell has spent over twenty years in management, most recently with QVC as a Vice President. She has held leadership positions in Human Resource Development, Communication, Marketing and line Management. Nan has a B.A. from Stanford University and M.A. from the University of Michigan. Currently working on her first book, Winning at Working: 10 Lessons Shared, Nan is a writer, columnist, small business owner, and on-line instructor. Visit www.nanrussell.com or contact Nan at info@nanrussell.com.
http://www.jobbankusa.com/CareerArticles/Career_Advice/ca70705a.html
The Importance of Consistency
By: Scott Ginsberg
You just never know.
When you answer a phone call from an unknown number.
When you engage in a conversation with a guest at your office.
When you greet a potential customer who walks into your store.
When you make small talk with a stranger you've just been introduced to.
When you respond to a random email from a friend of a friend of a friend.
You just never know.
And because of that, because any of these individuals has the potential to immediately tell everyone he knows either "That guy's great!" or "That guy's an a@#$%e!" you must remember that consistency is far greater than rare moments of greatness.
This means you have a choice. You can be a nice, friendly, approachable, authentic, easy-to-deal-with person ONLY around those "important" people, i.e., customers, coworkers and managers; or you can act that way with EVERYBODY, notwithstanding their apparent insignificance. It brings to mind the words of Roy Beers, who once said, "Your true character is most accurately measured by how you treat those who can do nothing for you."
Great example: I do a lot of staff training for hotels, namely, Hyatt Regency. One Friday night after hosting an afternoon session, I bumped into a few of my audience members at a nearby bar. (I didn't know who they were at the time.) But literally, we smacked into each other! And I spilled half of my drink on the floor. I looked up at the three guys and said, "No worries guys - this place is a madhouse. It's just water anyway."
One of them said, "Sorry about that Scott. Hey, by the way, we really loved your speech on approachability today! Thanks a lot."
"Oh, I didn't realize you guys worked for the Hyatt! Yeah, sorry we didn't get a chance to meet after the session. But I'm glad you enjoyed it. And it sure is funny running into you now, huh?"
Yeah, funny.
Has this ever happened to you? Have you ever realized who the person was 20 seconds AFTER you'd made your impression?
It's kind of scary. Kind of makes you think back and wonder, "Wait, what did I say again? Was it something stupid? And would I have said something different if I knew exactly who I was talking to?"
That's the big question. That's where consistency comes in to play. Because odds are, you might not know right away if the person you're talking to is stranger you'll never see again, an existing customer, a potential customer, or a friend of an existing or potential customer.
And all it takes is one sentence to make him think, "You know, I think I'll take my business elsewhere." Then again, all it takes is one sentence to make him think, "Man, I love this place! I can't wait to tell everyone back at the office all about it!"
Because you just never know.
And yet, some people still don't understand the power of this idea. Probably because they've never had a business-changing encounter - positive or negative - that swiveled on the hinges of serendipity.
But they will. And so will you. Both bad and good. Hey, I once started a friendly conversation on a bus with a complete stranger who eventually passed along my business card to a local reporter whose news story kicked off my career as an author and a speaker! Then again, I once made a terribly rude comment about my former boss without knowing he was a customer of my father's! Ouch!
So whether you're prospecting, greeting guests or just making small talk around the office, remember this: it's just easier to be consistent. Kind of like the old adage, "If you tell the truth all the time, you won't have to remember anything." Because ultimately, consistently is greater than rare moments of greatness. And people only give you credit for that which they see you do consistently.
Because you just never know.
Scott Ginsberg is a professional speaker, "the world's foremost field expert on nametags" and author of HELLO my name is Scott and The Power of Approachability. He works with people and organizations who want to become UNFORGETTABLE communicators - one conversation at a time. For more information contact Front Porch Productions at www.HelloMy NameIsScott.com.
http://www.sideroad.com/Customer_Service_Basics/consistency.html
What is Commitment?
