Books that influenced and changed my ways of thinking

I've been thinking about some of the books I've read that have had a profound and permanent influence on me, in the sense that they changed my way of thinking and looking at things. Perhaps I was psychologically ready for those changes at the time I read them. Nevertheless, these books provided a spur that was necessary at the time. Some of the changes set me on brighter, happier paths, while others ushered in an acknowledgment that the world could be a melancholy and evil place. Some helped me deal with issues that I was going through at the time I read them. There are twenty books on my list; I will write about five each over the next four posts. 

A Candle in Her Room by Ruth M. Arthur. A book from my pre-teen years that is impossible to forget. Written in 1966, it is the story of four generations of women who come into contact with an evil doll that has the capability of altering personalities and behavior. The evil behavior encompasses deceit, betrayal, manipulation, and lust for power. Looking back, I don't think this is a book for children, more for teenagers. But when I remember back to my pre-teen years, I think the book was an eye-opener. It was an introduction to the existence of evil in the world and it showed me that even those my age could have questionable motives and evil intentions. 

The Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury. A sci-fi novel, one of the first I ever read, that chronicles mankind's exploration and colonization of Mars. The sense of foreboding in some of the chapters, especially when humans first settle on Mars and meet the Martians, who seem at first to be welcoming, is palpable. One of the scenes I will always remember--the Martians had lured the humans into a false sense of security by being hospitable and recreating scenes of earthly life, but their actual plans for the humans were nefarious. An unsettling book that describes deceit and evil behavior, and a sense of foreboding--as in, what bad thing will happen now? 

 
A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens. I've read the book and seen several movie versions of it. It is impossible not to be affected by the redemption of Ebenezer Scrooge from a heartless miser to a warm-hearted and generous old man after being visited by the Ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future, respectively. It is a classic in the truest sense of the word, a book that leaves one with the knowledge that forgiveness and personal redemption are possible and that there is always hope that good will prevail. 

Jude the Obscure by Thomas Hardy. The ending of this novel was like a punch in the stomach. I remember telling my father that Jude's life was the definition of injustice. How much despair and tragedy could one life contain? In Hardy's view, there were apparently no limits to the misery one life could contain. My friend Brendan read the book and wrote to me 'obscure, indeed'. Hardy uses the word 'obscure' to describe Jude; Jude was an unknown and relatively unimportant player in the society around him, to the women in his life, and to the universe at large. Unable to be with the woman he loved (Sue) and trapped into marriage by a woman who pretended to be pregnant and who did not love him (Arabella), Jude's fate was sealed. Arabella had no scruples (commits bigamy), Sue had too many (felt guilty for all her choices for happiness). Although Jude and Sue had some years of happiness living together, they paid for that happiness in tragic ways. Hardy's book is a rather despairing commentary on love, the institution of marriage, societal norms, and church laws, all of which could be and were twisted in this novel to bring about oppressive unhappiness. It's almost as though if you tried to choose happiness, you were doomed to fail, doomed to regret, doomed to feeling guilty about wanting to be happy in love and life. The novel also questions whether personal happiness and personal choice were really possible and whether personal fate is determined or undetermined. The novel's viewpoints challenged my ideas at the time about love, marriage and happy ever after. 

The Road Less Traveled by M.Scott Peck. The discovery of this book was life-changing for me. I've recommended it to so many people over the years. The wisdom contained within its pages is priceless. Peck was a psychiatrist and had seen and listened to a lot of patients; he subsequently wrote another book called People of the Lie, which fascinated and scared me since it dealt with people who live in the dark and shy away from the light--evil people, psychopaths, narcissists--the list is long. The Road Less Traveled is more for ordinary folk dealing with the problems and difficulties of life. As Peck clearly states 'Life is difficult'. I read it at a time of great upheaval in my own life, and it really did help to set me on a better path, because I realized that I could change, that change was possible if I took responsibility for my own life. It sounds cliched, but it's not. Peck's view is that real spiritual and intellectual growth take time, but you have to desire them. You have to choose to desire them and do the hard work required in order to achieve them. 

Change and courage

It does, doesn't it? When you think about it, change is scary. So yes, moving out of your comfort zone requires courage. Here's to all of us who are in that boat, riding the waves of change. The water can sometimes be choppy, and sometimes we don't really know where we're going. But we manage and the waters eventually become calmer. 

A new phase of my life

I’ve been thinking about how we freely change our lives, and how sometimes life forces us to change. The two are often intertwined. I’ve always been of the opinion that it’s best to make necessary changes freely, rather than be forced to make them. But not all people would agree on that. Sometimes people wait too long to make changes they should have made years previously. It’s hard to say why they waited; fear perhaps, or inertia—just going along with the flow. Sometimes people need to be told when to make a change, and for many, that’s just fine. They’re not so concerned with the why. They end up not having to deal with the angst and indecision that can accompany working toward making necessary changes freely, because angst and indecision are part of that scenario. I’ve known several people who were forced to make changes they didn’t want to make, and they were resentful about it. It would have been better to have suffered through the angst and indecision of working toward making the changes freely. But they were not those types of people. They survived the changes, but the resentment lingered. My point is that if you freely choose change, you will not resent having to make the change. You may regret the change somewhere down the road, but you won’t have resentment.

I moved to Norway over thirty years ago and changed my life dramatically. I planned the move well, so that when I arrived here, I had a job waiting for me. That was the most important factor for my relocating to Norway, having a job that was compatible with my science background. Looking back on that time, I remember the thoughts and feelings involved. Was I making the right decision? Would I be able to find a job compatible with my expertise? Would I be able to tackle a new country, culture, and language? Would I be able to travel back to NY often to visit family and friends? Would I be too dependent on my future husband for all my social interactions? And so on. I did not move to Norway for political refuge; I moved here so that my husband and I could have the opportunity to develop a long-term relationship with both of us in one place. A long-distance relationship where both parties are separated by an ocean is not an optimal experience after a while. My choice to move here made things easier for my husband, and since I did not have children, I could prioritize my husband’s priorities. I don’t regret that at all. But now that I have chosen to retire early, I want to prioritize other things, among them being able to travel to NY more frequently in order to spend time with my close friends. Life is short and we don’t have enough time to do all the things we might want to do anyway, so it’s best to prioritize as best we can and live accordingly. We cannot predict the future, nor how long our lives will be. A number of co-workers have asked me why I am retiring early, and some have wondered if I regret my decision (already?). I give them the reasons above and state unequivocally that I do not regret making the decision. I’ve had ample time since I gave notice to ‘feel my way’ forward, and it feels fine. I move into the unknown, but it’s ok. The unknown is a part of life. Sometimes you need to hop out into it, and see what happens. Retirement to me is simply a new phase of my life. I look forward to exploring it.

 

Choosing change

Weary (and wary) of change

There are at least two sorts of changes, perhaps more. The first sort is the type of change that life brings about, that you can do nothing about--innate change. We age, we grow older, we grow old. There are many changes connected to aging that we can merely observe in ourselves and others; we cannot stop the progression of time. Illness and death are part of the journey. We learn to accept this type of change, albeit grudgingly at times, mostly because there is nothing we can really do about it. At some point you realize that it's best not to think too much about it and to enjoy the days and years that are given you. Because not all people get that chance, as has become all too clear to me during the past decade. 

