How to Retire By Age 25

I originally posted this to a different blog on February 9, 2015 when I was a sophomore in college. I’ve since shut down that other blog, and I’m re-posting this here.


According to a 2014 Gallup survey, the average U.S. retirement age is 62. But what if you could retire in half that time, by age 25?

There are two ways to retire early: make more or spend less. Most seem to make more, but you could also just spend less. Then you could travel the world, meet all kinds of interesting people, make music, create art, write books, whatever you want.

The working class doesn’t care much for creation and adventure, so I’ve prepared this investment plan to assure the taxpayers that those who retire early aren’t necessarily a waste of their dollars.

If three years after graduating (age 25) you have amassed a $220,000 bank account, then you can retire from the desk job and start working on what’s most important to you.

1. Power of Compound Investing

Einstein said, “Compound interest is the eighth wonder of the world. He who understands it, earns it … he who doesn’t … pays it.”

Lucky for us, compounding isn’t as complex as quantum physics.

This table shows if you invest $220,000 when you’re 25 years old into an account returning an average of 10% per year, assuming all capital gains are reinvested, your investment will be worth almost $11 million when you turn 65.

Note: If full table isn’t showing on your mobile device or smartphone, try switching your screen orientation from portrait to landscape view. If full table is still not viewable, try reopening this webpage on a laptop or desktop with a bigger screen.

Year Age Return Account Value Inflation (3%)
0 $220,000.00 $220,000.00
1 25 10% $242,000.00 $234,951.46
2 26 10% $266,200.00 $250,919.03
3 27 10% $292,820.00 $267,971.78
4 28 10% $322,102.00 $286,183.46
5 29 10% $354,312.20 $305,632.82
6 30 10% $389,743.42 $326,403.98
7 31 10% $428,717.76 $348,586.77
8 32 10% $471,589.54 $372,277.14
9 33 10% $518,748.49 $397,577.52
10 34 10% $570,623.34 $424,597.36
11 35 10% $627,685.68 $453,453.49
12 36 10% $690,454.24 $484,270.71
13 37 10% $759,499.67 $517,182.32
14 38 10% $835,449.63 $552,330.63
15 39 10% $918,994.60 $589,867.66
16 40 10% $1,010,894.06 $629,955.76
17 41 10% $1,111,983.46 $672,768.28
18 42 10% $1,223,181.81 $718,490.40
19 43 10% $1,345,499.99 $767,319.84
20 44 10% $1,480,049.99 $819,467.79
21 45 10% $1,628,054.99 $875,159.78
22 46 10% $1,790,860.49 $934,636.66
23 47 10% $1,969,946.54 $998,155.65
24 48 10% $2,166,941.19 $1,065,991.48
25 49 10% $2,383,635.31 $1,138,437.50
26 50 10% $2,621,998.84 $1,215,807.04
27 51 10% $2,884,198.72 $1,298,434.70
28 52 10% $3,172,618.59 $1,386,677.83
29 53 10% $3,489,880.45 $1,480,918.08
30 54 10% $3,838,868.50 $1,581,562.99
31 55 10% $4,222,755.35 $1,689,047.86
32 56 10% $4,645,030.88 $1,803,837.52
33 57 10% $5,109,533.97 $1,926,428.42
34 58 10% $5,620,487.37 $2,057,350.74
35 59 10% $6,182,536.11 $2,197,170.69
36 60 10% $6,800,789.72 $2,346,492.97
37 61 10% $7,480,868.69 $2,505,963.36
38 62 10% $8,228,955.56 $2,676,271.55
39 63 10% $9,051,851.11 $2,858,154.09
40 64 10% $9,957,036.22 $3,052,397.57
41 65 10% $10,952,739.85 $3,259,842.06

Footnotes:

10% Return based on average annual returns of Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund (VTSMX)

Account Value calculated using F = P(1 + k)^n

Account Value calculated as nominal amount for end of each year on December 31

3% Inflation based on conservative estimate one percent above the two percent target of the Federal Reserve

Inflation calculated using P = F(1 + k)^-n

Inflation-adjusted amounts calculated for December 31 of each year, in terms of dollars on January 1st of Year 1

2. Power of Distributions: Dividends

If I’m going to retire to work on my own stuff, I don’t want to worry about money, but I’ll still need an income stream to support my living expenses. Dividends, right?

This table shows the 10% annual return split into an 8% price appreciation and 2% dividend yield. My initial investment is now worth about $5.2 million when I turn 65. Less than in the table above, but that’s okay because I get money every year in the form of a dividend distribution.

Age Price Account Value Inflation Dividend Distribution Inflation (3%)
$220,000.00 $220,000.00
25 8% $237,600.00 $230,679.61 2% $4,752.00 $4,613.59
26 8% $256,608.00 $241,877.65 2% $5,132.16 $4,837.55
27 8% $277,136.64 $253,619.28 2% $5,542.73 $5,072.39
28 8% $299,307.57 $265,930.90 2% $5,986.15 $5,318.62
29 8% $323,252.18 $278,840.17 2% $6,465.04 $5,576.80
30 8% $349,112.35 $292,376.10 2% $6,982.25 $5,847.52
31 8% $377,041.34 $306,569.11 2% $7,540.83 $6,131.38
32 8% $407,204.65 $321,451.11 2% $8,144.09 $6,429.02
33 8% $439,781.02 $337,055.53 2% $8,795.62 $6,741.11
34 8% $474,963.50 $353,417.45 2% $9,499.27 $7,068.35
35 8% $512,960.58 $370,573.64 2% $10,259.21 $7,411.47
36 8% $553,997.43 $388,562.65 2% $11,079.95 $7,771.25
37 8% $598,317.22 $407,424.91 2% $11,966.34 $8,148.50
38 8% $646,182.60 $427,202.82 2% $12,923.65 $8,544.06
39 8% $697,877.21 $447,940.82 2% $13,957.54 $8,958.82
40 8% $753,707.38 $469,685.52 2% $15,074.15 $9,393.71
41 8% $814,003.97 $492,485.79 2% $16,280.08 $9,849.72
42 8% $879,124.29 $516,392.87 2% $17,582.49 $10,327.86
43 8% $949,454.23 $541,460.48 2% $18,989.08 $10,829.21
44 8% $1,025,410.57 $567,744.97 2% $20,508.21 $11,354.90
45 8% $1,107,443.42 $595,305.41 2% $22,148.87 $11,906.11
46 8% $1,196,038.89 $624,203.73 2% $23,920.78 $12,484.07
47 8% $1,291,722.00 $654,504.88 2% $25,834.44 $13,090.10
48 8% $1,395,059.76 $686,276.96 2% $27,901.20 $13,725.54
49 8% $1,506,664.54 $719,591.38 2% $30,133.29 $14,391.83
50 8% $1,627,197.71 $754,523.00 2% $32,543.95 $15,090.46
51 8% $1,757,373.52 $791,150.33 2% $35,147.47 $15,823.01
52 8% $1,897,963.41 $829,555.68 2% $37,959.27 $16,591.11
53 8% $2,049,800.48 $869,825.38 2% $40,996.01 $17,396.51
54 8% $2,213,784.52 $912,049.91 2% $44,275.69 $18,241.00
55 8% $2,390,887.28 $956,324.18 2% $47,817.75 $19,126.48
56 8% $2,582,158.26 $1,002,747.68 2% $51,643.17 $20,054.95
57 8% $2,788,730.92 $1,051,424.75 2% $55,774.62 $21,028.50
58 8% $3,011,829.39 $1,102,464.79 2% $60,236.59 $22,049.30
59 8% $3,252,775.74 $1,155,982.50 2% $65,055.51 $23,119.65
60 8% $3,512,997.80 $1,212,098.15 2% $70,259.96 $24,241.96
61 8% $3,794,037.63 $1,270,937.87 2% $75,880.75 $25,418.76
62 8% $4,097,560.64 $1,332,633.88 2% $81,951.21 $26,652.68
63 8% $4,425,365.49 $1,397,324.85 2% $88,507.31 $27,946.50
64 8% $4,779,394.73 $1,465,156.15 2% $95,587.89 $29,303.12
65 8% $5,161,746.31 $1,536,280.23 2% $103,234.93 $30,725.60

Footnotes:

Split of 10% Return into 8% Price and 2% Dividend based on past performance of Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund (VTSMX)

Dividends technically paid out quarterly; for simplification, any resulting effects on account value are assumed in 8% annual price appreciation

Dividend-paying assets will have price fluctuations each quarter; for simplification, changes in dividends paid out quarterly as a result of asset price fluctuation assumed in 2% annual dividend yield

3. More Distributions: Capital Gains and Roth IRA

These distributions—Capital Gains and Roth IRA—are different than the Dividend distribution, because the Dividend distribution is automatically paid out from dividend-paying assets in the account, typically every quarter; hence, we split the 2% dividend yield from the 8% price appreciation.

