This excerpt from the University of Washington Business School –
People who experience emotional ambivalence – simultaneously feeling positive and negative emotions – are more creative than those who feel just happy or sad, or lack emotion at all, according to a new study.
“Due to the complexity of many organizations, workplace experiences often elicit mixed emotions from employees, and it’s often assumed that mixed emotions are bad for workers and companies,” said Fong, whose study appears in the October issue of the Academy of Management Journal. “Rather than assuming ambivalence will lead to negative results for the organization, managers should recognize that emotional ambivalence can have positive consequences that can be leveraged for organizational success.”
“Managers who want to increase the creative output of their employees might benefit from following in the footsteps of companies like design firm IDEO or Walt Disney, which pride themselves on maintaining odd working environments. On some level, the bicycles that hang from the ceiling at IDEO and the colorful, casual environment at Disney probably help their employees sharpen their abilities to come up with novel and innovative ideas.” Emotionally ambivalent workers are more creative, innovative
The work environment is mentioned as one applicable venue – what might be others? Team dynamics perhaps – creative tensions fostered within the framework of relationship? What might be the parameters that would keep it from crossing into emotional and mental states that would be self-defeating?
You’re busy. You have a full agenda and yet you’re part of an organization too. Which means that others are going to ask you to do things and unless you’re comfortable with the social consequences of being the person that everyone knows doesn’t ever help anyone else, you’re going to have to know how to say “no” with a bit of tact and grace.
Here are nine good ways to say no in no particular order. Why not ten? No reason. Continue reading 9 Ways to Say “No” with Grace
This is a silly story but it makes a point. Suppose Ted sees a bull on Wall Street in New York City’s financial district. What is likely to go through his mind? His first thought is probably not going to be, “Oh, that’s right, we’re in a bull market now,” as he continues down the street. More likely it will be something along the line of “What the . . .?” followed by “Damn, I think he’s looking at me.”
Which will lead Ted to his “fight or flight” self-preservation response, and this being a large bull, will result in flight if he’s smart. Only when he’s safely away will his emotions calm down. And only then will he begin to think rationally about why exactly a bull is loose on Wall Street.
Point? All three of Ted’s s systems have been involved – drives and needs (self-preservation), emotions (fear) and cognitive thought (wonder what that bull is doing here). In this situation they worked together pretty seamlessly – and pretty correctly given the circumstances.
The rub comes when the three are not working well together. When one of the components is out of balance. Or an emotion unsuitable for the occasion dominates. Or a thought process comes to erroneous conclusions based on incorrect interpretation of . . . and the list goes on.
As we move forward from what has been an introductory series of posts for this site I just want to reiterate a couple of goals here.
- Sharing techniques for helping us more effectively manage three areas of brain functioning that go to the core of who we are and how we respond to the world around us.
- Highlighting evolving news, research and tools that can help us do number one above.
- Establishing a forum and community where others can share some of the same.
Out of it perhaps we can come to know ourselves a bit better as well as live and work together a little more effectively with those around us.
Maslow’s Well-Known Hierarchy of Needs
The title says it in a nutshell. The third primary division in our brain processes, at least in the model that I use, has to do with drives. When you’re hungry – it’s hard to think about anything else. As is the case with thirst, or sex, or any of the other fundamental drives that determine significant aspects of who we are. Literally, we can be driven to distraction.
It’s a similar situation with less physical drives. Security. Intimacy. Self-fulfillment. And a whole number of others. Opinions differ as to what constitutes a drive. Or even what “drives the drive” if you will. But unmet drives and associated needs have a significant impact on our behavior. And on our worldviews.
Three buckets if we must – thoughts, emotions and drives. Together they define a fair portion (though not all) of who we are. Individually – and collectively. Think of these three buckets as Ted, or everyman. Ted thinks about where he (or she as the case may be) wants to go in life. He has goals. He wants to get along with others. But he keeps doing things that unravel everything he wants. Shooting himself in the foot as the old saying goes. Sometimes wrong thinking does him in. Sometimes it’s his emotions . . . and other times it’s a need. Sound familiar? Yeah, we’ve all been Ted.