By Anthony Smith
There are many types of Commitment. Commitment to, family, spouse, children, job, country, self, ideology and God. The state of being bound emotionally or intellectually to a course of action or to another person or persons. A Pledge. To pledge or obligate one's own self; commit, consign, entrust, confide, relegate. When I married my wife I committed myself to her welfare, both physically and emotionally. She put her trust in me to provide for not only her but for our children, forsaking all to the betterment of one relationship under God. I made a commitment to my employer to do the best as I was able to provide him with quality work for the pay that I received, never defrauding him in any way.
I made a commitment to my Country, to serve and protect such rights as were provided by the constitution, as I served in the Military, being sent where and when I was ordered. I made a commitment to myself to do those things that were lawful and needful to my welfare, to obtain the American dream of self suffiency and wellbeing. I made a commitment to my Ideology, being understood that God came first then everything else afterwards. Believing in one God, one Saviour, one Bible and one way of Salvation by the Direction of one Holy Ghost. I did my best to uphold each commitment as I was able, being limited in the body but with my spirit willing.
Even after being devastated by three heart attacks, my commitment to my wife, family, children, ideology, self and God has not dwindled nor been removed by my sercomstances. Once a commitment has been made it cannot be counted as void because of changing situations. But as we all have made commitments in our lives, not one of us ever had to shed blood for our commitment to God. We all, as believers, have made a commitment to God. To uphold, His, Statutes, Laws, Commandments, Ideals, to hold to our Faith in Him no mater what came against us, but we still have not shed blood for the cause of our commitment. We have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.[Heb 12:4 Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.] Lets talk a little about the comittment of Jesus to His Father and to us.
Matthew 26:39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt. Jesus made severial comittments,
1. To re-obtain Dominion over the earth. [Mat 4:8-10; Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.] For we all know that Adam was given dominion over the earth by God and then lost it to Satan when He fell. Matthew 4:8-10, proves that Satan Had dominion over all because Jesus never rebuked him for his offer to give the kingdoms of the earth to Him.
2. Preach The everlasting Gospel to the House of Israel.[Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Mar 7:26-27 The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation; and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter. But Jesus said unto her, Let the children first be filled: for it is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it unto the dogs. [The comittment of Jesus was to offer salvation to the Jews first, doing so fulfilling prophecy. [Isa_53:5, Isa_53:6, Isa_53:11, Isa_53:12; Mat_8:17; Gal_3:13; Heb_9:28; 1Pe_2:24, 1Pe_3:18; 1Jo_2:2] Isa 9:6-7; For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isa 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
3. To set in place a plan of Salvation for all mankind. John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. John 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
4. To give His life to secure mankinds salvation for all that would believe on Him. Joh 10:14-18; I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep(Recognition of the Saved), and am known of mine(Recoginition of the Savour).
As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep(Israel). And other sheep I have(The Gentile Race), which are not of this fold:(The Jewish Race of People) them also I must bring(Save), and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold,(No more Jew nor Greek) and one shepherd.
Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.(His fulfilment of His Comittment to God and Man.) No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
5. To live a sinless life for an example for us.
Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot(Sin) to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. 1Pe 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: (Sinless)
6. Comitted to fulfill the will of the Father. Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.Mat 11:27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. Mat 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. Joh 8:49 Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me. Joh 8:54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:
7. Comitted to Destroy the works of Satan. Luk 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. Act 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. Rev 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
8. Comitted to Return to reastablish Gods dominion upon the earth for eternity. Eph 4:10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. Rev 2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
Jesus has fulfilled His commitments except 1, The return to finally destroy Satan and establish His eternal kingdom upon the earth. To those that don't believe, look at history and see all the commitments that were fulfilled by Christ and ponder the thought, that if all these things are true, then the last will also come to pass. Do you think that God will leave the last undone? I think not. This world is falling apart at the seams, conflict, confusion, war and rumors of war. The worlds monetary system is going bankrupt, soon money will be useless and the things that you thought were important, no one will even want to steel. What will be your commitment when Christ returns? Will it be to Him or will you commit to Satan and a final battle at Armogedon?
Temple of Spirit & Truth Ministries
A.R. Smith Sermons International
http://ezinearticles.com/?What-is-Commitment?&id=76162
What Is Commitment in Relationships?