The Capital Gains and Roth IRA distributions, on the other hand, are paid out from the account appreciating at 8% annually, so I’ll have to sell some assets each year.

What’s the purpose of these additional distributions?

The table above shows a “real” (inflation-adjusted) distribution of approximately $4,600 during the year of age 25. I’m confident in my ability to live minimally, but I’m not sure I would lead a very healthy lifestyle with less than five grand for a whole year.

A Capital Gains distribution allows more than just my Dividend distribution to be paid to me each year, but can also be adjusted to hold constant the total annual distribution that covers my living expenses at a “real” value of $10,000 per year.

The key to this plan is spending; specifically, less spending. I need money only to survive with spartan amenities without being a fiscal burden on society, while having enough left over after living expenses to fund experiences. For me, this amount is $10,000 per year.

But what about when I’m old and sick and need to be put in a home and pay my medical bills and $10,000 each year is not enough?

A Roth IRA will act as a tax shield for my money as I grow old, but the IRS limits annual contributions to $5,500. The amount will eventually increase, but for now we’ll just assume it’ll be $5,500 for a while.

This table shows account value each year before and after Capital Gains and Roth IRA distributions. At the end of each year, Capital Gains and Roth IRA distributions are subtracted from the account before the beginning of the next year when the account value starts to appreciate at the 8% annual rate. The Dividend distribution is not subtracted from the account because the Dividend is calculated by a 2% yield separate from the 8% appreciation of the account.

Inflation-adjusted amounts are not provided. The account will be worth $1,714,197.67 after Distributions when I’m 65 years old, which, adjusted for 3% inflation each year, equals $510,193.22 in terms of dollars on January 1st of Age 25 (Year 1).

Age Before Distributions Capital Gains Dividend Roth IRA After Distributions
$220,000.00 $220,000.00
25 $237,600.00 $5,248.00 $4,752.00 $5,500 $226,852.00
26 $245,000.16 $5,709.00 $4,900.00 $5,500 $233,791.16
27 $252,494.46 $5,877.38 $5,049.89 $5,500 $241,117.08
28 $260,406.44 $6,046.96 $5,208.13 $5,500 $248,859.48
29 $268,768.24 $6,217.38 $5,375.36 $5,500 $257,050.86
30 $277,614.93 $6,388.22 $5,552.30 $5,500 $265,726.71
31 $286,984.85 $6,559.04 $5,739.70 $5,500 $274,925.80
32 $296,919.87 $6,729.30 $5,938.40 $5,500 $284,690.57
33 $307,465.81 $6,898.42 $6,149.32 $5,500 $295,067.40
34 $318,672.79 $7,065.71 $6,373.46 $5,500 $306,107.08
35 $330,595.65 $7,230.43 $6,611.91 $5,500 $317,865.22
36 $343,294.44 $7,391.72 $6,865.89 $5,500 $330,402.72
37 $356,834.93 $7,548.64 $7,136.70 $5,500 $343,786.30
38 $371,289.20 $7,700.11 $7,425.78 $5,500 $358,089.09
39 $386,736.21 $7,844.95 $7,734.72 $5,500 $373,391.26
40 $403,262.56 $7,981.81 $8,065.25 $5,500 $389,780.75
41 $420,963.21 $8,109.21 $8,419.26 $5,500 $407,354.00
42 $439,942.32 $8,225.48 $8,798.85 $5,500 $426,216.83
43 $460,314.18 $8,328.78 $9,206.28 $5,500 $446,485.40
44 $482,204.24 $8,417.03 $9,644.08 $5,500 $468,287.21
45 $505,750.19 $8,487.94 $10,115.00 $5,500 $491,762.24
46 $531,103.22 $8,538.97 $10,622.06 $5,500 $517,064.25
47 $558,429.39 $8,567.28 $11,168.59 $5,500 $544,362.12
48 $587,911.09 $8,569.72 $11,758.22 $5,500 $573,841.37
49 $619,748.68 $8,542.81 $12,394.97 $5,500 $605,705.87
50 $654,162.34 $8,482.67 $13,083.25 $5,500 $640,179.67
51 $691,394.05 $8,385.01 $13,827.88 $5,500 $677,509.04
52 $731,709.76 $8,245.08 $14,634.20 $5,500 $717,964.68
53 $775,401.86 $8,057.62 $15,508.04 $5,500 $761,844.24
54 $822,791.78 $7,816.79 $16,455.84 $5,500 $809,474.99
55 $874,232.99 $7,516.14 $17,484.66 $5,500 $861,216.84
56 $930,114.19 $7,148.54 $18,602.28 $5,500 $917,465.65
57 $990,862.90 $6,706.09 $19,817.26 $5,500 $978,656.80
58 $1,056,949.35 $6,180.07 $21,138.99 $5,500 $1,045,269.28
59 $1,128,890.82 $5,560.81 $22,577.82 $5,500 $1,117,830.02
60 $1,207,256.42 $4,837.65 $24,145.13 $5,500 $1,196,918.76
61 $1,292,672.26 $3,998.82 $25,853.45 $5,500 $1,283,173.44
62 $1,385,827.32 $3,031.29 $27,716.55 $5,500 $1,377,296.03
63 $1,487,479.71 $1,920.68 $29,749.59 $5,500 $1,480,059.04
64 $1,598,463.76 $651.10 $31,969.28 $5,500 $1,592,312.66
65 $1,719,697.67 $34,393.95 $5,500 $1,714,197.67

Footnotes:

Capital Gains and Dividend sum to an inflation-adjusted $10,000 each year (Notice: this is the annual amount I claim to need for living expenses)

Capital Gains calculated as difference between amount of Dividend distribution and inflation-adjusted $10,000

4. Roth IRA: Avoiding Taxes

Where do all those Roth IRA distributions go? Into a Roth IRA, of course.

This table shows my Roth IRA account, accumulating annual contributions of $5,500, growing to about $2.4 million by the time I turn 65.

Year Age Contribution Return Account Value Inflation (3%)
1 26 $5,500 10% $5,500.00
2 27 $5,500 10% $11,550.00 $10,886.98
3 28 $5,500 10% $18,205.00 $16,660.15
4 29 $5,500 10% $25,525.50 $22,679.08
5 30 $5,500 10% $33,578.05 $28,964.72
6 31 $5,500 10% $42,435.86 $35,539.36
7 32 $5,500 10% $52,179.44 $42,426.66
8 33 $5,500 10% $62,897.38 $49,651.78
9 34 $5,500 10% $74,687.12 $57,241.46
10 35 $5,500 10% $87,655.84 $65,224.17
11 36 $5,500 10% $101,921.42 $73,630.20
12 37 $5,500 10% $117,613.56 $82,491.79
13 38 $5,500 10% $134,874.92 $91,843.26
14 39 $5,500 10% $153,862.41 $101,721.18
15 40 $5,500 10% $174,748.65 $112,164.51
16 41 $5,500 10% $197,723.51 $123,214.76
17 42 $5,500 10% $222,995.87 $134,916.17
18 43 $5,500 10% $250,795.45 $147,315.90
19 44 $5,500 10% $281,375.00 $160,464.23
20 45 $5,500 10% $315,012.50 $174,414.78
21 46 $5,500 10% $352,013.75 $189,224.73
22 47 $5,500 10% $392,715.12 $204,955.08
23 48 $5,500 10% $437,486.63 $221,670.87
24 49 $5,500 10% $486,735.30 $239,441.51
25 50 $5,500 10% $540,908.83 $258,341.07
26 51 $5,500 10% $600,499.71 $278,448.55
27 52 $5,500 10% $666,049.68 $299,848.28
28 53 $5,500 10% $738,154.65 $322,630.24
29 54 $5,500 10% $817,470.11 $346,890.47
30 55 $5,500 10% $904,717.12 $372,731.48
31 56 $5,500 10% $1,000,688.84 $400,262.67
32 57 $5,500 10% $1,106,257.72 $429,600.84
33 58 $5,500 10% $1,222,383.49 $460,870.66
34 59 $5,500 10% $1,350,121.84 $494,205.21
35 60 $5,500 10% $1,490,634.03 $529,746.59
36 61 $5,500 10% $1,645,197.43 $567,646.46
37 62 $5,500 10% $1,815,217.17 $608,066.78
38 63 $5,500 10% $2,002,238.89 $651,180.45
39 64 $5,500 10% $2,207,962.78 $697,172.08
40 65 $5,500 10% $2,434,259.06 $746,238.77

Footnotes:

Age begins at 26, not 25, because first Roth IRA distribution from account is paid out December 31 of year corresponding with age 25; therefore, first cash flow is essentially at beginning of age 26

Account Value = C{[(1 + k)^(n) – 1] / k}

10% Return based on average annual returns of Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund (VTSMX)

5. Conclusion

If you can make $220,000 in the next five years, then you can retire on $10,000 per year, with a $1.7 million mutual fund account and $2.4 million Roth IRA when you turn 65.

