a Productivity Philosophy Archives - Page 7 of 12

What Should I Contribute?

August 4, 2011 by Matt Perman

Drucker:

Throughout history, the great majority of people never had to ask the question.
What should I contribute? They were told what to contribute, and their tasks were dictated either by the work itself as it was for the peasant or artisan — or by a master or a mistress — as it was for domestic servants. And until very recently, it was taken for granted that most people were subordinates who did as they were told. Even in the 1950s and 1960s, the new knowledge workers (the so- called organization men) looked to their company’s personnel department to plan their careers.
Then in the late 1960s, no one wanted to be told what to do any longer. Young men and women began to ask. What do / want to do? And what they heard was that the way to contribute was to “do your own thing.” But this solution was as wrong as the organization men’s had been. Very few of the people who believed that doing one’s own thing would lead to contribution, self-fulfilment, and success achieved any of the three.
But still, there is no return to the old answer of doing what you are told or assigned to do. Knowledge workers in particular have to learn to ask a question that has not been asked before: What should my contribution be? To answer it, they must address three distinct elements: What does the situation require? Given my strengths, my way of performing, and my values, how can I make the greatest contribution to what needs to be done? And finally, What results have to be achieved to make a difference?
Consider the experience of a newly appointed hospital administrator. The hospital was big and prestigious, but it had been coasting on its reputation for 30 years. The new administrator decided that his contribution should be to establish a standard of excellence in one important area within two years. He chose to focus on the emergency room, which was big, visible, and sloppy. He decided that every patient who came into the ER had to be seen by a qualified nurse within 60 seconds. Within 12 months, the hospital’s emergency room had become a model for all hospitals in the United States, and within another two years, the whole hospital had been trans- formed.
As this example suggests, it is rarely possible — or even particularly fruitful — to look too far ahead. A plan can usually cover no more than 18 months and still be reasonably clear and specific. So the question in most cases should be. Where and how can I achieve results that will make a difference within the next year and a half? The answer must balance several things. First, the results should be hard to achieve — they should require “stretching,” to use the current buzzword.
But also, they should be within reach. To aim at results that cannot be achieved — or that can be only under the most unlikely circumstances — is not being ambitious; it is being foolish. Second, the results should be meaningful.
They should make a difference. Finally, results should be visible and, if at all possible, measurable. From this will come a course of action: what to do, where and how to start, and what goals and deadlines to set.

Does God Require Faithfulness or Fruitfulness?

August 2, 2011 by Matt Perman

This is actually a very fascinating question. I have a lot I’d like to say on this, but here are just a few thoughts for now.

Sometimes you hear it said that “God requires faithfulness, not fruitfulness.” But the reality is that God requires both. God requires both faithfulness and fruitfulness.

However, the point behind the statement and what most people actually mean when they say that is true and critically important. Here are four reasons for that which, I hope, also flesh things out a bit more accurately.

First, faithfulness is the path to fruitfulness. So the wording of the question itself is slightly off. It implies that faithfulness and fruitfulness are somehow disconnected; that we are of course to be faithful, but that somehow being fruitful happens by some other means.

This would be a radical misunderstanding. For it implies that faithfulness is not enough for fruitfulness. And if faithfulness is not enough, then what else is there? Only unfaithfulness, which would be horrible. Fruitfulness comes through the path of faithfulness, and no other way. In this sense, we truly can say “God requires faithfulness only.” We can say that, not because fruitfulness is optional, but because faithfulness necessarily results in fruitfulness. Which leads to the second point.

Second, faithfulness always results in fruitfulness. It is not only that faithfulness is the path to fruitfulness. Rather, it is that faithfulness always and inevitably results in fruitfulness. Always.

The NT has no categories for the unfruitful Christian. The unfruitful Christian simply does not exist. Notice, for example, how Jesus talks in the Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13:1-9; 18-23). There are four categories of people. All of them ultimately prove to be unbelievers, except the last: the good soil. And in relation to the good soil, Jesus says “This is the one who hears the word and understands it. He indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty” (Matthew 13:23).

The issue is not whether the good soil bears fruit or not. It is simply how much. Everyone who is good soil — who truly understands and accepts the Word — bears fruit: either thirty, or sixty, or a hundred.

Likewise, in the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14 – 30), every servant was fruitful — except the last one, who was an unbeliever. One made five talents more and another two talents more. The last person, who received one talent, hid the talent and did nothing with it. He is not an example of an unfruitful Christian, but an unbeliever (vv. 26 – 30).