The other type of change is external change. It is not a natural part of human life as is innate change, but it is a part of our lives that has consequences for us. It is often a type of change that can be forced upon you by a workplace or an organization, or by events in one's personal life that you have not instigated. It can be unsettling change, in that you have to react to it in one form or another, either passively or actively. Many choose the passive route, others choose the proactive route. Regardless, this type of change will affect your life and change it irrevocably--marriage, children, divorce, a major move, a bad job, a good job, retirement. They are changes we can choose, but sometimes they are not. And it is when this type of change is forced upon us that problems can arise. 

During the past two decades or so, modern workplaces have put a tremendous amount of emphasis on the necessity for employees to be able to change (almost at a moment's notice). I remember when I took a year-long leadership course here in Oslo; the operative (Norwegian/Danish) word was 'endringsparat' (ready for change). As a leader, it was important that your employees were endringsparat. An entire module was dedicated to how to lead employees through major workplace changes, and how to deal with those employees who were resistant to change. It was an interesting module, to say the least. Discussions of major mergers came up, and our teacher took an informal poll of the class--how many had been through such a major change as a merger and felt that the outcome was successful. Only one or two people raised their hands. The majority did not, and when quizzed, told stories of fiascos and failures to communicate that torpedoed such workplace changes. There was massive resistance to the changes that ensued in the wake of the merger. What was not commented upon or discussed was the timescale involved in such major changes. How quickly do leaders expect employees to adapt to change? Mergers, for example, are such major changes that it wouldn't surprise me if it took a decade or more for employees to become used to the idea. I don't think most leaders look at this aspect--the length of time involved for employees to adapt to and to accept change. I think they should look more closely at exactly this aspect. 

It is possible for employees to become weary and wary of change. Just hearing the word 'change' can be anathema for some employees, and I think that's because they feel that they have had no say in the matter. Yet another change has been forced on them, that they are expected to accept immediately. That can only lead to conflicts and failure to communicate. I think the time window for measuring the outcome of change should be long. I think management should allow at least five to ten years for employees to adapt to major changes. But that is rarely the case. It all has to be wrapped up nicely with a pretty bow, so the package can be displayed as a 'success'. But how do you measure that success? Did you talk to your employees?

I know several leaders who are young (in their forties) and older (around sixty or in their sixties). All of them have faced situations of major change that they have had to implement or are responsible for initiating. All of them have expressed mild to strong surprise that many of their employees appear to be resistant to those changes. They don't get it, they don't understand what they've done wrong. I try to tell them that perhaps their employees are weary of change. And that some are most likely wary of change. I was, during a period of too many changes about fifteen years ago. I listened to the svada (empty words, empty phrases, meaningless talk about great ambitions for this and that) and thought 'been there, done that'. So many times I can't count. How many times can you change yourself, start over, reinvent yourself, market yourself and your dreams, and to what end? Are we all to conquer the world? Most of us are good at what we do, and that should be enough. But in today's modern workplace, it's not, at least not for many modern workplace leaders. They have to do something, they have to effect change, they have to be remembered for such things. They have to 'motivate' their employees and make them endringsparat. It borders on hysterical. I prefer the non-hysterical approach. 

Through all the years, there has been change, whether modern leaders see it or not. Workplaces change, not because of artificial changes forced on employees, but because the world around us changes. We communicate via internet and digital meetings because technology in the world has made it possible for us to do so. That changes a workplace. Emails changed workplaces for good. They also changed personal communication for good. Smart phones likewise. IT departments are large and necessary entities in most companies; just try living without your computer when it's down for two days. So changes have been implemented gradually over the years in response to the external world. It is the artificial changes, the forced and often unnecessary changes, that cause problems. Leaders who are truly interested in the wellbeing of their employees should learn to distinguish between what are necessary and what are unnecessary changes. The latter can wear down the morale and motivation of many employees, whether modern leaders like it or not. 

 

The demise of workplace loyalty

Modern leadership courses emphasize many things, but loyalty to one’s workplace is not one of them. Loyalty (my definition of it) is considered to be old-fashioned; what’s important is being able to navigate the many and continual changes that come your way as an employee. Don't become too attached to anything because it could all change tomorrow. Don't become too attached or loyal to a project, a job, or a good leader. Be ready to let go of all of it immediately, because you may very well be asked to do that. Be ready for change at all times. That is the modern workplace mantra.  

As long as employees do not resist the many changes that are foisted upon them, they are considered 'loyal' in the way that management likes. That is the modern definition of workplace loyalty. If management decides that an employee should move to a new location and start anew, it is expected that the employee do that without questioning the wisdom of their decision. Modern workplace loyalty is doing and saying what workplace leadership wants you to do and say; it is not doing and saying what is often the truth and what is often best for oneself and one’s workplace, because the truth is generally not appreciated, or rather, management does not often wish to be reminded of it, especially when it comes into conflict with the plans and strategies that management wishes to implement. Most managers are not interested in hearing your thoughts/opinions about their decisions, whether they are about your job or the workplace at large. If management decides that a merger is the best course of action for a workplace, they effectuate it even if most employees are opposed to it. That has been my experience in huge public sector workplaces. Employees must simply find a way to deal with the outcome, even if it is an obvious failure on many levels. If management decides that personnel budget cuts are the way to reduce operating costs, they effectuate them, despite the protests and complaints by the employees affected directly by them. If management decides that the remaining employees are to do the work of the employees who have been let go, they will put a spin on that decision and foist it upon the remaining employees. If productivity decreases as a result of this decision, management will not allow employees to remind them that this is a direct result of the budget cuts. Management refuses to face the truth--that it is not possible for two people to do the work of five. Modern workplaces are all about saving money ad nauseam but making sure that top leaders get the generous salaries they feel they deserve. And so on. 

Leaders would rather not have to deal with such a tiresome virtue as loyalty, with employees who want what's best for their workplace, who like their workplace, their colleagues, the camaraderie, the shared history, and the interesting projects. It's difficult for most employees to live up to the version of modern worker that most modern workplaces want. The same idea applies when discussions of open office landscapes come up; management will push through that idea despite protests from employees who know from the start how the noise and chaos of open landscapes will affect their productivity. They are not listened to. They are expected to be sheep; just follow management's lead and accept the consequences. If the decision proves to be a huge mistake, they'll find a way to gloss over it so that it is never defined as a mistake. Ergo, it will not be possible to learn from mistakes because there aren't any. 