By David Steele
The question of when a relationship is committed is a source of much confusion and debate. We live in a time when the marriage rate is going down, the co-habitation rate is going up, and the majority of first-born children are now born to unmarried parents.
In this article I hope to shed some light on this question to facilitate your work with couples and individuals challenged by different perceptions of the status of their relationships.
COMMITMENT VS. PROMISE
I recently had a conversation with a woman who told me she had just broken off a "committed" relationship. A few questions later I learned that she had been dating this person for a year, they were not living together, and the reason she broke it off is that he "cheated."
We talked about pre-committed vs. committed relationships, and she agreed that it was a pre-committed relationship, but insisted that they had made a "commitment" to each other.
OK, things are getting clearer. On the one hand is the status of the relationship- pre-committed vs. committed, and on the other hand are commitments made within the relationship. Macro vs. micro. Two different things, right?
In our conversation, it occurred to me to make a distinction between a "Commitment" vs. a "Promise." They made a promise to each other within the context of a relationship that was not committed. That distinction seemed to help her make more sense of things.
When I asked the RCI coaches for feedback on the "commitment vs. promise" distinction, most felt that it was just semantics and there is not much of a difference. The general consensus was that when you make a promise you are making a commitment.
Well, I agree that it is a question of semantics, and here is my definition of terms:
PROMISE: Verbally stated future intention to perform a specific act.
- I promise to pick up your dry cleaning and not forget this time - I promise to be exclusive in our relationship
COMMITMENT: Both a FACT demonstrated by behavior, and an ATTITUDE consisting of thoughts and beliefs.
- I am committed to keeping my promises - I am committed to our relationship
In short, a promise is something you say, and a commitment is something you do. A promise is situation-specific. A commitment is contextual.
A promise is a small commitment. If a potential partner doesn't keep promises, I would question their ability to keep commitments, as they are definitely related.
CONFUSION ABOUT COMMITMENT
Whether or not you agree with my semantics, the distinction I made between a commitment and a promise was helpful for the above conversation.
The larger picture though, is that I see a lot of confusion about the status of today's relationships. Some years ago when I coined the term "pre-commitment" to describe couples that were exclusive but not yet committed, it was a helpful distinction, but the question remains- "What is commitment?"
When you are married, it is clear you are in a committed relationship. Your commitment is a legal contract and a publicly witnessed FACT. However, it is common for couples in trouble for one or both partners to have an uncommitted ATTITUDE.
I have talked with many unmarried people, as the woman above, who have described themselves in "committed relationships." They clearly have the attitude, but often have nothing but verbal promises (and sometimes not even that!) to demonstrate that the relationship is committed.
IN MY OPINION, YOU ARE -NOT- IN A COMMITTED RELATIONSHIP IF:
1. Your partner is not aware your relationship is committed
2. You are wondering if this relationship is committed
3. You and your partner have differences of opinion about the status of your relationship
4. Your family and friends have different perceptions about the status of your relationship
5. You and your partner have not acted to explicitly formalize your commitment in some way
6. You are relying on verbal promises without a significant track record of them being kept
A commitment is explicit and unambiguous. A commitment is a formal event of some kind between two people. A commitment is something you DO over time. A real commitment is usually legally enforceable and there are consequences for breaking it.
And, for a relationship to be truly committed, there are no exits- mentally, emotionally, or physically. When the going gets rough, you make it work.
CONTINUUM OF COMMITMENT
Commitment is not a light switch that goes from "off" to "on." When building a relationship with someone, the level of commitment gradually increases.
Then you have all the shades of gray. living together, dating exclusively for more than a year, even engaged to be married, that might look and feel like commitment, but is it really?
FACT VS. ATTITUDE
Commitment in a relationship is complicated in that it takes two people, and it requires an alignment of FACT (events, actions) and ATTITUDE (thoughts, beliefs) for both of them.
It is common to be committed in fact (e.g. "married") but not in attitude (e.g. "I'm not sure this is the right relationship for me").