Final Footnotes:

According to current tax law, “Some or all net capital gain may be taxed at 0% if you are in the 10% or 15% ordinary income tax brackets.” In other words, I’ll be poor enough to pay no taxes on my distributions.

The IRS requires that you have “earned income” equal or greater to the contribution limit of $5,500 each year in order to make a maximum contribution. We can assume I’ll make $5,500 each year from my miscellaneous endeavors.

Initial investment of $220,000 calculated so as to allow for a $5,500 contribution to the Roth IRA each year beginning Age 25 until Age 65 (65 – 25 = 40 * 5,500 = 220,000).

As a general clarification, Capital Gains and Roth IRA distributions are subtracted from the account each year on December 31, after the account has earned the full 8% annual return for the present year, but before the account begins to earn a full 8% annual return for the next year, starting January 1.

Disclaimer: I am not a financial professional. The expected returns are non-guaranteed estimates. Also, many of these figures are based on current tax and financial laws that are subject to change. I am not liable for any losses, nor do I expect compensation for any gains.

Review of Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov

In a note at the end of the book, Nabokov writes,

“My private tragedy, which cannot, and indeed should not, be anybody’s concern, is that I had to abandon my natural idiom, my untrammeled, rich, and infinitely docile Russian tongue for a second-rate brand of English … “

Ha! If the writing in this book is second-rate, then how am I to feel? Even as a native English speaker, if I were to sift through the entirety of my own writing and muster my best single page, I feel it would still be inferior to any randomly chosen page from this masterpiece by Nabokov. Alas, I am thankful for great writers. Even if they destroy my hope of becoming like them, they still inspire me to try.

On the style of Nabokov’s writing, I took note of a few things. Concluding sentences that tie up the preceding chapter with a bow before proceeding to the next. Small details of imagery that put a magnifying glass between the reader’s eye and the scene. Humor, endless humor, even in the darkest circumstances (murder, for example), often self-deprecating. Personifying intangible themes with names like “McFate.” Using em dashes to sneak in asides. Digressing for several pages at a time, somehow returning.

And of course the plot and character development. Humbert eventually going crazy, hallucinating the follower Trapp, driven to madness by his love for Lolita. And Lo, at first enamored with Humbert, then not necessarily resistant to his advances (she even engages the first time with Humbert, if I recall), but eventually aware that their love affair is not normal, longing for other things (as children do) but Humbert keeping her from them.

A recurring question I have: can a book’s plot be interesting without love or violence? Without sex or murder? There seem to be a handful of themes that arouse and captivate the human interest. Almost all classical books seem to incorporate this handful in some way. Is this because the writers encounter these themes in their own experiences? Or because they are aware that these themes arouse the reader?

There was one section of Part Two, Chapter Two which I did not enjoy as much when Humbert recounts in a cataloging way randomly remembered details from various stops and attractions that he visited with Lolita in the early days of their American road trip. Even amid this slog of rambling, short sentences and phrases stood out, shining, showing Nabokov’s brilliance all on their own.

Examining Themes of Identity, Sex, Gender, and Love in “Letters to a Young Poet” by Rainer Maria Rilke

What a great book this was for a young poet like myself. I find that there is consistency among the worldviews of artists. Examples of this consistency include a devotion to solitude and a belief that happiness is somehow incompatible with making art—both of these were espoused by Rilke in this book.

I had honestly not heard of Rilke until this book was recommended to me by an artist whom I met while walking in the woods a few weeks ago. The general premise of this book is that Franz Xaver Kappus, a 19-year-old officer cadet at a military academy in Austria, writes to Rilke to seek advice. Kappus asks Rilke’s opinion of his own poetry and also how he should decide between pursuing poetry or a career in the military. There are ten letters in total. The correspondence lasted from 1902 to 1908.

As for myself, I still feel uneasy when I write about writing. It gives me a sense of blowing my own horn. But I enjoy it when other writers do it, the same as I would enjoy talking to a friend with whom I share an occupation.

In this review, I want to organize some of Rilke’s writing from this book into four themes, summarize what I understand to be Rilke’s main points, and then respond with my own commentary. Those four themes are identity, sex, gender, and love.

1. IDENTITY

“You are looking outwards, and of all things that is what you must now not do. Nobody can advise and help you, nobody. There is only one single means. Go inside yourself. Discover the motive that bids you write; examine whether it sends its roots down to the deepest places of your heart, confess to yourself whether you would have to die if writing were denied you. This before all: ask yourself in the quietest hour of your night: must I write? Dig down into yourself for a deep answer.”

I once had this thought that if you would do nothing else but be yourself, then you could not fail. We are trained to look outwards, to look at others and seek advice. This is the main method of learning we are taught in school. Rilke is talking here specifically about writing, but I believe it applies to all endeavors. I believe being yourself is the key to success because of consistency. If you try to be someone else, to imitate, you will eventually lose the desire to be that other person. Then you will search for someone else to be, on and on. This way, you become a confused mixture of others, and not even the others truly, only imitations of them. This way, you stay shallow, jumping like a frog on the surface from one lily pad to the next. You can go deeper into yourself than anyone else. Your depths are boundless. If we think about Gladwell’s 10,000-hour rule, it is easier to achieve this by being yourself. If you try to imitate someone else, you can only read the books they have written or talk to them in the time they spend with you. With yourself, you can read about yourself and never run out of pages. You can talk to yourself and never run out of things to say. Also, you are always yourself, so you have a better chance of getting to the 10,000 hours. If you are imitating another, then you might switch to imitating someone else before you get to 10,000.

On the other hand, are you really yourself? Or are you inevitably the product of nature and nurture, your biology and the society around you? If you “go inside yourself,” as Rilke instructs, what will you find there? Will you find someone or something that is in some way truly yourself? Or will you find something else? Even if you will not find yourself, perhaps going through yourself is the way to find what you are looking for.

“Turn therefore from the common themes to those which your own everyday life affords … “

Viewed as advice to a writer, I understand the “common themes” to be the themes about which a writer is ordinarily expected to write, e.g., a novel about war or poetry about love. Rilke is telling Kappus to focus, instead, on the themes of his “everyday life.”

This resonates for me because, when I observe my own life, and especially when I am looking for something to write about, I find that my life is rather boring. When I find my life thus, I usually have one of two thoughts. First, I think to change my life. I think I should go on a daring trip across the country like Kerouac. Second, I think to write fiction. I think I should write about something other than my life because it’s not interesting enough the way it is.

” … use to express yourself the things that surround you, the images of your dreams and the objects of your memory. If your everyday life seems poor to you, do not accuse it; accuse yourself, tell yourself you are not poet enough to summon up its riches; since for the creator there is no poverty and no poor or unimportant place.”

Ha! This is such a perfect response to what I just wrote in my previous bit of commentary. Rilke speaks from the grave still, as if he were here having a conversation with me. He says, “Accuse yourself!”

Of course, my life, as well as each and every other life, is fertile soil for the growth of great writing. What battles are fought within the mind of a man who plays chess in the park? What perverted and forbidden love wells in the heart of a pedophile, like Humbert Humbert in Lolita?

Moving forward, when I look at my surroundings and find nothing worth writing, I should not blame my surroundings. Rather, I should blame myself for not seeing the beauty that is always there. This is an important practice both in writing and in life.

Beyond being helpful for my writing, I truly believe this. There is beauty everywhere and always, even in the smallest occurrences. There is also humor, sadness, ecstasy, triumph, loss, and all the other grand human emotions. And they can be found in moments as simple as the faucet dripping or the leaf of the house plant bobbing in the breeze coming through the open window.

“Why do you want to exclude any disturbance, any pain, any melancholy from your life, since you do not know what these conditions are working upon you?”

This reminds me of a story I read in A New Earth by Eckhart Tolle. Basically, a guy wins a car in a lottery. People congratulate him and say, “You are so lucky!” He says, “Maybe.” Then one day he gets in a car crash. Someone says, “That was unfortunate.” He says, “Maybe.” While he’s in the hospital, a landslide destroys his house but he’s safe because he’s in the hospital, and in some way or another he says “maybe” again.

The point is: we don’t know if any event will turn out to be truly good or bad. We are often very immediate in how we judge things to be good or bad. For example, breaking up with your partner might seem bad at first, but then maybe you’ll go on an incredible journey with your newfound freedom.

“Do not observe yourself too closely. Do not draw too rapid conclusions from what happens to you; let it simply happen to you.”

I find this advice, viewed in a certain way, to contradict what Rilke previously mentioned, “This before all: ask yourself in the quietest hour of your night: must I write? Dig down into yourself for a deep answer.”

If I am a writer, might I just let it happen to me? Rather than searching too seriously for the cause of my being a writer in the first place?