I don’t understand workplaces that refuse to listen to the good advice and ideas of their employees who have worked there for many years, who know the history of their workplaces and the risks involved in going down a particular path. It’s almost as though the longer you work in one place, the more risk you pose to the implementation of the plans and strategies of management, because they know that long-term employees perhaps cannot adapt or might not want to adapt as readily as short-term employees. They are too loyal to the old way of doing things. I can understand this from management’s point of view, but it’s disconcerting to realize that history, experience, and general knowledge are not valued in the same way as they once were. It’s disconcerting to watch a workplace under new management make the same mistakes as were made ten years ago under an older management. It’s disconcerting to know that they did this because they did not want to listen to the long-term employees. It's disconcerting to watch how long-term employees are pushed aside or frozen out in favor of the younger ones who are more malleable. Eventually, the longer you stay in one workplace out of a misguided sense of loyalty, the less valuable you are to that workplace. That is the definition of a modern workplace. It is no wonder that younger people are less ‘loyal’ in the old-fashioned sense of the word. Why hang around when your ideas and advice are not valued? Many of them shift jobs without compunction after five or seven years. I’ve come to see that as a good thing. I started my career with that attitude, because I felt that at the seven-year mark, one perhaps needed a change of venue. It was important to move on in order to grow and develop. But that was a different era when loyalty between employer and employee was a two-way street. Employers may not have wanted you to leave, and they did their utmost to keep you. That is no longer true. But then I moved to a small country with considerably less career opportunities, and suddenly I had to face the reality that it wouldn’t be easy to shift jobs the way I might have been able to do had I stayed in my own country. So I stayed in one place, in one department, at one hospital. I pursued a doctoral degree, did a postdoc, and became a scientist, all at the same workplace. Many of my colleagues have been the same people for the past thirty years. I grew to like that for the most part—the sense of familiarity and shared history. Thirty years went by. But during the past ten to fifteen years, much has changed, perhaps not unexpectedly. The sense of familiarity and shared history are gone. They have been replaced by a feeling that the sands are constantly shifting under one’s feet. Employees come and go. Decisions are made, work groups established to implement them, and then they are abandoned for reasons that are unclear. Few people seem to complain about the waste of time and effort involved in this type of decision-making, not to mention the huge costs involved. Everything has become very fluid and relative. It often feels like the foundations are no longer strong, or that they are now being built upon shifting sands rather than on solid ground. Many long-term employees have adapted to multiple and continuous changes, but it took time, probably much longer than management preferred. The result however is that long-term employees stand alone. They feel alone and perhaps abandoned. They feel devalued and useless to some extent. The sense of shared history is gone. The sense of pulling together for a real and important goal is gone. It’s a strange feeling. I haven’t decided yet whether I like it, but that’s not what’s important. What’s important is that management likes this way of doing things.

Adjusting to continuous change

This coming year promises a good number of changes in my workplace. Most of them will be physical, in the sense that they involve physically moving several research groups and equipment from one floor to another floor in our building. That was decided a while ago, but as always, it takes a while for changes to be effectuated. The physical move will happen in March. Those research groups remaining behind will be sharing lab space with the routine functions and services in my department; those functions and services need more room, so the next major change and adjustment will involve how we share that space, how we discuss our needs amicably and find a solution that works for everyone. The reality however is that there is not nearly enough space for everyone, so some people are bound to be less satisfied than others with the agreed-upon solution.

Even if you decided to never actively adapt and change, to remain 'the same as you always were', you would never achieve that. Nothing stands still; all aspects of life and of work life change and will force themselves upon you. That is the nature of life. We are constantly adjusting to change, and it is best to stay open to change rather than fight it. The way research was done thirty years ago and the way it is done now are quite different. Thirty years ago it seemed as though everything about academic research science was more stable; now it seems more like big business that changes strategy every two to three years in order to maximize profits. When the daily stability of research life disappeared, it was difficult to adjust to that. After all, we were brought up on the idea that research needed stability, constancy, in order to thrive. In the 1990s, it was possible to work on one research project for ten years; you could get funding for one topic, e.g. apoptosis and cancer, and you had the time to experiment and to try new research plans. That is harder, if not impossible, nowadays; scientists change their research directions every three or four years in order to follow the trends of funding. Just in the cancer field alone, molecular genetics and genomics were trendy in the 1990s, as was apoptosis and cell death generally, then in the 2000s came cellular senescence, inflammation and its role in cancer, the search for cures for breast and prostate cancers, and the focus on many new and exciting techniques/technologies like microarray gene expression, RNA interference, knockout mice, and CRISPR. Immunotherapy to treat cancers has dominated research science for the past five or so years. So if you want funding and a career in academic science, you follow the current trends. That is what the younger scientists have learned; some of the older ones still fight against this reality.

It was easier to understand your role in a lab setting years ago--as a technician, PhD student, or postdoc. You knew you could rely on a group leader to guide you, and that group leader was often your mentor if you were a PhD student or postdoc. There were not multiple mentors as there are now. Your PhD years were not micromanaged by universities the way they are now. Thirty years ago the idea that you could be the lone scientist in the lab was encouraged; nowadays it is discouraged in favour of working as a team. If you want to work as an individual rather than in a team, if you want to promote and try out your own ideas, you are considered to be a non-team player, and that is anathema at present. The infrastructure of research science has also changed considerably; we share our workdays with IT personnel, administrators, middle-managers, accountants, among others. They were more behind the scenes thirty years ago. You won't get very far these days without the infrastructure of science. If you need lab consumables, you must deal with administrators and accounting people, because you are no longer allowed to order items on your own. You are no longer allowed to download any computer programs on your own; that is taken care of for you by the IT department, and the power they have to deny or approve specific programs can determine what may or may not get done in a research project.  

Academic science is big business now, with huge grant awards going to a small number of recipients. Those recipients often lead large research groups, e.g. centers of excellence. These large groups collaborate at the national and international levels with other large groups. Small research groups (four or five people) without national and international collaborators are not funded and eventually die away. That is the current strategy. If you don't like big business, you won't enjoy academic research science now. If you're young and you know this, the best thing you can do is to adjust your life accordingly--find another arena in which to use your talents and to shine. 

Finding our true direction

Sometimes in the waves of change we find our true direction.
--Unknown

I saw this quote recently and it struck a chord in me. During the past decade, I've been witness to more changes in my workplace than occurred during the first twenty years I've worked there. The biggest change was the merger of four separate hospitals with different work cultures into one large mega-hospital. After ten years, it is clear to most people that we may be one hospital, but that the cultures often remain as they were, with some exceptions in some departments. People often hold fast to what they know. It's safer that way.

But we know too that moving out of our comfort zones is often very good for us. We may be dragged out of our comfort zones kicking and screaming, or we may willingly leave them. Either way, we move into an unknown sphere, one that may test us, challenge us, and make us uncomfortable. And that's the point of change. It should make us uncomfortable. Feeling insecure, a bit fearful, somewhat anxious, are all parts of change. We don't want to feel those feelings, but we cannot grow or progress without them. I have discovered that situations involving change often provide answers to problems that I would not have otherwise come upon, and that is because they upend our sense of order, of what we perceive to be the right way of doing something. They force us to consider new and hitherto untested and not previously thought of ways of doing something. We find new solutions to old problems, or new solutions to problems in which we have become stuck. Or we find that we are not the people we thought we were, which should perhaps be obvious, but often is not. Life is about change, but that change is often gradual, so that we don't notice the changes that are happening to us or to those around us. We are not the same people now as we were at twenty, thirty, or forty, even if we like to think that we are. We were once single, then married, then parents. We were once students, then inexperienced employees, then managers, and then experienced employees. Some are now retirees. We may have been politically liberal as young adults, but are now more politically conservative as older adults. The point is that we are always changing and growing. Those people who resent that are often those who have a hard time adjusting to anything that threatens their status quo. The status quo can differ from person to person, but it would be safe to say that each of us can feel threatened by some change at some level, especially if that change touches some deep core part of us, a part of us that perhaps reminds us of unpleasant experiences in childhood.

