Exercise and Religion

Every once in a while my Tae Kwon Do instructor will have a short discussion on ki. During these discussions he always makes note that "this is not religion", which is true. But ki does belong in the mind-body-spirit tradition that is a part of many religions, and it made me think of the relationship of exercise and the major world religions.

Buddhism has a long tradition of having an exercise component, including, of course, martial arts. In fact, Shaolin Buddhist monks are traditionally credited with inventing Kung Fu. Hinduism has Yoga, which is definitely an exercise, which anyone who has taken Yoga will attest (in the West, however, the religious aspect has largely been divorced from the exercise). Islamic exercise consists of maiming, torturing and killing anyone who isn't a Believer, which really burns the calories (ever seen a fat terrorist?). But what about Christianity?

Thinking about sects ranging from Coptic to Catholic I can't think of any that have an exercise component. And it is actually a little curious that the body is left out of the mind-spirit mix since Christianity is actually one of the few religions (and perhaps the only) that actually believes in resurrection of the body as well as the spirit. If Christians are going to get their bodies back one day, one would think that taking care of them, or some sort of exercise, would be a component of this religion as well.

No EU? No Problem for Business

While most of the reaction to France's rejection of the EU Constitution has been political, I thought I would add a short analysis to what this means to American businesses: nothing.

The movement to the Euro, which is probably the biggest change to business, is already completed. There were probably going to be another layer of taxes and regulations that were to be imposed as a result of a Constitutional EU, but they are already high in Europe and would have been incremental (and the individual countries will still be piling them on, so no net savings either way, really).

Actually, it is somewhat good news to American companies. The bonds that tie European competitors down - expensive labor costs, difficulties in shedding workers, high regulatory hurdles - will now have no chance of slowing. It's interesting that some polls showed that these very items, which have created double digit unemployment in France, were part of the reason that the French voted against the constitution: the fear that the constitution would increase competition. They seem to fail to note that businesses there are shedding jobs like crazy anyway and if they don't open up to competition the trend is just going to continue.

Another Consulting Dilemma - We, You, I?

So you are a consultant. You are helping a company develop a marketing plan. You get a feel for their product and develop a product plan, promotion plan, competitive analysis, the works. So as you talk to your customer, what pronouns do you use when you have conversations like:

"When (you/we) announce the product, (you/we) should have a core customer already committed whom (you/we) can quote in the press release."

"(Your/Our) competitor is really flagging in this particular segment and should be where (you/we) attack."

"I have an idea for a product extension for your product line" OR "Our product line should be expanded into these areas".

The reason it is a dilemma for most consultants is because the goal of a consulting project is to suggest the next steps, which turns into a new consulting contract, so "we" is actually the goal. In my particular case the consulting contract is an extended job interview for both sides, and my use of "we" would be a good way to signal that I feel like a part of the "team". But I also don't want to sound presumptuous.

What I am currently using is a mix of both, plus some awkward sounding phrases like "When does (The Company) plan to have the product announced?"

But maybe it's okay to be presumptions. I was in a meeting with the *CEO* and he introduced me as a consultant, then added "But we hope to make him permanent." That's a pretty good signal, except I have seen plenty of CEOs agree to deals that never went through, which is a subject for an entirely different blog entry.

Reader Advice: Dealing with a Slacker

From the Mailbag:

Dear Director,

I recently started a new job. The new company is relatively small and employs a global "out of the office" mailing list. I noticed through this function that the technical writer slotted for my team has been out of the office "sick" or "leaving at 10 to go to the doctor" very frequently (for all day appointments?)

Two weeks ago, following a bunch of "out sicks," he was going to be out three days for a company paid-for training class, which he made for all three days. Last week, two of his "leaving early/out sick" messages came in time-stamped about 7:35 a.m., which means that he was at the office early and I missed seeing him by about 25 minutes.

Although he could theoretically be on some kind of funky flex time, this reminded me of the WSJ article a couple of years ago that talked about slackers using technology to simulate their actually being in the office without showing up. (The simple form is leaving a set of keys and a wallet on your desk). So this email could have been set up the day before to go out that morning or done remotely.

This guy doesn't report to me (though his boss has been out often lately sick, too), nor do I have any visibility into anything he's produced to bolster confidence in his ability to deliver. As often as the guy's out, I'd expect he has been battling ebola or something else I don't want to catch. However, since he was healthy enough to make it to his training class, I think he may be a slacker.

I'm new, and don't have a sense for the politics, but my project is about to kick off and his chronic absenteeism is a risk that I don't want to bear without adequate ass-coverage. Any suggestions on how to best position this?

According to my copy of the Sith Manager Desk Reference, the technique for dealing with slackerism, absenteeism, or any other sort of ism is to use the Force to crush his trachea. However, your new company may not subscribe to this management technique, and it usually annoys the people in HR.

My recommendation is to set a meeting with him in one of the times he is in the office and not contagious. Discuss your program, the timeframe, his responsibilities on the program, what you expect of him, and what his deadlines are. Give him all of this in writing. Then follow up with him on some sort of regular basis - at least weekly - once your project begins, tracking his progress and how he is keeping up with his deliverables. Keep meeting notes of the initial meeting and all subsequent followups.

The hope is that all this officialness will get his ass in gear - at least for your program. Best case you incentivize him to do his job. Worse case you have a paper trail for nailing his ass/covering yours should things not go well.

Since you are new and have no history on what this guy really does, you really don't have a lot of other options. I wouldn't elevate it in your position since your complaints/concerns may seem like whining since you don't know what this guy's reputation is yet within the organization (maybe his management knows he is a slacker, but they could think he is awesome - I have seen stranger things in business).

Any other advice out there?

The Consulting Dilemma

I got a lead for a new consulting client that is hitting the VCs and wants help rewriting their business plan. My friend who sent me the lead pointed me to the company's web site for more info should I be interested in bidding on the project.

I took a look at their basic concept and......eh. Nothing to blow anyone's socks away . I knew I had to decide: do I act excited about the opportunity and try to dress up this pig, or do I take a pass?

I'm in marketing, and my job is to, well, market. That means taking things that aren't exciting, interesting and dynamic and make them all of those things. Plus I am supposed to go out and make money. On the other hand there is the opportunity cost of taking such a project, plus potentially being attached to said project if the spin doesn't quite work out and it ends up as an unmitigated failure.

A similar consulting dilemma comes up when a consultant comes up with a negative report on a project he is working on. For example, let's say a consultant feels that the project he is working on should be killed. If the consultant gives the company his honest opinion, he may lose the client for good, especially if management has a vested interest in the project. If the consultant tells the client what he wants to hear, however, he will not only keep the client, he will keep the billable hours going as the project continues. I have never been in this situation, but I tell myself that my ethics are such that I would give my honest opinion. However, I understand that others in this situation may feel differently, especially if they had a mortgage payment coming due.