2. SEX

” … artistic experience really lies so incredibly close to sexual, to its agony and its ecstasy, that both phenomena are actually only different forms of one and the same longing and felicity … “

I have personally found this to be true. I have practiced a form of writing that is done by speaking my unfiltered mind aloud into a recorder. When writing this way, I felt the practice of writing to be most like the sexual experience. Though I’m not sure if I could pinpoint why exactly they are similar. Perhaps they are both acts of creation. Rilke and I both being males, I wonder if female artists would agree with us. Perhaps the artistic experience is closer to the male sexual experience—to give of oneself to another and, in doing so, create. Who is the “other” in the encounter. In sex, it is a sexual partner. In art, the artist’s relationship with their reader, viewer, listener is often a mystery. The artist does not often create with their consumer there in the room with them. How then does the artist form a relationship with their reader, viewer, listener, and is it a sexual relationship in some ways?

” … contrive, yourself, out of your own disposition and nature, out of your experience and childhood and strength to achieve an entirely individual relationship to sex (not influenced by convention and custom), then you need no longer fear to lose yourself and become unworthy of your best possession.”

First, I think Rilke is referring to one’s sexuality when he writes “best possession.” If I recall, Kappus (the other correspondent) must have expressed something like a feeling of becoming unworthy of his sexuality. In any case, the first part of this excerpt is where I want to focus. How does one achieve an “entirely individual relationship to sex?” Rilke seems to think one should start by ignoring one’s disposition, nature, experience, and childhood. These may be perilous words of advice to a person who has an inclination to sexual perversion. For example, I am currently reading Lolita. I can imagine how Humbert Humbert might twist Rilke’s words in order to justify his relationship with young Dolores Haze. After all, sex is usually not an individual undertaking. While one may come to the sexual encounter with their own “individual relationship to sex,” at the point of involving another, there are now the beginnings of society and agreement. On the other hand, do certain societies establish customs and laws which are excessive in the moderation of the sexuality of their individual members?

” … want on the one hand, and superfluity on the other, have dulled the clarity of this need, and all those deep, simple necessities by which life renews itself have become similarly dull.”

“Simple necessities” include more than just sex. Rilke is also talking about hunger, thirst, need for shelter, need for sleep. If I recall, I believe his point is that the superfluity made possible by our modern times has made the satisfaction of these necessities dull. No longer do we have to hunt to eat lunch. We can just walk down to the deli. No longer do we have to keep watch at the mouth of the cave. We can just lock our doors in our already safe neighborhoods. The “clarity” of the need has, therefore, become dull. Similar to how the first drink of wine is the most intelligible. After the first few sips, we are drinking just to finish the glass, just because it is there on the table and easily available to us. Our minds and bodies are evolutionarily equipped with the abilities to satisfy certain needs in order to be healthy. What happens when those needs are automatically satisfied? What then are we to do with our abilities?

“There it sees no entirely mature and unmixed sex world, but one which is not human enough, merely masculine, which is heat, intoxication and restlessness, and loaded with the old prejudices and arrogances with which men have disfigured and burdened love. Because he loves only as man, not as human being, there is in his sexual feelings something narrow, seemingly wild, malicious, temporal, finite, which weakens his art and makes it equivocal and dubious.”

“Because he loves only as man, not as human being … ” How does one love as a human being? Is Rilke’s view of masculine sexuality overly critical in this passage? Anything can be thought of as either good or bad. Thinking of masculine sexuality as good, we might say that is forthright, strong, charitable, and creative. Rilke seems to take the perspective of viewing it as bad here. Alas, my own mind may have not delved deeply enough into this particular passage. Still, I found it worthy of inclusion on its own merits.

3. GENDER

“And perhaps the sexes are more akin than we suppose, and the great renewal of the world will perhaps consist in this, that man and maiden, freed from all false feelings and perversions, will seek each other not as opposites … “

Gender is a scale, not binary, is something I’ve heard a lot recently. In what way are the sexes akin? Not biologically, this is plain. But then again, men and women have far more biological similarities than they have differences. And there is certainly great overlap between men and women emotionally and intellectually. Perhaps males can, at times, exhibit feminine qualities, and females can, at times, exhibit masculine qualities. Between man and woman, we are much more alike in our humanness than we are different in our gender.

“The girl and the woman in their new, individual unfolding will be only transient imitators of bad or good masculine behaviour, and repeaters of masculine professions. After the uncertainty of such transitions it will be seen that women have passed through the exuberance and vicissitudes of those (often ridiculous) disguises, only in order to purify their most essential being from the distorting influences of the other sex.”

We live in a world constructed by men, in which the way to get ahead is to be like a man. Is it any surprise when women imitate men in order to achieve success, say, in the workplace? Rilke seems to think that women are not living as their “most essential being(s).” What activities and qualities are most essentially womanly? Why are these activities and qualities not prevalent in our modern society such that women are forced to pretend to be men? What needs to happen for these activities and qualities to be established in society such that women feel that they have space to rise up as their “most essential being(s)?”

4. LOVE

“But that is where young people so often and so grievously go wrong: that they (whose nature it is to have no patience) throw themselves at each other when love comes over them, scatter themselves abroad, just as they are in all their untidiness, disorder and confusion … “

Young people fall in love when they are still not ready, when they are still untidy, disordered, and confused. There is no entrance exam for love. There are practically no requirements other than someone else loving you back. It is easy to fall in love. I daresay it’s even difficult not to. It is one of our most natural instincts. It is much more difficult to resist until one is ready. But perhaps one is never fully ready. So at some point you have to start loving and learn how to communicate effectively with your lover when you are an inadequate lover.

” … love falsely, that is simply surrendering, letting solitude go … “

According to Rilke, loving “falsely” is “surrendering.” And what he means by “surrendering” is “letting solitude go.”

“The claims which the difficult work of love lays upon our development are more than life-sized, and as beginners we are not equal to them. But if we continue to hold out and take this love upon ourselves as a burden and apprenticeship, instead of losing ourselves in all the light and frivolous play behind which mankind have concealed themselves from the most serious gravity of their existence,—then perhaps some small progress and some alleviation will become perceptible to those who come long after us; that would be much.”

Rilke says love is “the most serious gravity of mankind.” He seems to think that we can make some sort of progress in love that can be passed on from generation to generation, seemingly in the same way that we have passed on advances in science, for example. Rilke seems to think we make no progress because of “the light and frivolous play behind which mankind have concealed themselves.” What does he mean by “light and frivolous play?” Perhaps it is because love is left to each individual with only a lifetime to figure out an eternal complexity. As individuals, we are like ignorant children, when it comes to love. We approach it with a playful attitude. What would Rilke suggest instead? Is it possible for us to study, practice, and improve upon our loving abilities and then pass that knowledge and skill on to the next generation? What we pass on from one generation to the next in regards to love is mostly custom and law. The Kama Sutra has some instructions aimed at the betterment of love, but it also contains a good deal of decorum and rules if I recall correctly.

” … a relationship meant to be between one human being and another, no longer between man and wife. And this more human love … “

Can man be wife and wife be man? Does a “more human love” include homosexual love? Does Rilke mean more to say that man and wife should rise up out of their gender identities in order to engage in this “more human love?” Or does he mean specifically to include love between a man and a man or a woman and a woman?

Source: Rilke, Rainer Maria. Letters to a Young Poet. Start Publishing LLC, 2012.

The Modes Of Persuasion: Ethos, Pathos, Logos

My girlfriend came up to me today while I was working at the table in the kitchen and said, “I want to read more.”

First of all, I was super excited to hear this. I’m very attracted to people who read, so how convenient that my girlfriend would express this desire! In her defense, she does already read quite a bit, but she’s also an over-achiever.

The conversation continued and the explanation she gave for why she wants to read more was not what I was expecting.

She said, “When I’m talking to people, I want to be able to contextualize the advice I am giving them in knowledge and experiences other than my own.”

When she said this, it reminded me of something I thought I had learned in either high school English or college philosophy.

Logos, Pathos, Ethos

So I googled “logos pathos ethos.” This is the first link I clicked on. It describes logos, pathos, and ethos as “modes of persuasion,” originally thought of by Aristotle.

And here is a quote from the original source, Rhetoric by Aristotle, written in 350 BC:

“Of the modes of persuasion furnished by the spoken word there are three kinds. The first kind depends on the personal character of the speaker [ethos]; the second on putting the audience into a certain frame of mind [pathos]; the third on the proof, or apparent proof, provided by the words of the speech itself [logos].”

Basically, as best as I can understand from just 10 minutes of research on Google, here is the breakdown of the three modes of persuasion:

  • Logos = logic, reason
  • Pathos = emotions, sympathy
  • Ethos = credibility, authority

Now, after that brief history lesson, let’s zoom back in on my girlfriend’s comment: she wants to read more in order to contextualize the advice she is giving during her conversations with others.

This sounds to me like ethos.

The question is: can you increase your ethos simply by reading?

I would say so. In fact, how else would you gain credibility and authority other than by reading?