After many years in the workforce, after many years of working in the lab, I now have a more administrative position in an area that makes use of my scientific background, but that is a new area for me intellectually. My current boss suggested me for this position two years ago, and I said yes to it without really knowing what it would lead to. To my surprise, I found that not only do I have aptitude for this type of work, but that I really enjoy it. I enjoy developing strategies and plans for how to create and integrate specific functions into the daily workings of a department. I enjoy interacting with leaders and with the people working on the floor who are the ones that understand the 'guts' of the organization. I can lead meetings or just participate in them; either way, I've found that I have ideas to contribute that actually get listened to. Not all of them make their way into policies in my department, but I've nevertheless contributed them. I've learned the value of diplomacy (listening to and acknowledging the validity of arguments from two or more 'sides') and of making time to listen to others (something I've been good at before, which is another aptitude that comes in handy). I can summarize meetings quickly and write a meeting report that is concise and to the point. I see the value of the dissemination of information; without that, employees grumble and complain, which will only lead to demoralization and dissatisfaction. I have drawn on my scientific background when it comes to following through on plans; scientific experiments rely on follow-through and the summing-up of the observations you've made. You must organize the data you have into a written and/or oral presentation that can be conveyed to a wider audience. After thirty years of doing that as a scientist, I can do the same in my role as coordinator. In fact, I would say that it is that experience alone that has facilitated my ability to be a coordinator.

I think I was blindsided by changes in the workplace ten or fifteen years ago, because there were too many changes at the same time, none of which were properly explained to us. The visions and strategies involved in the changes were not conveyed properly to us. Was the merger of four hospitals into one done to save money, to concentrate expertise, or to make the running of the hospital more effective? Because the outcome of the merger, according to most employees, has not led to more effectiveness or to concentration of expertise. Most employees would say that the merger has only led to higher costs, to more bureaucracy and an unnecessary increase in levels of management, and to a blurring of roles that has confused employees who wonder what is really expected of them. I would wager that these outcomes were not the intention at the outset, but they are now the reality. So it is possible that these changes were not properly planned or executed, or that the budget that should have been in place to facilitate the changes, was too small.

I am no longer afraid of change. I look forward to it now, because I know that whatever is thrown at me, I can do something with it. I am no longer uncomfortable with moving out of my comfort zone, although I do miss the comfort zone at times. I see how far I've come in the space of two years, and I am glad that I said yes to taking on a new role. Sometimes in the waves of change we really do find our true direction.

Another post about leadership and new challenges

I have taken on a new role at work, one that's moved me out of my comfort zone into a more fast-paced daily existence. The fact that it happened at all is due to a new department leader who wanted to shake things up a bit, and she's done just that. She's given chances to new (untested) people like me rather than just settling for the old guard. I'm glad she's done that, because I was ready to step up to the plate, and I have. This past year has been a bit of a whirlwind in terms of contributing to all of the activities that are a part of my new job. I really enjoy contributing to building something new and to changing how things have been done. The tasks seem daunting at times, and sometimes I wonder what co-workers think when they're presented with the new ways of doing things. Are they skeptical or will they embrace change? I see that many of them are glad for the changes--they embrace them. Giving presentations on short notice, writing grant applications on short notice, leading meetings, and speaking up more--new challenges. I'm happy that I've learned to open my mouth more and express my opinions. The role requires meeting and talking to people, those I know and those I don't. It means meeting people where they are--I travel to meet them because I know that talking to them is valuable--for me and for my organization. It requires taking the reins and starting conversations, asking people for advice and giving it when asked. It requires problem solving, and I've realized that I genuinely enjoy problem solving; I finally understand that about myself--that I'm good at it. I like the puzzle aspect of it--how to fit the pieces together so that we get the results we want without alienating employees. Because no one wins when employees feel alienated. There is discussion and more discussion, but there is also taking the risk of making a decision that will affect employees' work lives. But that's ok, because when I look at my department leader, I realize that she is doing just that, taking the risk of making a decision without knowing for sure that it is the best decision to make. But it may be the right one--she and we cannot always know the outcome. Those are the leaders I will follow, because they do not require unquestioning loyalty, nor do they disrespect their employees. They can agree to disagree if necessary. But they do require their employees to move out of their comfort zone and to take responsibility. That's a leadership language I can speak and understand.

Reflections on balance and change and on the town where I grew up

It’s been a while since I’ve written a post for this blog. That’s because I’ve been traveling. I was in New York again recently to attend a wedding and to deal with certain issues connected to my brother’s death. I did a lot of walking on this trip, and had a lot of time to reflect on being there and on my life in general. These are some of my recent observations and reflections, most of them having to do with the importance of having balance in one’s life. My life now is about achieving balance.

There is a time for sadness and a time for happiness. My brother’s sudden and untimely death in February was followed by the happiness of a May wedding. I don’t think I have ever enjoyed a wedding as much as I did this one. Perhaps because I needed something happy to round out the sadness I have been feeling since February. Or perhaps because this wedding really was something different—a lot of fun. Or perhaps both. Thanks and best wishes go to Andrea and Mike who love each other and are happy to share their happiness with us.  

An exceptionally warm spring in New York balanced out the cold winter it experienced. I was lucky enough to experience that warmth in New York on this trip. There is nothing like sunlight and warmth to compensate for the darkness and cold of winter, and that is true no matter where you live.

As always, when I return to the town where I grew up, Tarrytown, I realize how beautiful it is and how privileged I was to grow up there. I remember train rides into Manhattan when I was a young adult, and some of the rundown ugly areas through which the train passed. I always knew that I could return to the loveliness of my hometown.

I always remember my parents and growing up in our house when I am in Tarrytown. Yet for each year that passes, I experience so much that is new, and these experiences eventually become joyful memories. I walk around there now and experience the town as an adult, far removed from my childhood and teenage years. I will never forget my parents or my growing up, but I have new memories now that lessen the sorrow of the old, the reminders that my parents are gone and with them the life that was. The bittersweet memories of my early years have been balanced out by new and happy experiences in this lovely town. I have integrated both into the person I am now. Sadness and happiness coexist within me—side by side.