God does require fruitfulness. But that fruitfulness is certain to follow if we are faithful.

This is, of course, simply the traditional doctrine of justification and good works. We are not justified by our works, but those who have been justified by faith will inevitably and always live a life of good works (Ephesians 2:8-10; etc.). To say that God requires fruitfulness, not just faithfulness, is simply another statement of this truth.

Which of course leads to the question: What, then, is fruitfulness? Perhaps another reason people say “God requires faithfulness, not fruitfulness,” is to guard against wrong concepts of fruitfulness being used as the measure of what God requires. That’s an important issue, which leads to our next point.

Third, faithfulness is a form of fruitfulness.

This points out another issue in the way the original question is worded: It implies that faithfulness and fruitfulness are necessarily two different things. I think they can be distinguished in some ways (as we will see next), but it is also important to realize that faithfulness itself is a form of real fruitfulness. Faithfulness is one of the “fruits” that God produces in us and requires of us. Faithfulness is a form of fruitfulness. This is an important point that is not to be overlooked.

Related to this, another component of our fruitfulness is our character and just plain the godly responses to the situations we are in, whatever they may be. This is a form of fruit that is not necessarily broadly visible, but it matters and is even more important than the often more visible ministry “results” of walking faithfully.

Finally, though, fruitfulness does also include the results of our faithfulness — the effects in the world of following Christ and trusting him and loving him and obeying him. If you look at John 15, for example, where Jesus discusses our bearing much fruit, the fruit includes things like answers to prayer (John 15:7-8) and loving others (John 15:10, 12, etc.). And in the Parable of the Talents, the “fruit” in view seems to naturally include the results of our obedience and work in the Lord, as well as the faithfulness itself.

But here again there is a critically important truth that is safeguarded by those who say “God requires faithfulness, not fruitfulness.” We should of course seek to be as fruitful as we can possibly be. But notice that in the Parable of the Sower, there is not a hint of judgment or disappointment regarding those who bear thirty-fold or sixty-fold fruit rather than a hundred-fold. Jesus simply says “He indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty” (Matthew 13:23). All of these yields are considered good and significant. The one who bears thirty-fold is not judged or looked down upon for not bearing one-hundred fold.

So also in the Parable of the Talents, Jesus doesn’t say to the one who gained two talents “Well, you should have gained five talents, but I guess this is good enough.” Not at all. He says, “Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your Master” (Matthew 25:23).

So the other key intention behind the statement that “God requires faithfulness, not fruitfulness” that is fantastically, critically true is: You aren’t more accepted by God for producing more fruit or less loved by him for producing less. If you are faithful, the fruit that results from your faithfulness is good and acceptable to him. If you are faithful, you shouldn’t worry about the “amount” of fruit you see or don’t see. As long as you are faithful and doing what God requires, you shouldn’t ever feel that you just aren’t “fruitful enough.” We don’t have control over the results; our responsibility is to be faithful to do what God has said.

Related to this is the fact that we are simply not in a position to judge our fruitfulness. It is reported that Billy Graham once said to his staff at the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association that “many of you will have greater reward in heaven than me.” Many looked skeptical when he said this; some of the people there were responsible for stuffing envelops and other such tasks. How could they be rewarded more than Billy Graham? So he reiterated his point and said: “I mean that. The reason is that God rewards faithfulness, not fruitfulness.”

I think he meant that statement in the right way, the way we are unpacking it here. And his main point was: God decides what our reward is. The way things look now are not necessarily indications of how God views things. Someone who is stuffing envelops in faith may indeed be rewarded far beyond someone whose visible results, right now, appear to be greater. For it is faith that makes our works good, and God may be doing incredible things through our seemingly mundane efforts that we simply will not see until we get to heaven.

So, another critical thing underscored by the statement that “God requires faithfulness, not fruitfulness,” is that we are not in a position here to judge our fruitfulness and feel that our fruitfulness is low simply because the visible results don’t seem to be large at this time.

Now, if there is all this good behind the statement that “God requires faithfulness, not fruitfulness,” what’s the problem with talking that way at all? I think in general, that phrase can obscure some of the four things we have just seen, especially the fact that faithfulness always results in fruitfulness of some form and to some degree, and that faithfulness is the path to fruitfulness, and that we should take courage from knowing that we will always see some degree of fruit.

But there is one other thing that statement can obscure. What should we do when we aren’t seeing fruit?