If we were to break down the three modes of persuasion into archetypes of the people with whom we usually talk, I think it would go something like this:

  • Logos = know-it-all smarty-pants who is always ready with an answer or a solution (but, despite being annoying, they are useful to have around, because they are often right)
  • Pathos = someone who will actually listen to what you have to say and empathize, instead of just steamrolling with their own point of view and projecting their own experiences on the situation
  • Ethos = the bookworm or avid media consumer who is constantly dropping references to literature, media, or some other source that you’ve never heard of (or someone accomplished enough to just speak from their own authority, like a professor)

Which one is the best?

I don’t think that’s the right question. I think the right question is: which one is the best in a given situation?

If we break that down even further … for any given conversation, there are probably different points in the conversation when one mode of persuasion is more effective than the other two. But how can you tell?

I think we’ve just scratched the tip of the iceberg in this short post, but these are some of the other questions on my mind:

  • How does the media use fake “ethos” in clickbait titles and skim-read references?
  • Are some people better at certain modes of persuasion than others? Are women better at pathos compared to men?
  • If you wanted to get better at a specific mode of persuasion, how would you go about doing that?

Anyway, now you probably have more questions than answers, so I’ll leave you here ?

Sources:

YourDictionary. “Examples of Ethos, Logos, and Pathos.” Example Articles & Resources, examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-ethos-logos-and-pathos.html.

Aristotle. “Rhetoric by Aristotle, trans. W. Rhys Roberts”The Internet Classics Archive.

Internal vs. External

My friends and I have a trip planned to Big Sky, Montana for the end of this month. I was texting with one of my friends Luke about the upcoming trip. I asked him, “What are some of the things you want to do while we’re there?” He listed off several things and then said this, “Maybe a hike or something but I’m more on the internal journey vibes, versus external.”

I was so excited when I read this text from him because it’s something I have been thinking about myself. For me personally, the idea has manifested as apathy about where I am located physically. Recently, I have spent time in two different apartments in San Francisco, a house in the suburbs of Kansas, and a bungalow in San Diego. Coming up, I’ll be traveling to Cabo, Big Sky, and Gatlinburg.

But I’m not as excited about the travel destinations as I expected myself to be, which brings us back to Luke’s point—internal versus external “vibes.” Let’s replace “vibes” with “experiences,” for a little more clarity.

Internal experiences include thinking, feeling, dreaming, meditating, and also (in a sense) just being. External experiences include seeing places, hearing sounds, touching things, and other sensory experiences in the physical world. I don’t think this delineation is black and white, but it will serve us for now.

The difference between internal and external experiences is particularly important to me at this time in my life because of my continued education in spirituality and Eastern thought. When I am meditating or just being mindful of whatever is happening around me, I realize that it doesn’t really matter where I am.

Occasionally, I’ll have the desire to be in a “better” place—in this case, I mean “place” literally, like a physical space, as opposed to a general state of being. But one of the teachings that I have been encountering (most recently from Tolle) is that there is no such thing as “good” or “bad.”

There is a Shakespeare quote, which I believe comes from Hamlet, that echoes this thought, “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.” Through this lens, there is really no such thing as a “better” place. There is only a place that I think is better.

So when I am in a “worse” place, I have at least a couple of options: I can leave the place and go to another place, or I can change my thinking about the place. If I am going for external experiences, I would choose the former; internal experiences, the latter.

Now, if nothing is either good or bad, then the same must be true for internal versus external experiences. Neither internal nor external experiences are either good or bad. But, alas, like Jim Carrey said during his commencement address that I watched on YouTube, “I’m making sound, and that’s the important thing.”

This Communication Strategy Can Help With Tough Conversations

I’ve learned a lot from my girlfriend about emotional intelligence and empathy.

The first lesson she taught me was about how to ask questions when you’re talking to someone, especially this question:

“How do you feel about that?”

Just that question alone has improved my conversations tremendously. I’ve found that people have feelings about pretty much everything, so they will always have an answer to that question.

Recently, I was having a tough conversation with someone, and I felt like they were spiraling. They were having negative thoughts, one after another. In the beginning, I followed my girlfriend’s lesson and I was asking questions, but this wasn’t stopping the negativity!

All their answers to my questions were just more negative thoughts—sometimes these thoughts were completely separate and unrelated to the negative thing that they were talking about just before.

Ultimately, the conversation ended and I came away from it feeling like I could have done more to help the other person escape from their spiral of negativity.

So I asked my emotional coach, my girlfriend! And here’s what she said:

It’s called “mirroring.” She said it’s based on her theory that when people are spiraling they really just want to be heard and validated.

So her strategy for doing that is basically just repeating back to them what they are saying. You can start off a “mirroring” statement by saying …

“It sounds like …”

“It seems like…”

Here’s an example:

Other person: This really stinks.

You: It sounds like that really stinks.

Other person: Yea! And you know what else? This other thing stinks too.

You: It seems like both of those things stink.

Other person: Yea exactly!

You have to be genuine. You can’t be like a robot reading a script. And it’s also important to note: you’re not necessarily agreeing or adding in more negativity. You’re just repeating back what you hear.

This is super helpful especially when you don’t know what to say. When someone’s just being negative and you don’t necessarily want to agree, but you also don’t want to disagree and create conflict, so you end up at a loss for words—this is exactly when “mirroring” comes in handy!

Good luck on your next tough conversation!

11 Powerful Excerpts from “A New Earth” by Eckhart Tolle

I have a sort of system worked out for books that I read based on recommendations. The first time I get the rec from a close friend, I add the book to a list. The second time I get the rec, I move the book to the top of the list. The third time I get the rec, I buy the book and read it.

Needless to say, I received the three recommendations for both of Tolle’s most popular books, The Power of Now and A New Earth.

I finished The Power of Now months ago and it was a transformative experience. I will say that the book was not impactful to my worldview in the rational way to which I am accustomed from most of my reading. In fact, some of Tolle’s main teachings are about how thinking has become a disease and why we should not “identify” with our minds. Therefore, any rational counter-arguments to Tolle’s teachings are, to some extent, just missing the point.

I do still take issue with how Tolle references Christian scripture and interprets certain passages in ways that support his theories while offering seemingly little explanation and no citing of outside sources to support his interpretations. But we won’t get into that now.


The main point of this post is to break down some knowledge bombs from several consecutive pages that I just read last night from the beginning of “Chapter Seven: Finding Who You Truly Are” in A New Earth. Seriously, at several different points I had to close the book, lie it on my chest, and exhale just to recover from the impact of each one of these knowledge bombs.

Here are some of the main points before we dive in:

  • “Knowing yourself is to be rooted in Being, instead of lost in your mind” (Tolle 186)
  • “You are not the ego” (Tolle 189)
  • “Acknowledging the good that is already in your life is the foundation for all abundance” (Tolle 190)
  • “You cannot receive what you don’t give. Outflow determines inflow” (Tolle 191)

Now let’s jump into the line-by-line. I’ll provide the original quote from Tolle in quotation marks and then add some of my own thoughts underneath each quote …


1. “Knowing yourself deeply has nothing to do with whatever ideas are floating around in your mind. Knowing yourself is to be rooted in Being, instead of lost in your mind” (Tolle 186).

This one probably requires a bit more explanation than just these two sentences, especially in order to fully understand what Tolle means by ‘Being’ (notice the capital ‘B’). It gets at the metaphysical worldview that Tolle subscribes to, for which he lays the groundwork in the first chapter of The Power of Now. Here is that chapter from a random website if you’d like to read it now.

Here’s the gist: “Being is the eternal, ever-present One Life beyond the myriad forms of life that are subject to birth and death. ”

I am admittedly still trying to wrap my own mind around this concept. It is worth noting that Tolle definitely isn’t alone in having this idea. Something similar seems to be a tenet of Eastern thought. For example, in Hinduism, there is a concept called atman, which refers to the non-material self that is distinct from the mind and the body.

Bringing it back to practical terms: I’m still honestly not 100% sure about what is meant by ‘Being,’ but I do know that it has been very helpful for my mental and emotional health to think of myself as being part of something bigger than myself, as opposed to a separate entity that is trapped in my own mind / body / ego and cut off from the rest of existence.


2. “Your sense of who you are determines what you perceive as your needs and what matters to you in life—and whatever matters to you will have the power to upset and disturb you. You can use this as a criterion to find out how deeply you know yourself. What matters to you is not necessarily what you say or believe, but what your actions and reactions reveal as important and serious to you. So you may want to ask yourself the question: What are the things that upset and disturb me? If small things have the power to disturb you, then who you think you are is exactly that: small” (Tolle 186-187).

The ‘criterion’ that Tolle mentions has become a very useful and simple mental / emotional / spiritual exercise for me. It works like this: anytime I am experiencing a negative emotion (anger, worry, fear, anxiety, stress, sadness), I ask myself, “What is causing me to experience this emotion?” In almost all cases it ends up being an attachment that I have to something.