It is also common to be pre-committed in fact (e.g. dating exclusively) and committed in attitude (e.g. "This is 'The One!' ").
In my work with couples I have found that the most important variable determining their future success is their level of commitment to the relationship.
In my experience, when couples are committed in fact, but not in attitude, their prognosis is poor.
Then, there are the pre-committed couples that generally fall into two categories-
UNCONSCIOUS- typically following the "mini-marriage" model of trying the relationship out, acting committed without actually making the commitment. A disconnect of fact and attitude.
CONSCIOUS- aware that they are not yet committed, usually have commitment as a goal, asking themselves "Is this the right relationship for me? Should I make a commitment?" An alignment of fact and attitude.
CONCLUSION
So, when is a relationship committed?
-- When there is an alignment of fact and attitude.
What creates the "fact" of commitment?
I propose these three criterion:
CRITERIA #1: Promises made to each other about the permanent nature of the relationship that are kept
CRITERIA #2: Explicit, formal, public declaration
CRITERIA #3: Unambiguous to partners and others
In today's world, if all three of the above are met, I would say it is a committed relationship, whether legally married or not.
I sincerely hope this article helps address the common questions about commitment that arise in relationship coaching. There are no pat answers or prescriptions, but it is my hope that these ideas and concepts will help you have productive conversations with your clients that are caught in the gray areas to support them to make effective relationship choices.
Copyright 2006 David Steele
David Steele, MA, LMFT is founder of Relationship Coaching Institute and author of "Conscious Dating: Finding the Love of Your Life in Today's World." http://www.consciousdating.com Visit http://www.consciousrelationshipresources.com for access to free live tele-seminars, audio programs, e-programs, and more for couples and singles who want to find and have a successful conscious relationship.
http://ezinearticles.com/?What-Is-Commitment-in-Relationships?&id=249098
What is Failure?
-One Leader’s Perspective
By Greg L. Thomas
When I was a child my uncle had a favorite saying. When things would go wrong he would mutter, “My mother said there would be days like this”. Then he would immediately opine…”but she never said there would be so many of them and they would all follow one another!” Do you consider yourself a failure? Do you look at your past or present achievements with a sense of disappointment? Have you attempted to be a servant-leader only to feel your efforts have been in vain?
Perhaps you have had goals or dreams that have not been fulfilled. Maybe you have lost your zeal and enthusiasm about the future. Everyone goes through the valleys and shadows of life. Many of the greatest leaders who ever lived experienced a period of “exile” or despondency in their lifetime! Some days and seasons of life are very good, and some days are far from good. It is certainly true that when we feel we have “missed the mark” or failed, we should seriously examine what we did wrong to learn from the experience. It is also true that “what we sow we shall reap”. But before you consider yourself or others a failure, I would like to give you a few things to think about.
Failure is a strong word. It even sounds harsh and judgmental. In the western world it is often applied to people in a condescending way. It is also typically used in a way that emphasizes permanence. When someone is designated a failure it is often implied they have little value and the opportunity to change their situation is minimal. When an event is called a failure it is often implied that the results were miserable and unchangeable. But is this really the correct definition of this coarse word? Is this the proper perspective for a leader to have?
First of all, a failure is relative to time. How do we know we have had a good day? The answer is often relative to the passing of time. Sometimes we may believe we have had an excellent day only to find out later that something else was going on we didn’t know was occurring. When we analyze the day in its entirety it turns out to be different than we first thought. On the other hand, we have all had days that seemed to be bad. Maybe everything appeared to go wrong or we may have had a big single event that turned the entire day into a negative frame. Yet, as we look back at the events of that day it may have turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to us! Time turns a lot of failures into successes. The first great American general was George Washington. But early in the American Revolutionary War few would have called him adequate, let alone great! He lost virtually every battle and skirmish against the British troops. He and his men were demoralized and at times it appeared the war was lost. Yet time proved these battles had just the right effect. The British resolve to keep the American colonies was being diminished with each battle and with the loss of each British solder. It turned out that winning battles was not as important as the resolve to continue … no matter what the odds.
Time transcended George Washington from a failure to a hero. The same can be true in our lives!