The first thing to say is that there will be times when we seem to experience a visible lack of fruitfulness. There can even be times when Christians seem to be going backwards in their obedience and seem to be flagging in the fruitfulness of faithfulness itself. But God will always keep his children faithful and persevering to the end. So I don’t want the reality that true fruitfulness will always follow faithfulness to be taken to mean that there are never times of little fruitfulness in the life of a Christian.

But the other thing to say here is that one way faithfulness responds to an apparent lack of fruitfulness is by saying “do I need to change how I’m doing anything here?”

God’s commands are unchanging, and so that I’m not talking about changing at the level of obedience. But at the level of application, there are ways to do things that may be more helpful to people or less helpful; more edifying or less edifying; more likely to help people come to see the truth of the gospel or less likely.

We shouldn’t let the essential call to focus on faithfulness rather than fruitfulness become a call to ignore the need to make legitimate changes that are likely to help us do better in our lives and ministries.

Which is the last point: One thing that faithfulness does is have a view to it’s fruitfulness. Many times our fruitfulness is out of our hands; the results are God’s alone. Sometimes, though, there are things we can adapt or improve in order to do better, and the result will be more fruit. Faithfulness keeps alert to ways to adapt and improve in order to serve others more effectively, and thus more fruitfully.

Stinginess Results in Having Less Resources, Not More

July 17, 2011 by Matt Perman

It’s counterintutive, but true:

“A stingy man hastens after wealth, and does not know that poverty will come upon him” (Proverbs 28:22).

On the other hand:

“One gives freely, yet grows all the richer; another withholds what he should give, and only suffers want. Whoever brings blessing will be enriched, and one who waters will himself be watered” (Proverbs 11:24-25).

This applies in all sorts of ways to all sorts of areas, and it’s not just about money. We are to incline towards mercy and generosity in all of our dealings with people.

Generosity means that when you do your work, you do it to the best of your ability — you do more than is expected, not less. When you lead others, you seek their welfare and building up, and not just the accomplishment of tasks. When organizations create policies, their disposition should be towards serving and empowering their people, not first protecting themselves.

In everything we do, in all realms of life, our disposition should be towards service and generosity, rather than self-protection.

Ironically, one of the biggest threats to this is the quest for efficiency. Sometimes, the quest for efficiency can simply become a cloak for stinginess. That’s why I don’t hit the note of efficiency much on this blog — I believe that the best way to be efficient is simply to be effective. There is a place for efficiency, but be careful of letting efficiency balloon in to stinginess. Make it your first priority to seek that which serves others and benefits them; let efficiency be the second consideration, not the first.

And, in the end, you will find that this is actually far more efficient. “He who waters will himself be watered.”

9 Things Successful People Do Differently

July 12, 2011 by Matt Perman

A good article from Harvard Business Review.

Excellence is not the Opposite of Failure

June 27, 2011 by Matt Perman

Marcus Buckingham states this well in Go Put Your Strengths to Work:

The radical idea at the core of the strengths movement is that excellence is not the opposite of failure, and that, as such, you will learn little about excellence from studying failure.
This seems like an obvious idea until you realize that, before the strengths movement began, virtually all business and academic inquiry was built on the opposite idea: namely, that a deep understanding of failure leads to an equally deep understanding of excellence. That’s why we studied unhappy customers to learn about the happy ones, employees’ weaknesses to learn how to make them excel, sickness to learn about health, divorce to learn about marriage, and sadness to learn about joy.
What has become evident in virtually every field of human endeavor is that failure and success are not opposites, they are merely different, and so they must be studied separately. Thus, for example, if you want to learn what you should not do after an environmental disaster, Chernobyl will be instructive. But if you want to learn what you should do, Chernobyl is a waste. Only successful cleanups, such as the Rocky Flats nuclear facility in Colorado, can tell you what excellence looks like.
Study unproductive teams, and you soon discover that the teammates argue a lot. Study successful teams, and you learn that they argue just as much. To find the secrets of a great team, you have to investigate the successful ones and figure out what is going on in the space between the arguments.

Well said.

The Virtue of Inefficiency?

June 24, 2011 by Matt Perman

Sometimes, the quest for efficiency is a red herring. Consider the example of the first light bulb, described in The Bottomless Well: The Twilight of Fuel, the Virtue of Waste, and Why We Will Never Run Out of Energy:

Thomas Edison’s first light bulb wasn’t at all efficient. One 1905 observer complained that “the incandescent lamp is an extremely poor vehicle for converting electric energy into light energy, since only about 4 percent of the energy supplied to the lamp is converted into light energy, the remaining 96 percent being converted into heat energy.” And the power plant that Edison built to light his bulb didn’t convert even 10 percent of its heat into electricity.
But the end-to-end losses of over 99 percent seemed worthwhile to produce such a wonderfully clean, compact, cool, and safe source of light. Efficiency was beside the point. As Jill Jonnes recounts in Empires of Light, gas and oil lamps didn’t stand a chance against such a superior alternative.