For example, when I worry that the stock market is going to crash, I trace back that worry to my attachment to money. When I fear that my low back pain might be something more serious like a tumor, I trace back that fear to my attachment to my life. Those two examples are pretty serious, but there are definitely smaller things, like getting upset when my bank charges me an overdraft fee (again, attachment to money) or when my flight is delayed (attachment to arriving at a certain time).


3. “You are not the ego, so when you become aware of the ego in you, it does not mean you know who you are—it means you know who you are not. But it is through knowing who you are not that the greatest obstacle to truly knowing yourself is removed” (Tolle 189).

My understanding here is that, even though we should not identify with our egos (according to Tolle), there is still value in knowing your ego, or at least becoming aware of it.

Maybe I have to go backward before I can go forward? I have spent most of my life identifying completely with my ego and, as a result, the ways in which I interact with the world have been constructed according to my ego—how I think, how I feel, my habits, my core beliefs, etc. It seems like it would be very difficult to drop all of that all at once and then pick up right away with completely identifying with Being. What would I do? Just immediately start sitting in ceaseless meditation?

Still, I do not fully understand why “knowing who you are not” is the greatest obstacle to knowing yourself. On this page of the book, Tolle does not fully explain this.

Maybe it’s because there are not many obstacles, but there is at least this one very big obstacle that is the ego. And it’s the obstacle in which almost everyone gets trapped.

Maybe it’s our natural state to know ourselves as rooted in Being, and that’s what would happen automatically, but our egos get to us before the natural process can take its course.

So it’s not so much that you need to know exactly who you are not. In other words, you don’t have to perform rigorous psychoanalysis on yourself and attend countless therapy sessions. You don’t need to know your ego perfectly. You just need to know, generally, that you have an ego and your ego is not you.

Side note: ‘ego,’ similar to ‘Being,’ is another one of the terms that Tolle uses frequently that is important to understand. I won’t go into it here, but a quick Google search should give you an idea.


4. Nobody can tell you who you are. It would just be another concept, so it would not change you. Who you are requires no belief. In fact, every belief is an obstacle. It does not even require your realization, since you already are who you are. But without realization, who you are does not shine forth into this world. It remains in the unmanifested …” (Tolle 189).

Sometimes spirituality seems lazy to me. Maybe that’s just because I was born and raised in capitalist America. But what compels us to “shine forth?” Why not just be?

I’ve heard some people say, “You’re a human being, not a human doing.” What would it look like just to be? I guess there is always doing. Just by inhabiting a body we are doing. We are breathing, seeing, sitting, etc. What is the least amount of doing possible? Sitting in silent meditation?


5. “Acknowledging the good that is already in your life is the foundation for all abundance” (Tolle 190).

For example, I focus on my low back pain, but the rest of my body is healthy. Instead of focusing on my low back pain, I can focus on the health in the rest of my body, which will invite abundance into my life.

This one seems similar to just being grateful. It seems so simple, but I always forget.


6. “You cannot receive what you don’t give. Outflow determines inflow. Whatever you think the world is withholding from you, you already have, but unless you allow it to flow out, you won’t even know that you have it” (Tolle 191).

This makes me think of something I realized one day when I was in college. I remember wishing that people would ask me to hang out more—going out to drinks, going to a party, going on a date. Then I realized, other people are probably thinking the exact same thing. So what if I become that person who asks those other people to go out? In this way, I would be receiving by giving. I still get to the same place: going out. Instead of just waiting for other people to ask me, I’m the one doing the asking.

Giving is creative, I find. The more you give and put yourself out there, the more that comes back to you. I don’t necessarily think of this so much like giving $10 to charity and then expecting to get $10 back in another area of your life. It’s way more simple than that. Like maybe I stop to help someone on the sidewalk and then we get to talking and become friends. I gave some of my time to help and received a new friend.

I do wonder if there are limits to this. Can you give too much? What if you are giving so much that you neglect yourself? Can you give more by taking better care of yourself? Maybe this is getting too technical about a general concept.


7. “Most people define themselves through the content of their lives. Whatever you perceive, experience, do, think, or feel is content … What is there other than content? That which enables the content to be—the inner space of consciousness” (Tolle 193).

This is one of Tolle’s main points. We are not the “content” of our lives. We are consciousness.


8. “When we go into a forest that has not been interfered with by man, our thinking mind will see only disorder and chaos all around us. It won’t even be able to differentiate between life (good) and death (bad) anymore since everywhere new life grows out of rotting and decaying matter” (Tolle 194-195).

Not seeing death as “bad” has been a big one for me lately. What is, is what is. If I am to die, that is what is. And what is, is bigger than me. I am a part of all this, and it will all continue on, even after I am gone. In some way, I will even continue to be a part of it.

In a very physical way that is easily understood by the modern scientific mind: the atoms that make up my body will not disappear when I die. My body will decompose and the atoms that were previously a part of my body will become part of the soil or something else. This is actually happening all the time already. I lose atoms when my hair falls out and my skin cells fall off. I gain atoms when I eat and drink.

As for the less tangible parts of “me,” like my mind and my soul, I am less sure of how they will persist. I will live on in pieces of art that I have created and relationships that I have formed.

But trying to hold on to ways in which “I” will persist even after my death is missing the point, because “I” am neither my body nor my brain. I am Being. Everything is Being. I am not separate from Being. And Being will go on, even as the egoic concept of myself changes forms.


9. “The mind is more comfortable in a landscaped park because it has been planned through thought; it has not grown organically. There is an order here that the mind can understand. In the forest, there is an incomprehensible order that to the mind looks like chaos. You cannot understand it through thought, but you can sense it when you let go of thought, become still and alert, and don’t try to understand or explain. Only then can you be aware of the sacredness of the forest. As soon as you sense that hidden harmony, that sacredness, you realize you are not separate from it, and when you realize that, you become a conscious participant in it. In this way, nature can help you become realigned with the wholeness of life” (Tolle 195).

“Nature can help you become realigned with the wholeness of life.” Boom! That’s a knowledge bomb if I’ve ever heard one.

This reminds me of a book I’d like to recommend to anyone who wants to go deeper on the concept of being one with nature: Ishmael by Daniel Quinn.


10. “This is illustrated in the story of a wise man who won an expensive car in a lottery. His family and friends were very happy for him and came to celebrate. ‘Isn’t it great!’ they said. ‘You are so lucky.’ The man smiled and said ‘Maybe.’ For a few weeks he enjoyed driving the car. Then one day a drunken driver crashed into his new car at an intersection and he ended up in the hospital, with multiple injuries. His family and friends came to see him and said, ‘That was really unfortunate.’ Again the man smiled and said, ‘Maybe.’ While he was still in the hospital, one night there was a landslide and his house fell into the sea. Again his friends came the next day and said, ‘Weren’t you lucky to have been here in hospital.’ Again he said, ‘Maybe.’ The wise man’s ‘maybe’ signifies a refusal to judge anything that happens. Instead of judging what is, he accepts it and so enters into conscious alignment with the higher order” (Tolle 196-197).

I wrote a poem about this (it’s a work in progress):

How can you be so sure
A wrong turn won’t be right

How come you grip
The steering wheel so tight

Watching lines on maps
And planning where to go

It helps to know
That the road will have its way

A detour
Might save a crash

And a pit stop
Might change your life

So step on the gas surely
Because going is the only way

But maybe just
Loosen up a bit


11. “J. Krishnamutri, the great Indian philosopher and spiritual teacher, spoke and traveled almost continuously … At one of his talks in the later part of his life, he surprised his audience by asking, ‘Do you know to know my secret?’ … ‘This is my secret,’ he said. ‘I don’t really mind what happens'” (Tolle 198).

In my mind, I immediately test this ‘secret’ to the fullest possible extent: Do I mind if I die? If I’m being honest with myself, I think a lot of the smaller things that I mind about are in some way connected to my attachment to my own life.

I haven’t read Mark Manson’s book The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, but I have read this article by him. I think Manson is halfway to what Krishnamutri realized.


Source: Tolle, Eckhart. A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life’s Purpose. Plume, a member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc., 2006.

The two sides of art

Is art what happens naturally? What you think on your own before it’s shared? Even before your superego can get a hold of what your dreaming id produced in the night?

Or is it what is edited and curated for the masses? Brought to the table for conversation and critique, so that it may be consumed and enjoyed by many more than just yourself. 

For me, art seems to be the two sides of the same coin on the sidewalk or street, no matter where in the world I walk. And these two sides are the individual and the community, the ego and society. For as much as we wish to be ourselves, we wouldn’t want to be anything if not for others—and so too for our art. 

An artist wants so much to be unique and one-of-a-kind. Take, for example, a musician who refuses to listen to “pop” music on the radio or rebukes “sell-outs” for producing music aimed at commercial success.

But if the market accurately reflects the demands of the masses, though surely not individual, it still seems to be just as much “art” as the avant-garde off in the corner trying to sniff out anything at all that hasn’t been seen before.

Originally written on September 29, 2019.