We must often be prepared to patiently wait for our efforts to produce results we can see. It is easy to do something and expect immediate results. We many even suspect failure has occurred if we don’t quickly see something tangible happen. But remember that seeds grow underground before you can see them. Sometimes they grow slowly and first establish roots before we see any tangible evidence of life. Those of us who garden learn to wait for the flowers to bloom. In the same way we must be careful not to casually judge an action or event as a failure. It is very possible that not enough time has elapsed to correctly judge the results. That principle holds true in nature and in life.
The second thing about failure is that it is relative to your perspective. Something terrible may happen in your life, but upon close examination you may clearly see a “silver lining”. There is an old Norwegian story about a fisherman who was out to sea with his two sons. The day was very good and they had achieved a large catch that would make anyone proud. But then a storm suddenly appeared that was so fierce and dark they could no longer see the shoreline! The boat rocked and creaked violently and the three men thought they would lose their lives. As if that wasn’t bad enough, they lost their sense of direction and feared they would be lost at sea. Unknown to the fisherman, a tragic fire started at his home about the same time. It began in the kitchen of his cottage and destroyed every possession he had! The fisherman and his sons eventually found their bearings and were able to bring their boat safely ashore. When the men reached the dock, the fisherman’s wife was waiting to meet him with the tragic news of the fire. She uttered while crying, “Karl, a fire has destroyed everything we had”. “We have nothing left!” But the fisherman appeared to be unmoved by her news. She continued, “Karl, are you listening to me…everything is gone!” Karl nodded his head and replied, “Yes dear…I heard you…but a couple of hours ago, the boys and I thought we would die at sea. We were in despair and losing hope we would ever find the shore. Then I saw a dim yellow glow in the distance. We rowed toward it closer and closer and it grew ever larger drawing us toward its light. The same fire that destroyed our home saved our lives!”
Karl understood an important lesson. Failure is often success when we see it from a different point of view. If we have a positive mindset it is virtually impossible to reflect on any event which doesn’t have some good in it, if only we are willing to look for it. In 1872 a severe drought occurred in California that shriveled up a farmer’s entire grape crop. All other farmers considered their crops a failure. However, one farmer sent his “dried up” grapes to a grocery store and they were advertised as Puruvian delicacies. These decimated grapes even began to sell for a premium price far above the cost of fresh grapes! And from this crop failure, we have all been eating raisins since that time! Again, failure is largely determined by our perspective and point of view. If you consider yourself or an event as a failure perhaps another look is in order!
The perception of life at any given moment may not reveal its true meaning. Most of us make the mistake of judging events by too short of a segment of time, or too few events! If we judge everything by too few circumstances, we will incorrectly read the whole of life by a few isolated events. Perhaps another day away or over the next hill we will be able to view what appeared to be a failure as a true success. The people who win are those who hold on to their hopes and dreams and patiently wait for the proper perspective to become clear.
Many folks feel like failures because they need the right standards to measure success or failure. Success is not the achievement of power, prestige or great influence. Many individuals achieve these things but are not happy or even content with what they have. Many athletes and entertainers achieve these things only to lose it all in an orgy of self-destruction. Success is doing what you can, with where you are, and what you have to work with!
Achieving our best is always limited by our circumstances. It is easy to say, “if only I have known or if only I could turn back the hands of time”. But we simply can’t do that, because no one can know everything. We all have to make decisions and plot our direction only with the information we presently have at hand.
In conclusion, as a leader be careful how you define a “failure” and how quickly you make this judgment. Yes, when we feel we have “missed the mark” or failed, we should seriously examine what we did wrong to learn from the experience! But, remember that failure is relative to time. What may appear to be a failure today may have planted the seeds for success later on. Secondly, failure is often success when we see it from a different point of view. With a proper perspective…what we actually experience or the “end result” may be far different than what we immediately see.