Sometimes a concern for efficiency undercuts what really matters. To have said “96 percent of the energy that goes into the light bulb produces heat, not light, so let’s get rid of this thing” would have missed the most important thing: we have light. And this is way better than oil lamps.

It’s often the same way in organizations. An organization often starts out vibrant and energetic and full life. Things are getting done, and people love what they are doing.

But then someone says “we need to get this organized better.” So they bring in the efficient organizers, and the life and spirit of the organization is efficencized right out of it.

Of course, organizing is a good thing. The problem is in treating it as the main thing. Or, which is the same thing, sacrificing the things that create the life and spirit of the organization to the perceived need to “have control” and be efficient.

Don’t be an efficient organizer — someone who cares about cost-cutting and efficiency as though they are more important than the mission and goals of the organization. Put the mission first. Be efficient where you can, but don’t let that become the point.

The Good Enough Principle

June 17, 2011 by Matt Perman

Rick Warren, in The Purpose Driven Church:

You may have heard it said, ‘If it can’t be done with excellence, don’t do it.’ Well, Jesus never said that! The truth is, almost everything we do is done poorly when we first start doing it—that’s how we learn. At Saddleback Church, we practice the ‘good enough’ principle: It doesn’t have to be perfect for God to use and bless it. We would rather involve thousands of regular folks in ministry than have a perfect church run by a few elites.

This is good counsel. Sometimes, in the quest to make sure we do something perfectly, we end up never getting to it all. We say to ourselves that we’ll do it “someday” because we don’t think we’ll be able to do it well right now. So we plan to wait until conditions are better, or until we have everything lined up and perfect. And then we never get to it.

Or, we might think we’ll never be able to do a certain thing well, and so we never even plan on trying — even though there is a clear need and we could do something. We say “I’m not able to do it up to the standard at which it should be done, so I won’t do it at all.”

It’s far better to realize that “less-than-perfect service is always better than the best intention.” If there is something you feel like you ought to do, get started now, with what you have. And, ironically, you’ll probably find that in the doing of it you will get better than if you had waited.

I’m not saying that there is not a time to prepare. There is — and sometimes preparation can be a long process. But if the reason you are holding off is because you have an unrealistic view of perfection, when you do have the ability to get moving now, then you should get moving even if it won’t be perfect!

Not to Seek Your Own, In a Selfish Sense, Is the Best Way of Seeking Your Own in a Better Sense

May 17, 2011 by Matt Perman

I love these words from Jonathan Edwards (in Charity And Its Fruits):

If you are selfish, and make yourself and your own private interests your idol, God will leave you to yourself, and let you promote your own interests as well as you can.
But if you do not selfishly seek your own, but do seek the things that are Jesus Christ’s, and the things of your fellow human beings, then God will make your interest and happiness his own charge, and he is infinitely more able to provide for and promote it than you are. The resources of the universe move at his bidding, and he can easily command them all to subserve your welfare.
So that, not to seek your own, in the selfish sense, is the best way of seeking your own in a better sense. It is the directest course you can take to secure your highest happiness.

I would say that this might be the second most important thing I have ever read.

The Secret of Effectiveness

May 10, 2011 by Matt Perman

It’s really simple to understand on one level; but on another level, it’s very hard to truly grasp and put in to practice. Here it is, stated very well by Rick Warren in The Purpose-Driven Church:

The secret of effectiveness is to know what really counts, then do what really counts, and not worry about all the rest.

This makes sense if you think about it. Effectiveness means doing the right things. It doesn’t mean just getting things done, but getting the right things done.

If you are going to be effective, then, you need to know what the most important things are. But that’s not enough, because if you know what is most important but don’t actually do those things, it won’t help you. so you not only need to know what really counts, you have to actually do what counts.

But in seeking to do this, there are obstacles. There is a villain, so to speak: all the other things (many of which are good in themselves) which are outside of our core purpose and threaten to distract us from it by splintering our efforts and pulling us in too many directions. So in order to put first things first, you also need to know how not to worry about other things.

So: Know what counts, put it first, and know how to keep yourself from being distracted by everything else.

Search Whatsbestnext.com