I know my way around Tarrytown, that was clear to me on this trip—the names of the streets, where to make a right or left turn if one is driving, where to find a parking space, and where to take a short cut when walking or driving. I spent one day while I was there just walking around the town, from my hotel on Route 119 down to the railroad station and then up again to Broadway through the different residential streets. I walked further on to Sleepy Hollow (formerly North Tarrytown) and all the way to the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery, at which point I turned around and headed back to the hotel. I must have walked at least eight miles that day. On my way back, I visited the Warner Library and read a few newspapers in the reference room. I also took some photos for the book I am writing about growing up in Tarrytown. In the lobby, I met a Maryknoll priest who was taking photos for a book he is writing about growing up in Tarrytown. It was nice to meet a fellow wanderer. I also stopped at the Pastry Chef and enjoyed some biscotti and a cappuccino. The Pastry Chef is where my parents always bought the excellent cakes (lemon sponge cake comes to mind) that we had for the special occasions in our lives—graduations, birthdays, holidays.

I have changed, yet parts of me remain the same and will always do so. Much like Tarrytown itself. Tarrytown has changed, and yet it remains the same as I remember it from growing up in many ways. It struck me that it truly is a little slice of Americana, to be able to walk around this town and see shops and buildings that existed when I was a child, and probably long before I was born as well. And as my sister commented, the places where we hung out as teenagers are still very much the same. She and I drove around Philipse Manor and Sleepy Hollow Manor, the Lakes, and to Rockwood, where we walked for a while like we did when we were teenagers. Rockwood is still a montage of sprawling hills and flat meadows, untamed vegetation and growth, lovely old trees, gorgeous views of the Hudson River, and a sense of wildness that never leaves it. The nature of Rockwood exists for itself; it is not under man’s control and I like that. Being there frees the heart and soul. The trees are old and beautiful, and speak of a time that existed long before we were born. I like that feeling of mystery, of the unknown.

Happy 2015!

A new year upon us, with hopefully more opportunities to 'find the strength to accept what we cannot change, the courage to change the things we can, and the wisdom to tell the difference'. I've modified the Serenity prayer written by Reinhold Niebuhr, which is a powerful little prayer. It is finding the wisdom to 'see' the difference that is the most difficult. Often we bang our heads against the wall of a problem that can never be resolved and waste precious years doing so. Other times we don't see the golden opportunities staring us right in the face for how to solve a problem that can be solved. Often the changes that most need to be made are within ourselves. We cannot change others. It's been said countless numbers of times, but it's true. Change starts with you. I've been thinking about change as it pertains to my own life, and have made some changes that I'll share with you as 2015 progresses. I've realized that taking calculated risks is what makes life interesting, likewise having a sense of adventure. And sometimes opportunities appear for helping you to change your life that can only be divinely-inspired. So here's to the new year, to positive change, to having faith, to serenity and to real peace. I wish that for everyone I know and love, and for the world too.

And for those of you who would like to read Niebuhr's prayer in its entirety, here it is:

God, give me grace to accept with serenity

the things that cannot be changed,

Courage to change the things

which should be changed,

and the Wisdom to distinguish

the one from the other.

Living one day at a time,

Enjoying one moment at a time,

Accepting hardship as a pathway to peace,

Taking, as Jesus did,

This sinful world as it is,

Not as I would have it,

Trusting that You will make all things right,

If I surrender to Your will,

So that I may be reasonably happy in this life,

And supremely happy with You forever in the next.

Amen.

The value of being unreasonable

Of all the quotes about change that I posted yesterday, Shaw’s “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man” stuck with me the most, although the others certainly made a memorable impression. I love quotes that get me thinking. This one made me think about how I face and have faced the world and my workplace during the past few years. I don’t think I’ve been very reasonable. I have not always tackled the changes around me, perhaps because there were too many of them to deal with all at one time. I don’t adapt immediately to anything, but I can adapt over time, provided I can see the value in making the change. I don’t always see the value of doing so. Most changes have to do with the way research is done now; the new focus is on getting researchers to accept a research world that is defined by large research groups and extensive national and international group collaborations. A far cry from the research world of twenty years ago, where working in small groups, often alone, was the norm, at least in the environments where I worked. At that time, decisions were often made alone with perhaps some input and advice along the way; now, there are several meetings with multiple individuals to discuss specific issues before a decision is made concerning them. This new approach shifts responsibility for decisions from one person to several persons, which is advantageous in some respects; I can see the value in this approach. However, the loss of autonomy as an independent creative researcher and the dilution of responsibility are two major concerns that could have negative repercussions. It is easier to adapt to change, to fit in and to stop challenging, rather than to stand out or stand alone, to protest, or to challenge the voices of reason telling you to be reasonable. Or better yet, to be realistic. It remains to be seen whether the current trends and approaches will lead to increased productivity and effectiveness (the current definition of progress) or if unreasonableness is the better approach to ensure progress, as Shaw apparently believed. 

Some great quotes about change

·         You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take. -Wayne Gretzy

·         If we don't change, we don't grow. If we don't grow, we aren't really living. -Gail Sheehy

·         Change before you have to. -Jack Welch

·         By changing nothing, nothing changes. -Tony Robbins

·         If you do what you’ve always done, you’ll get what you’ve always gotten. -Tony Robbins

·         Your life does not get better by chance, it gets better by change. –Jim Rohn

·         When in doubt, choose change. -Lily Leung

·         In a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks. -Warren Buffett

·         Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore. -Andre Gide

·         Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. - Mark Twain

·         I can accept failure, everyone fails at something. But I can’t accept not trying. –Michael Jordan

·         The best thing you can do is the right thing; the next best thing you can do is the wrong thing; the worst thing you can do is nothing. -Theodore Roosevelt

·         The greatest mistake you can make in life is to be continually fearing you will make one. –Elbert Hubbard

·         As soon as anyone starts telling you to be “realistic,” cross that person off your invitation list. –John Eliot

·         God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. -Reinhold Niebuhr

·         The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -George Bernard Shaw

·         Don’t say you don’t have enough time. You have exactly the same number of hours per day that were given to Helen Keller, Pasteur, Michelangelo, Mother Teresa, Leonardo da Vinci, Thomas Jefferson, and Albert Einstein. –Life’s Little Instruction Book

·         Never too old, never too bad, never too late, never too sick to start from scratch once again. -Bikram Choudhury.

·         Someone was hurt before you, wronged before you, hungry before you, frightened before you, beaten before you, humiliated before you, raped before you… yet, someone survived… You can do anything you choose to do. –Maya Angelou

Reflections on change

If we are honest with ourselves, we know that dealing with changes that are thrown at us is a difficult task, especially in a work situation, but also in our personal lives. Scores of self-help books have been written on the subject of how to deal with change, how to start anew, how to let go of the past, how to let go of situations that we have outgrown, how to face the future, how to start today, how to think positively about change, how to rearrange our mindsets. The irony of life is that we change whether we want to or not. We can try to resist change, block it, ignore it, run from it, or drown it out. It doesn’t matter what we do; change will find us. We look in the mirror and find the subtle changes that tell us that we are getting older. We watch our parents grow old and pass away. We watch our children grow up, move away, and start their own lives and families. We cannot prevent any of it. We cannot make time stand still. No matter what we do or say, life goes on, people move on, careers end, and perhaps throughout all of the inevitable changes, a sense of humor is our saving grace. Or reading the words of others who have thought about and reflected upon the same things. At every point in our lives, we need inspiration, support, positive refills, and encouragement. It is an unfortunate misconception that adults do not need these things. I am often told that children and young adults need them more. And that may be true, but as adults, we still need to be inspired and encouraged. If we have faith in some higher power, something outside ourselves, if we belong to a church or to a spiritual society, we at least can nurture a lifeline to that part of ourselves that rears its head from time to time in an effort to tell us how things are going inside of us, in our hearts and souls. If we don’t have that, there are many books that offer inspiration and encouragement for many of the problems we face.