Many years ago a young struggling cartoonist lost his job when he was told by his boss “he couldn’t draw and had no talent”. He decided to work for himself and find his own clients. After a long period of struggle and failure he found only one customer! A minister paid him a very small amount of money to draw advertising for his church. The cartoonist was so downtrodden and pathetic the church allowed him to stay in their mouse-infested garage. While he lived there he drew cartoons that no one wanted, and nicknamed his favorite little mouse who scurried in the garage…Mickey. From apparent failure Walt Disney transcended disappointment and misfortune to become a success. He achieved this by believing in his vision, and his mission along with time and a right perspective.
So can you!
Comments to: editor@leadingtoday.org
http://www.leadingtoday.org/Onmag/2003%20Archives/dec03/gt-dec03.html
What Is the Difference Between an "Excuse" and "Reason"?
"We have forty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse." These were famous words of Rudyard Kipling about "excuse and reason." Excuses make us fall short of our achievements. Sometimes things are way beyond our control. However, if you investigate each failure, you might find that coincidences are also are results of your actions. No excuses are worth your time.
http://quotations.about.com/b/2005/09/16/what-is-the-difference-between-an-excuse-and-reason.htm
In jurisprudence, an excuse or justification is a form of immunity that must be distinguished from an exculpation. In this context, "to excuse" means to grant or obtain an exemption for a group of persons sharing a common characteristic from a potential liability. "To justify" as in justifiable homicide means to "vindicate" or show the justice in the particular conduct. Thus, society approves of the purpose or motives underpinning some actions or the consequences flowing from them (see Robinson), and distinguishes those where the behavior cannot be approved but some excuse may be found in the characteristics of the defendant, e.g. that the accused was a serving police officer or suffering from a mental illness. Thus, a justification describes the quality of the act, whereas an excuse relates to the status or capacity (or lack of it) in the accused. "To exculpate" means to free a particular individual from culpability after he or she has caused loss or damage and to represent this in a judgment that is either an acquittal or mitigates sentencing in the criminal law, or reduces or extinguishes the liability to pay compensation to the victim in the civil law.
Explanation
The executive and legislative branches of modern states enact policy into laws which are then administered through the judicial system. Judges also have a residual discretion to excuse individuals from liability if it represents a just result. When considering the consequences which are to be imposed on those involved in the activities forming the subject matter of the common law or legislation, governments and judges have a choice:
the criminal or civil defendant may be excused from liability as belonging to a class of person that ought to be excused, their behaviour may be considered justified, or an exculpation may be allowed on the merits of the particular case.
To be excused from liability means that although the defendant may have been a participant in the sequence of events leading to the prohibited outcome, no liability will attach to the particular defendant because he or she belongs to a class of person exempted from liability. In some cases, this will be a policy of expediency. Hence, members of the armed forces, the police or other civil organizations may be granted a degree of immunity for causing prohibited outcomes while acting in the course of their official duties, e.g. for an assault or trespass to the person caused during a lawful arrest or for an ambulance driver exceeding the speed limit in an emergency. Others are excused by virtue of their status and capacity. Others may escape liability because the quality of their actions satisfied a general public good. For example, the willingness to defend oneself and others, or property from injury may benefit society at large. Albeit that the actions of a vigilante fall outside the formal controls that would seek to ensure reasonable use of force in state-appointed police officers, such people may accidentally find themselves interrupting the commission of a crime and their actions in defence of their own or another's interests is justified out of expediency as opposed to having to wait until a police officer arrives before help can be rendered.
An exculpation is a defense in which a defendant argues that despite the fact that he or she has done everything to constitute the crime, tort or other form of wrong and so, in principle already has guilt for those actions and/or a liability to compensate the victim, he or she should be exculpated because of the special circumstances said to operate in favor of the defendant at the time the law was broken.
Excuses
This is an aspect of the public policy of parens patriae. In the criminal law, each state will consider the nature of its own society and the available evidence of the age at which antisocial behavior begins to manifest itself. Some societies will have qualities of indulgence toward the young and inexperienced and will not wish them to be exposed to the criminal law system before all other avenues of response have been exhausted. Hence, some states have a policy of doli incapax and exclude liability for all acts and omissions that would otherwise have been criminal up to a specified age. Thereafter, there may be a rebuttable presumption against the use of criminal sanctions except in more serious cases. Other states leave discretion to prosecutors to argue or the judges to rule on whether the child understood that what was being done was wrong.