Editing

I could subject my writing to scrupulous and excessive editing and critiquing by many different readers, but would this cause my writing to trend toward being better?

That’s what we might expect. Like the blueprints for a space rocket. The greater the number of scientists, engineers, and physicists who have all reviewed and double-checked and triple-checked the plans for the rocket, the higher its chances of success, right?

Well, maybe.

Assuming all the reviewers were intelligent and none of them actually made an edit or suggestion that was, in fact, erroneous—then yes, we would expect the rocket ship to get better with more review. 

But what about a piece of art?

Something for which there is no objectively right answer, like there is for math and science. I guess it partly depends on your definition of art, and your standards for “good” art.

Take cooking, for example. There seem to be some objective rules of quality. If a dish is burnt or undercooked, then it would break these rules. If a dish is not even edible, it may be difficult to consider it culinary at all. But once these objective rules are satisfied, then we enter into the world of taste. What delights one culinary critic may disgust another. And the disgust of the one may not regress to any objective rule; it could just be their personal taste. 

Now, if we turn our attention back to writing, there are certainly some of these objective rules for quality that apply, like the rules of spelling and grammar. But to let too many editors comment on the “heart” of the work based on their personal tastes, and not based on any objective rules, may cause the piece to become “watered down” and lacking in the originality and individuality that made it any good in the first place.

Originally written on October 24, 2020.

Ease into relaxation

You cannot break from yourself suddenly. You cannot sit into meditation and expect all of your trains of thought from the day to simply stop in their tracks. You cannot go on a trip and expect to achieve deep relaxation in the very first hour.

Everyone needs a break from themselves from time to time. It allows you to recharge your batteries and see your own life from the outside looking in, instead of struggling to stay above the surface amidst crashing waves.

But you cannot approach your rest and relaxation with the same productivity-focused mindset. It’s a different gear, no, it’s a whole different machine. It takes time to switch over.

Using hunger to focus

There are natural causes of focus that can be used for other purposes. For example, when you are hungry, your mind easily achieves a singularity of focus, that I presume was used by our ancestors to focus on the one pursuit of satisfying hunger. Knowing full well that you have food stocked in the cabinet, you can trick your mind into thinking that whatever task you are working on is the means to your satiation. There is no complicated mental trick necessary. Simply become hungry and then sit down to work. The singularity or focus will come automatically. At some point you will actually need to get up to eat. But for a window of time, you will have this great focus.

Need is time-based

In a moment, there is nothing you need. It is only over time, that needs arise. It is impossible to be hungry, for example, in a moment. It is impossible to be tired. It is only a period of time that makes it possible to become hungry or tired.

These needs keep you from peace. They fill your mind with motivation for action. They tell you it is time to go and have something to eat. It is time to lay down and have a nap.

To fend off each of these needs would be like pulling leaves from a large tree. To pull up the tree all at once by its trunk, you need only to forget the passage of time.

There is nothing to need if there is nothing to come. There is nothing to need if there is only now.

Consistency is key for branding

Branding is important for an individual just like it is for a company. Consistency is key for branding, e.g., Kleenex is now synonymous with tissues. If you change your logo, customers will be confused. For an individual, your name is your brand. New projects require pseudonyms.

Minimalist art

Minimalist art is about calming down. It offers simplicity in a complex world. A landscape painting from the Romantic era is too much detail. We don’t hunger for that detail anymore. Our lives are full of detail. Too much detail. So that a blank piece of white paper has become art.

Review of The Name of the Wind by Patrick Rothfuss

The Name of the Wind is written as a frame narrative, which means a-story-within-a-story. The outer story introduces Kvothe as the innkeeper of the Waystone Inn (there he is known as “Kote” to hide his identity). The inner story begins as a traveling scribe named Chronicler visits the Waystone Inn and asks to write Kvothe’s life story. Kvothe begrudgingly agrees and begins to tell his story out loud as Chronicler writes.

Rothfuss is a master of building suspense. When Kvothe is playing for his talent pipes at the Eolian. At first you think that Kvothe will win his talent pipes easily, given his skill from years of learning to play with the Edema Ruh. But then he discusses the particular song that he has chosen to play and discusses it with Stanchion, co-owner of the Eolian. Stanchion is surprised because it is such a difficult song, so this starts you wondering if Kvothe will have as much success as you thought. Then Rothfuss describes in detail all the performances that precede Kvothe’s and this adds to your doubts, as every single musician in front of him fails to earn their pipes. There is also the question of whether a female vocalist will come in from the crowd to sing the part of Aloine, an essential part of “The Lay of Sir Savien Traliard” (the difficult song that Kvothe has chosen). It finally comes to be Kvothe’s turn. He is playing brilliantly. The reaction of the crowd is described with great detail by Rothfuss. And a mysterious female voice comes in to sing the part! But then one of the strings on Kvothe’s lute breaks. And you don’t know what’s going to happen …

Another element of the book that I thought was particularly well-done by Rothfuss was its believe-ability. In other fantasy fiction I have read, the other constructs a world that is very different from the world in which we live. This is wonderful, because it’s the point of fantasy after all, but it can become difficult to stay in touch with this world if you forget other parts or just don’t understand the complexity of the world that the author is trying to create. Rothfuss created a world that with which it was easy for me to stay in touch. The struggles on Kvothe on the streets of Tarbean are very understandable. They are the struggles of poverty, hunger, and violence. His ambitions at the University are easy to understand. He has a clear goal to find out about the Chandrian. Everything is ordered to that goal. His love with Denna is a simple love, expertly described in depth and over time.

The last thing I wish to mention is the recurrence of the symbol of money. In the world of Temerant, money is copper and silver. I started to notice the recurrence of the symbol of money in Tarbean when Kvothe is forced into poverty. He has to beg and steal to survive, fighting for every iron drab. He starts to save a “rainy day” fund hidden somewhere on the rooftops of Tarbean. When he arrives at the University, he faces similar problems. Kvothe has to come up with money to pay tuition, to buy a lute, to buy a second pair of clothes. This struggle for money serves as a very relatable conflict that persists throughout the entire novel and provides very believable explanation for Kvothe’s actions.

Overall, I loved this book. I have read Dune and Lord of the Rings just before it, and it ranks as an equal, if not at the top. For those who are thinking of whether to read it, I would describe it as a mix between Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings, erring more closely to the side of Harry Potter.

Review of Dune Messiah by Frank Herbert

When I read what Brian Herbert (Frank’s son) wrote in his introduction to the book, that “Dune Messiah is the most misunderstood of Frank Herbert’s novels,” I knew that the reviews from the internet would prove to be true. The sequel is inferior to the original Dune novel. But I will still be reading the third book in the trilogy, and I am hopeful.

If I were Frank Herbert and I could go back and write the novels again, I would have drawn out the battle between the Fremen and the Sardaukar in the original Dune. It seemed like there was so much rising action and then the climax was over in a flash. The Padishah Emperor lands on Arrakis and then all of a sudden his Sardaukar forces are overwhelmed in what seems to be an instant by the Fremen. Meanwhile, Paul and Chani’s son is killed in one of the sietches. An entire separate 500-page novel could have been written to describe these events.

It almost seems like Frank Herbert was growing tired of writing the original and wasn’t yet planning to write the sequel, so he truncated the story and sped things along. Because of this, an entirely new storyline had to be created for the sequel. Paul is now Emperor of the known universe. Jessica is back on Caladan. And new main characters like Irulan, Edric, Scytale, and Hayt are introduced.

The central conflict completely shifts. Instead of leading the Fremen rebellion on Arrakis to reclaim his ducal throne, Paul is now fighting to maintain control over his political position and his prescient powers. As a result, the content of Dune Messiah became more politically and intellectually complex. Herbert spends more words on monologues than plot progression. As someone who reads Sci-Fi for the page-turning aspect of a good story, the sequel was less enjoyable than the original. I would have liked to read an elongation of the same plot from the original.

A thematic element that I noticed more in Dune Messiah was the balance between Mentat and Bene Gesserit. Both are powerful in their own way. Mentats are logical and data-driven. Bene Gesserit have abilities of the Voice and speech recognition. In Fremen societies, the Reverend Mothers of the Bene Gesserit are responsible for “changing” the poison into a drug that fuels Fremen orgies. Interestingly, Mentats are mostly men and Bene Gesserit are mostly woman. The respective powers of each type seems to align with our traditional understanding of gender—men being more logical and women being more emotional and empathic. Paul is the exception to this rule. He is the Kwisatz Haderach. He has the powers both of a Mentat and a Bene Gesserit (from his mother’s training).