I often remind myself when I feel stuck in a rut, that some of the best things that ever happened in my own life, happened simply because I changed my life, after much reflection, confusion, disorientation and sometimes anger and depression. I left a painful relationship when I was in my twenties and chose to be alone rather than live a lie. I could have stayed and been miserable. I left a ‘safe’ job in my twenties (a unionized research technician job with great benefits that my father told me to keep) and chose to work in a non-unionized research position, one that allowed me to travel to international conferences, for example, Cambridge England, where I met my husband. I could have stayed in my safe job and refused to move on. But then I would never have met my husband or subsequently completed my PhD. I wasn’t focused on looking for a new relationship at the time I met my husband; I was in fact ready to leave my job in Manhattan after working there seven years, and was interviewing for positions around the USA when I met him in England. Meeting him resulted in my leaving my birth country in my early thirties and moving abroad in order to give that relationship a chance, learning a new language, and embracing a new culture, workplace and degree program. I was not raised in a household that thrived on change. My parents were good solid people, but their lives (and to some extent ours when we were younger) were defined by my father’s illnesses and job problems. Would they have loved to have traveled together to Italy and England when he retired? Of course. But by the time they reached the point when they could have done that, other realities took over their lives. My father died young, at sixty-seven. Neither he nor my mother got the chance to do many of the things their children have done. Their lives became more defined by fear as they grew older, mostly due to my father’s illnesses—afraid to travel, afraid to upset the daily routines, afraid to change the daily routines. That is perhaps the way of life, that each new generation does more and dares more than the previous generation. It’s hard to say. The point is that it is best to be proactive about change, to see the future and to at least try to adjust to what is coming. We cannot know the future, we can only live now, but I still think it best to be open to change and to actually choose it, instead of having it forced upon you. 

Thinking about the future, reflecting on the past

Thinking about the future, reflecting on the past, and trying to live in the moment--the unending challenge. I try to make sense of past events, to learn from them, and to use whatever little wisdom I gain to plan for the future. I suppose everyone does this. It’s probably part of getting older, because of course the older we get, the more ‘past’ there is behind us for us to reflect upon. I register that I have changed a lot, just within the past several years. Unsettling workplace events and family experiences impact on how one wants to live in the present and plan for the future. I have finally learned to let go of how I wanted things to be and to accept how they actually are. My work life was one of those things I thought I had a firm grasp on, but it changed shape as I held it and became difficult to hold in one place—like a squirming child. The work world has changed dramatically and for a while the difficulty was just to hang on to the speeding car as it careened forward. Now the car has either slowed or I have mastered running faster to keep up. I definitely know that I absorb information and adjust to change much faster now than I ever did before. And since that seems to be the goal of modern workplaces—to get employees to adjust to constant change--I guess the change is a positive one. But it is not my full-time job that has produced that change, despite the constant pressure to change; it is my consultant work for the UiO science library and for Liivmedia that have had the greatest effect upon me. If I have ‘broadened my horizons’ and changed my approach, it is because I reached out in a whole new direction when I decided to work for both of them, and found a whole new arena in which to enjoy science. Following the different scientific social media and internet sites, reading, digesting, absorbing and commenting on articles I read in all areas of science has been immensely freeing and exhilarating. I don’t want to just read about what goes on in the field of cancer research anymore; I find reading about astrophysics, the universe, global warming, nutrition, and bee colony collapse disorder just as interesting. I have concluded after much reflection on past decisions that I have no regrets that I pursued a career in science. But I have understood that I don’t have to be just a research scientist to enjoy science or even to work in science. There are many different careers that one can have that utilize a science background—science communication, science journalism, journal editor, patent law, social media, consultant. Even though I will likely end my work life as a research scientist, it heartens me to know that I have contributed successfully as a consultant as well. That’s what I would tell young people these days; don’t limit your options. Keep all doors open. It makes for a more dynamic career and an adventurous future.

Jumping hurdles

It’s been a while since I last wrote for my blog; I have been very busy with work-related things. My work life has changed yet again, perhaps for the better. Time will tell. I am now part of a large research group that has a new leader and he seems to be up for the job. He has the qualities needed to run a research group, and for now, that’s all I care about. My workplace remains a study in transition; I doubt the dust will settle any time soon. Several of my friends and colleagues are now dealing with the depression and uncertainty that haunted my life up until the end of 2011. It’s their turn now. I let go, gave in, and resigned myself to constant change, change for change’s sake, to frustration, to disappointment, to bad behavior. In the end, you get used to change and all its accoutrements. What seemed like such an impossible hurdle to overcome, dealing with constant change, has at least become a hurdle of lower height. It is possible to jump it at times without falling. It is even possible sometimes to soar over it; that’s happened at least a few times since the new year started. The associated hurdles of questionable leadership and boredom are harder to soar over, but I will. I no longer look at work in the same way anymore though; it’s a job, albeit well-paying and interesting, but a job nonetheless, and when it’s time to go home, I close the door on it—a big change for me. I doubt I will go in reverse and become the workaholic I once was. It’s hard to let go of an identity that was comfortable, one that defined me for many years. It’s finding a new identity that’s the tough challenge now; I alternate between scientist and writer/photographer. Both make equal claims on my time now. And I let them. Because in truth, I want to let them. I want both of them in my life. I no longer choose one at the expense of the other. I don’t want to give up my creative interests, and if I give up the time needed to pursue them, I will be unhappy, that I know.

Experimenting with the workplace

I have written a lot of posts about the modern-day workplace over the past year and a half in an attempt to understand my own workplace and all the changes that have occurred there during this period of time. I follow the news in both the USA and Norway and whenever there is news about what is going on in modern workplaces, I sit up and take notice. It interests me almost as much as science news. I’m not necessarily talking about business news in general; more about organizational behavior in businesses. Why do companies behave as they do toward their employees? What are the different management philosophies that dominate workplaces and how do they affect employees? Why did they arise in the first place? Who is responsible for their implementation in the workplace? When did modern workplaces become research laboratories? By that I mean, when did it become kosher to ‘experiment’ on employees by foisting different trendy management philosophies on them? Because it is an experiment to do this to a workplace—to force a workplace to adopt new strategies and ways of managing people in the name of cost-effectiveness, productivity and innovation. And before one experiment is finished, before data can be analyzed and conclusions drawn, another experiment is undertaken in the name of some other wonderful ideal that is usually impossible to live up to. It is impossible to draw any conclusion whatsoever without careful study and analysis of data that has been carefully collected from carefully-designed experiments. Do any of the workplace experiments meet the stringent criteria required for performing such experiments? I sincerely doubt it, based on what I have been witness to in my own workplace.