The status of minor may also excuse liability in the civil law for contract, tort and other legal situations during which liabilities would otherwise attach to the infant. Where there is only minimal understanding, transactions entered into will be void, i.e. the infant is excused. When understanding grows in line with age, the law switches from excuse to exculpation, and transactions may be voidable, i.e. the courts will judge, whether in the particular circumstances, it would be right to favor the interests of the child or the interests of the other party or parties involved in the transaction. Hence, it would not be appropriate to allow a child knowingly to deceive innocent retailers or service providers into supplying value, and then allow him or her to avoid liability to pay a reasonable sum of money for those goods or services. This is a balancing of political and commercial interests.
If individuals are a danger to society and/or to themselves but not responsible through a lack of understanding, there is no point in punishment (whether in the criminal or non-criminal sense). Punishment is only justified morally if the person understands that what was done was wrong and accepts the judgment of society as part of the process of expiation and rehabilitation. Hence, as with parens patriae, the state accepts the person as being in need of care, and offers or requires medical treatment instead of subjecting such people to the stress of having to undergo a trial as to liability.
This criminal defense straddles the divide between excuse and exculpation. It works by showing that the defendant's mind was not in control of the body's movements at the relevant time and that this loss of control was not foreseeable. For example, a diabetic suffering a hypoglycaemic attack will not be liable for any loss or damage caused. To that extent, it borrows from the policy excuse favoring those who are suffering from a mental illness, but allows the full trial as to liability to proceed. For a detailed comparative law discussion, see automatism (case law)
Exculpations
In this situation, the defendant has actually done everything to constitute the breach of the law and intended to do it in order to avoid some threatened or actual harm. Thus, some degree of liability already attaches to the defendant for what was done. In law, the usual rule is that the defendant's motive for breaking the law is irrelevant although, in the criminal law, this may reduce the sentence. The basis of the defense argues that the threats made by the other person make the defendant's entire behavior involuntary and therefore the liability should reduced or removed. The extent to which this defense should be allowed, if at all, is a simple matter of public policy. A state may say that no threat should force a person deliberately to break the law, particularly if this breach will cause loss or damage to a third person. Alternatively, a state may take the view that even though people may have ordinary levels of courage, they may nevertheless be coerced into agreeing to break the law and this human weakness should have some recognition in the law. For example, suppose that a group of terrorists kidnap A's family and instruct A to carry a large bomb into a crowded area as the price for the release of his family. If A carries out these instructions, making no effort to contact the police or to warn those in the danger area, the issue of liability for death and injury resulting depends on whether the state wishes to encourage terrorists to use local citizens of well-known reputation as their bomb carriers. This is not a legal but a political decision.
In the civil law, duress is similarly only an exculpation, rendering contracts and other transactions voidable, and offering only minor mitigation in the calculation of the amount of any damages payable.
The fundamental policy operating here is ignorantia juris non excusat, i.e. the state cannot allow ignorance of the law to be a defense. This would unduly encourage the lazy and the deceitful to trade on their ignorance (real or otherwise). Thus, only mistakes relating to the factual basis of what is being attempted can form this defense and, in the majority of situations, it will only offer limited benefit to a defendant of ordinary capacity since the state owes no general duty to save citizens from the effects of their own ignorance or stupidity. Nevertheless, there may be limited circumstances in which people may honestly believe things that either prevent them from forming the requisite mens rea or from reaching an id idem agreement
This is an example of a purely mitigatory defense in that, in the few situations when it is allowed to operate, it only reduces the level of criminal liability. In most legal systems, it cannot extinguish liability. It is a natural part of human nature that people get angry when they are provoked. But the state has a positive interest in maintaining good order and therefore, no matter what is done or said, people are not supposed to react violently or to cause loss or damage. Even though certain forms of physical contact or particular words might cause even reasonable people to become seriously annoyed, the state cannot sanction or justify retaliation. Thus, in most aspects of the law, any loss of control is taken to be an aggravating factor that, in the criminal law or the law of intentional torts, might well lead to an increase in sentencing, or the award of punitive or exemplary damages.