I get the impression that this type of ‘experimental’ approach occurs in the classroom as well. Education seems to have been invaded by the same types of people who are responsible for the major changes in the workplace. There seems to be an inordinate amount of experimentation in the classroom, whether in grammar schools or high schools. I don’t get it. What are the experiments trying to prove? I have listened to frustrated parents talk about their children, who are now young adults and who are struggling to find meaning in their lives. These are children who grew up in the 1990s and during the early part of this century, who were told that they could plan their own curriculum in schools, choose their own course of study, and so forth. What they weren’t told was how they were to follow that self-chosen road to its end. They weren’t taught discipline and focus and the value of hard work and homework; they weren’t told about failing and rising again after failing. They were only told to believe in themselves. Some of them do, but many of them don’t. It’s a vague concept for a child to ‘believe’ in himself or herself. When you’re young, you don’t think that way. You think rather—‘I’m scared to give this talk in front of the class. I don’t want to be the center of attention or the butt of the jokes or the nerd’. But there’s often no one to talk to about these things. And you would much rather get concrete help on how to talk in front of the class than hear an adult tell you to ‘just believe in yourself and it will all work out’. That may be true, that it usually does work out. But as adults, we are responsible for training the young, not leaving them to their own devices. I find it ironic that adult workplaces are micromanaged to the n^th degree, whereas children’s (public) schools are not, or haven’t been up to this point. The teachers may be micromanaged, yes, and forced to fill out a myriad of reports; the children are given a lot of ‘freedom’. Discipline is discouraged, homework likewise; teachers who come down hard on students are reprimanded. It’s a very different world than the one I grew up in, and I don’t really understand it. The same is true about the modern workplace—it is not the workplace I cut my teeth on, and I am spending a fair amount of time trying to figure out when the paradigm shift occurred, when the rug got pulled out from under our feet, and how it all changed when no one was looking. The values and ethics I grew up with that I expected would be valued in the workplace, are not necessarily valued as much as I thought they would be. Loyalty, discipline, structure, focus, hard work—I know they are appreciated, but not in the same way as in my parents’ generation. But when I started out in the work world over thirty years ago, they were still highly appreciated. It is amazing how much can change in the space of ten or twenty years. I suppose when I look at it all objectively, I cannot really be surprised. Change is part and parcel of life, including work life. Perhaps it has been rather naive to expect it to remain the same, especially when everything else around us changes continually. 

Be careful what you wish for

Whenever I look at the statistics for the blog posts I’ve written, I find that posts about modern workplaces are among the most popular. I guess this shouldn’t surprise me, because we spend a good portion of our lives in our workplaces, so it’s not strange that we want to both understand and feel a part of them. I’ve spoken to many different people lately, both here in Norway and in the USA, and the thoughts, complaints, and experiences they share mirror my own. There have been huge changes in our workplaces just during the past ten years. It seems to me as though they have happened gradually, but the overall effect has been jarring. And if I am honest, I know that with each change that occurs in my own workplace, I am pushed out of my comfort zone yet again. The time allotted for engaging in and experiencing a new comfort zone gets shorter and shorter. The idea I suppose is that we’re not supposed to ‘get comfortable’—the new way of thinking is that it’s bad for productivity and efficiency. Modern workplaces are about change—change at any cost, change for change’s sake, change for the sake of modernization, change to meet the needs of the future, change to improve the quality of workplace life for employees, change to deal with an aging employee population—there may be many reasons for change. After having been pushed and prodded for the past several years, I am finally awake to what is going on around me, and I find that I am beginning to get some kind of overview, a bird’s eye view as it were, on the whole thing. But I am a long way from understanding it.

What I can surmise from all the changes is that many of them are about control—controlling huge organizations, be they universities, hospitals, corporations—it doesn’t matter. The growth of administration to effect this control has led to micromanagement and dissection of all that we took for granted before, all that functioned without us really knowing how or why. And since it functioned, we really didn’t have to know how or why it did. We trusted that this or that particular system (ordering, accounting, invoicing, archiving) was run by people who knew what they were doing, just as we knew what we were doing in our own spheres. It was fine to ‘take each other for granted’, respect each other’s differences, and go on about our daily work lives. Since the ultra-business people with their new management trends have taken over, we are forced to acknowledge their presence, forced to interact with them on a daily basis. They want us to know they are there—not that they are there to serve us; rather that we are there to serve them. They want to be acknowledged for all they do and they want us to know that they are in charge. So now we know. Now we know the answer to the old joke—how many people does it take to screw in a light bulb? How many people does it take to order a computer, or three items needed for work, or to create an invoice, or to create and fill out a work order so that eventual work can be planned? An easy answer is now six or more people, if you’re lucky. Administration grows exponentially. I’m guessing that the jobs of the future are in business administration. Young people should take notice.

Many of the changes are also about creating a lack of accountability. What do I mean by this? You can no longer relate personally to one individual who might be able to help you. The impersonal shield as I call it goes up the minute you ask to speak to one person who might know the answer to your question. You must rather deal with six or more people whose names you will never remember. And that’s the point. Or if you get an email from one of the six, it is with a cc: to the other five, so that you will never know with certainty that the person who wrote to you is the person you should deal with in the future. In this way, no one person is accountable; no one person can be blamed if a problem should arise. But this also means that no one person can receive the honor for a job well-done. They must all share it communally, like it and keep quiet if they don’t.

This lack of accountability is also part of what I call the dilution effect. Call it spreading out the blame, the praise, the responsibility, the actual job tasks—whatever may be involved. No one person can be responsible for one specific job anymore—that would be tantamount to giving full control to one individual, and that cannot be tolerated in modern workplaces, because that would give one person autonomy and a sense of well-being. So the job is diluted out, which leads to a thinning-out of its effectiveness, much like what happens if you dilute the concentration of a medicine that might help you—if it’s too dilute, it loses its effectiveness. I don’t blame the people who sit in these positions—they are told what to do by their superiors. But it’s a sorry state of affairs we’ve reached when high levels of competence and expertise are no longer encouraged. What’s rather encouraged is team-playing , sharing the expertise and diluting out one’s competence and accepting that it should be this way. What happens to a company or to a society when competence is diluted out in this way? Can we trust that teams of people with limited information about their individual jobs can fly, drive or manage the planes, trains, or companies of the future, respectively? Personally, I want to fly in a plane that I know is in the hands of fully-competent individuals, so that if something happened to two of the three pilots, the remaining one would be fully-competent to tackle the situation alone. Ditto for a train. Ditto for a company.  

What is our role in creating the current situation? I wonder. The old adage ‘be careful what you wish for, you might get it’ comes to mind. Have we wished for some of this? I think the answer is yes. I think unwittingly, every time we said that we wished there was a more defined system for this or that, every time we worshipped on the altars of productivity and efficiency, every time we wanted to give up some autonomy because it was too tiring to think or do for ourselves---we were wishing for someone to come along and take control for us. Call it a collective wishing. We may have bought into the business philosophies that talked about how much more effective everything would be after a huge merger. We wished for that effectiveness. It seemed like a real solution, even when we were already productive—we wanted more. But nothing that gets to be the size of a bloated whale or a huge lumbering dinosaur can be effective. Bigger is not always better. Is it always wanting more, better, bigger that will destroy us? Or turn us into bloated whales and lumbering dinosaurs? We are not meeting the needs of the future in this format, that’s for sure. 

Musings about change and depression

Nearly a year has gone by since I began writing this blog. I began writing it to help me deal with the many changes that were occurring in my workplace, among other things. The changes themselves would have been difficult enough to deal with in my home country (USA), but the fact that they happened here in Norway made them even tougher. That is because it has been nearly impossible to ‘crack the code’ in terms of understanding how my workplace functions, what leaders want (or don’t want), how to get ahead, how to ‘get around’ some of the ancient rules that govern it, and so forth. It has made me feel somewhat better to know that many Norwegians in my workplace haven’t been able to make sense of the changes either. Cold comfort, but comfort nonetheless. Because unless you’ve lived in another country for a number of years, you have no idea of what can happen to you and your sense of judgment in a different culture. No matter what happens, you will always question yourself and your sense of judgment first when things don’t go as planned. Did I interpret this wrong, was I to blame, did I misunderstand the other person or the conclusions from a meeting, and so on. I have spent many years trying to fit in ‘career-wise’, trying to understand the Scandinavian corporate/business/academic mentality, doing my best, giving my all, in the quest to do a great job and to succeed as a research scientist. It has not been easy. It would not have been easy anywhere else either, but it was doubly hard here to succeed in any way because of the extra effort that had to go into trying to figure out the system. I have not been fortunate enough to have had mentors or sponsors. My husband has been a wonderful support system but he has also had difficulties of his own trying to figure out his workplace (we now work for the same hospital conglomerate, just in different locations of the city).

During the past year I have written a lot about my work life in an attempt to understand what happened to my workplace and by extension, to me and my colleagues during that time. The past three to four years have been transition years involving a lot of reorganization and restructuring associated with a huge merger of four major city hospitals, and when the dust settled, it was time to start the process over again since the powers that be who organized the first restructuring were not satisfied. And so it goes. I’ve written about colleagues who have had difficulty adjusting to all the changes; I’ve written about my own struggles adjusting to so many changes. Not all the changes have affected us directly, but even if they have not, they affect workplace morale generally, because budgets have been cut, the quality of patient care is always being questioned, research grant support has been reduced, and there is a lot of talk about the good old days when there was more money available and less bureaucracy and administration. But there is no point in talking about the old days. They are gone. There is much more bureaucratic control now, and a hierarchy of leadership that did not exist before. Is it a better system? Only time will tell. If it works out, it will be because employees made a concerted effort to make it work. There is no guarantee that it will work out, however, and that is the big gamble. The politicians who decided on this huge merger can be voted out, and the new ones who come in can in principle decide to reverse some of what has happened if they don’t like what they see. Plus there is always something new on the horizon, some new social trend or policy that can be implemented so that the legacies of different politicians will be ensured. In the meantime, huge social experiments go unremarked. I wonder if there are sociologists studying the effects of huge mergers on employees. I am waiting for the data from those studies. But so far, I haven’t heard of any such studies.  

 

Massive changes can make workers unhappy and even depressed, especially when they do not really understand what is happening around them. To be fair, despite considerable effort to keep employees informed, it is nearly impossible for a workplace to prepare them for all eventualities. But what employees want to know is not how fantastic everything is going to be once the dust settles; they want to know how the changes are going to affect them personally. They need reassurance that their jobs are not in danger. They need to hear that they are more than just chess pawns who can be pushed around on the chess board, plucked up from one area of the board and set down on another. They want to hear that they are doing a good job; they want to know that their projects can proceed as usual; they want some normalcy and stability in a highly unstable situation. There are always employees who thrive on continual change. The majority of employees thrive on stability, and that has to be recognized and accepted by workplace leaders. You cannot demand loyalty and obedience from your employees while telling them that their jobs might be in danger. You cannot tell them to ‘get out’ if they don’t like what is happening around them. This was essentially the message from one of my workplace leaders in a lecture she gave prior to a Christmas party (of all things) several years ago. Some people may have liked her style. I found it unappealing and rather tactless, because she was stating the obvious and didn’t need to. It’s aggressive and unnecessarily so. It’s not how you win friends and influence people. A better approach might have been to have said that there will be changes and that some of them may be difficult, but that we are a team and that if we all pull together, we can get through the changes and perhaps come out stronger. But she is a pawn herself in a long line of pawns that have to spout the company line. I doubt she felt comfortable spouting the rhetoric. If I am representative of the average worker, all I can say at this point in time is that the vagueness and ambiguity that existed prior to the merger have gotten larger, not smaller. It is not possible to get an overview, no matter how hard one tries. I find it difficult in any case. Do I need the overview? I don’t know. I’ve been told that I do, that it’s important to understand the workplace and management structure. Some people I know wonder who their bosses are, because in some cases, people now have three or more bosses—some who have administrative responsibility for employees, some who have the professional responsibility. But when employees ask who their new boss is, they don’t get an answer. So is it any wonder that employees get depressed?

Depression, according to the psychiatrist and author Rollo May, is the “inability to construct a future”. For some reason this definition resonated with me. I responded to it viscerally and intuitively. Why? Because it felt true. When you are depressed, you are stuck. You don’t know which way to turn, because you don’t have a clue about the future. You cannot envision your future nor can you see how to go about building or creating it. In order to create anything, you must be able to visualize it first. With depression you lose the ability to visualize the future. You are stuck in the now. All your creative and mental energy goes into figuring out the ‘now’.  It’s as though a fog settles over your head, blocking your forward view. You are forced to stop driving and to sit on the side of the road. You become passive, waiting for instructions or a road map for how to proceed further. Your energy flow gets blocked. Or you may drive around the same area over and over, stopping at the same stop sign, and not getting any further, because you have lost your sense of direction. Depression may not be a bad thing if you manage to deal with it eventually, if you get frustrated enough with being stuck. It is harmful when you give up and give in and those approaches become a permanent way of dealing with the trials that life deals out.

The Chinese talk about chi (qi), the energy flow in a person, as being an important aspect of a person’s health and life situation. It makes sense to me. If that energy flow is blocked, it will affect the health and energy level of a person. Again, I respond to this intuitively; it just makes sense. The blockage must be dealt with in order for the energy to flow. The goal is harmony for the mind and body. Sometimes it is enough just to read an inspirational text; the blockage may dissipate once the mind understands the situation in a new way. That is the beauty and the power of the written word. In other situations, a good film or conversation may achieve the same thing. The important thing is to free the energy.