In casual conversations or even in formal meetings one often encounters excuses for actions or inactions. A set of common excuses along with a question and a sarcasm is presented below in order to clarify how one might test an excuse for reasonableness or expose its unreasonableness in a rhetorically effective manner:
Excuse:"We tried that once, and it didn't work." Replies:"Is that enough reason to give up trying?", "Well, that's certainly reason not to try that light bulb thing again, Mr. Edison!"
Excuse:"We've always done it this way." Replies:"Is that enough reason to not attempt to find a better way?", "Yes, that's how we've always drunk our iced tea, Mr. Jim Jones!"
Excuse:"We can't afford that." Replies:"Even though no one stated yet how much it costs?", "Even though it cost no money!"
Excuse:"We don't want to send the wrong message." Replies:"Is the message we're already sending the best we can do?", "...because we've been so good for so long at sending the right message!"
The effectiveness of excuses in persuading a person or group often depends either on the soundness of the premise of the excuse or else on the validity of the logic when applying the principle of the excuse to more general situations. However, many excuses that fail these tests of classical logic may remain persuasive, and can be countered best with humour or hyperbole.
A fairly common theme found in "self improvement" publications is how to overcome objections and excuses without inciting offense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excuse
How Heavy is Regret?
By Susan Russo
“We suffer from one of two things. Either the pain of discipline or the pain of regret. Discipline weighs ounces and regret weighs tons.” -Jim Rohn
Sometimes that hardest thing is to follow through with our resolutions. We may start out setting well-intentioned goals and soon we find ourselves back in the same old patterns. It’s certainly much easier to stay in your comfort zone than to step out of the box and change certain behaviors.
Most of us are so busy that we don’t even know when we would find the time to make these necessary but dreaded changes. After all, we work so hard, that it’s pleasure we seek, not more work. The irony of it is; if you take the time and make the effort now to achieve what you want, ultimately it is pleasure that you will experience.
On the other hand, if you hold onto the limiting belief, that change takes to much effort, then guess what, you will continue to live with behaviors that will only keep you stuck right where you are today. And, instead of experiencing increased wealth, health, love, etc., you’re pleasure seeking mission of staying the same and not upsetting the apple cart, will guarantee you looking back one day with regrets.
If there is something in life that you are not experiencing and you would really like to, then the only way to get yourself from here to there is to take some kind of action. Even if you start small, by doing something everyday to reach your intended goal, it will eventually snowball into actions that result in experiencing the pleasures you desire.
Discipline is nothing more than making a decision and sticking with it. If you want something bad enough, keep the end result in mind and keep moving in the direction of where you want to go. If you happen to fall off the wagon, just get back on it. By doing something each day that will bring you closer to your goals, you will strengthen your patterns, until eventually they become a habit.
By starting something and not following through, it reinforces the old and familiar, it keeps you stuck in a rut and six months or a year down the road, you’ll wish you had taken the steps to achieve what you wanted. But, since you didn’t, you’re now faced with deciding once again if you will make the commitment to yourself to do what it takes to get what you want or just learn to be happy with the way things are.
Isn’t better to push through the pain of creating a new habit and suffer for a little while—rather than a lifetime?
All of our choices come with consequences. You already know what the consequence is to stay the same, now you have to weigh if it’s worth making the effort to make a change and live the life you’ve always desired. It’s your choice!
Read more about it in the book, “The 7 Keys to Unlock the Power Within You” found at: http://www.susanrusso.com
Susan Russo is an author, speaker and coach who provides inspiration, self-empowerment and the tools and strategies to help move you toward personal success and fulfillment. She is editor of "You've Got Power" Ezine. Author of “The 7 Keys To Unlock the Power Within You” and “There Is Life After What's-His-Name” found at: http://www.whystay.com
Copyright 2007 Pinnacle Thought Inc.
http://ezinearticles.com/?How-Heavy-is-Regret?&id=434445