A tangential note related to Dune: I’m starting to notice a common theme in the later works of authors that have experienced success with earlier works. I’ve noticed it with Hesse (earlier works being Gertrude, Demian, and Siddhartha, later work being Glass Bead Game), Huxley (earlier work being Brave New World, later work being Island), and now Frank Herbert (earlier work being Dune and later work being its sequel, Dune Messiah). The theme is that the author pays more attention to plot and character development in earlier works, and then more attention to theme and philosophical musings (often written into dialogue) in later works. The attempt to fit themes and philosophy into plot seems to be a less covert effort in later works. Instead the authors just come right out and say it using their characters as mouthpieces. Perhaps this is due to arrogance and laziness resulting from past successes. Or maybe later works are driven by ulterior motives such as commercial success.

Friends come and go

Friends come and go. You intersect on your paths. If you are to remain yourself, you cannot stay together forever. Doing so would cause you to become more alike, meeting on the middle path, somewhere between the two paths you would each otherwise walk on your own. There is a rare friendship where you can walk side-by-side. Some paths run parallel just by chance. Some will drift from each other and then cross again at some point in the future. Some will drift and then never cross again.

Review of Ishmael by Daniel Quinn

I didn’t like this book. I don’t usually finish books that I don’t like, but this one I had to finish just to make sure the author didn’t make any last minute defenses against my criticisms.

My main problem with this book is that it claims to be a novel but falls short in terms of plot and character development. Other philosophical fiction authors who I enjoy—Hesse, Coelho, Rand—all do a masterful job of developing characters and plot that could stand on their own as a novel, even without the philosophy. Ishmael could not stand on its own as a novel without the philosophy. The plot is essentially this: a man goes to meet a gorilla and has a conversation. That conversation contains Quinn’s philosophy.

Other than not being the novel which it claims to be, this is problematic also because the format of the work does not allow for the full fleshing out of philosophical claims as would be more achievable in an academic paper. For example, Quinn claims that Mother Culture (the term he uses to refer to the culture of our modern civilized society) offers “an axiom stating that there is no way to obtain any certain knowledge about how people ought to live.” This is just blatantly false. While it is true for some schools of thought (e.g., moral nihilism), and these schools of thought might seem to be growing, it is far from unanimously accepted throughout our entire culture. There are plenty who still argue for objective ethics. To make such a flippant claim about the whole of modern ethics, as Quinn does in this way, is enough reason to not take his philosophy seriously.

From a logical perspective, this false premise is one that Quinn then uses to go on building his argument. But you cannot build an argument from a false premise. I found there to be more than one false premise which had me ready to throw out the book altogether, knowing that whatever conclusion Quinn would reach would not be able to stand on its own legs.

A redeeming argument from Quinn’s side could be that he purposely uses the format of a dialogue-intensive novel to achieve an understanding in the reader that is unattainable for a more academic philosophical paper. In the book, Ishmael actually explains this process to the narrator. He says, “The journey itself is going to change you.” Here is the full quote:

“And when we’re finished, you’ll have an entirely new perception of the world and of all that’s happened here. And it won’t matter in the least whether you remember how that perception was assembled. The journey itself is going to change you, so you don’t have to worry about memorizing the route we took to accomplish that change.”

If I had to guess, I would say Quinn was really talking to the reader when he spoke these words through Ishmael. In fact, Ishmael seems to function mostly as a device through which Quinn speaks his philosophy. The reader takes the viewpoint of the narrator, as a student of Ishmael.

Now having finished the book and having a clearer picture of what Quinn was trying to achieve, I can understand why Quinn chose this format. His claims across history, religion, anthropology, and philosophy would have required hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence and argumentation to be supported appropriately (in the academic sense). Quinn does not have time for this, because the claim which he wishes to make, is that the world is dying, and we need to change our ways in order to save it. Maybe such an argument doesn’t need to be completely logical, if it seeks to achieve its aim, which is to encourage action in a large percentage of the world population, especially when we consider that a great number of people are more motivated by emotion than logic. For this reason, an academic paper would not have achieved Quinn’s aim, and he couldn’t have contained all the proper argumentation and evidence in a novel which he hoped that many of the common population would be able to read.

All in all, I didn’t like this book, but it still achieved its purpose with me. The journey itself changed me, like Ishmael said it would. I do believe there is a way for man to live. And it seems we stopped living that way around 10,000 years ago, at the time of the agricultural revolution. “Mankind was not needed to bring order to the world.” The world was already in order before man.

Reread your favorite books

I was talking with a friend recently about networking. We were discussing the merits of going to conferences, retreats, and the like, where the idea is to meet other people and make new connections.

My opinion is similar to DJ Khaled’s, “No new friends.”

I said something like, “I would rather spend ten hours with one of my best friends, than one hour with my best friend and one hour with each of nine new friends.”

Of course, there are business benefits to networking. But I think it’s better to try and not confuse these two—business and friendship.

As for friendship, I already feel that my time is strained to stay in close contact with my best friends and family.

Now, this is not to say I have a large amount of friends. I can count my best friends on one hand. But maintaining these relationships takes time.

There are 168 hours in a week (24 x 7 = 168). If you sleep 8 hours each night, that’s 56 sleeping hours (8 x 7 = 56). If you work 40 hours per week, then you have 72 hours of free time each week (168 – 56 – 40 = 72).

Seems like a lot of time, right? Add in exercise, cooking, eating, reading, and a few other daily activities and all of a sudden it’s not that much.

Your time is valuable and friendships are important.

If you add too many new friends, it will dilute the time that you’re able to spend with the friends you already have.

I’m starting to feel the same way about books.

I used to think, “There are so many great books out there. I need to read as many as I can.”

Now, I think, “There are a few great books, a lot of good books, and even more mediocre books.”

I can’t say that I know which ones are the great books, objectively. Over the past few years I have built a reading list from sources that I respect and have read over 200 books. I am now going back through and rereading the ones that I like most.

Oftentimes, I find I have forgotten so much great knowledge contained in a book that I read only once. It seems better to refresh my memory with the contents of the best book on the topic, rather than reading the second best book on the topic.

There’s also the question of finding great books and best friends. It’s not easy.

I’ve received plenty of bad book recommendations for books that I’ve had to stop reading after I’ve already bought the paperback copy that now sits gathering dust on the bookshelf.

As for friends, I consider myself lucky to have a few great friends. Meanwhile, I meet hundreds of people each year that I don’t care for nearly as much as I do for the friends that I already have.

This reminds me of something my friend Casey recently schooled me on called “reinvestment risk.” It describes the risk that your assets might be removed from one investment for whatever reason, at which point you will have to search for a new investment for your assets, when there may not be an equal or better investment available.

In this case, friends and books are investments. Our asset is time.

So by engaging yourself to find new best friends and other great books, not only are you (1) committing to diluting the time that you are currently spending with the best friends and great books you already have whence you find any new friends or books, you are also (2) wasting more of your temporal assets as go on searching for new investments.

For some, especially younger folk, the search is still underway to find your best friends and great books.

For others, who are fortunate to have some of each, it may be worth considering that the answer is deeper, not more.

72 hours of free time each week

There are 168 hours in a week (24 x 7 = 168).

If you sleep 8 hours each night, that’s 56 sleeping hours (8 x 7 = 56).

If you work 40 hours per week, then you have 72 hours of free time each week (168 – 56 – 40 = 72).

I often make excuses for why I can’t do something. My passion is writing and my most popular excuse is, “I don’t have enough time to write because I work.”

It’s just not true. Working isn’t the problem. Time management is the problem.

This post isn’t a how-to on time management.

It’s a reminder to myself that I have enough time.

How to deal with rejection

When I first started in sales, I was making over a hundred cold calls every day selling internet advertising to SMB business owners in Arkansas (read: selling a tech product to a non-tech-savvy clientele).

Some prospects would hang up when they heard the name of my company. Others would yell about how they had already received multiple calls from my co-workers.

I was hearing “no” a lot.

There were some days that I didn’t want to come to work in the morning. More than half of my co-workers quit in the first two months.

Dealing with rejection is one of the hardest parts of a sales career. But like anything else, it’s a skill that can be learned.

Here are three strategies that salespeople can use when dealing with rejection:

1. Expect to hear “no” by default.

2. Don’t take it personally.

3. Remember: “On to the next one.”

These strategies will not only bring you more success, but they’ll also make you feel better.

1. Expect to hear “no” by default.

This is a good strategy for two reasons. One, it will keep you from getting your hopes up. Two, it will give you time to prepare your next move.

Some sales leaders say that the selling doesn’t really start until you get your first objection.

Hearing “no” is a fact of life in sales. Instead of being surprised by it, you should learn to expect it.

This will help to keep your emotions in check. I’ve noticed that rookie reps often become very excited when they think they’re about to close a deal. They start bouncing around in their seat and smiling ear-to-ear. And then, when the deal doesn’t close, they’re crushed. They get discouraged and slack off on their calls for the rest of the day.

This is emotional immaturity. It clouds your judgment and causes a salesperson to lose control of the sale. You should be controlling the emotional state of your prospect, not the other way around.

Instead of dreaming about your prospect saying “yes,” focus on your plan for when your prospect says “no.” What objections are you anticipating? What responses have you prepared for those objections?

If your prospect says “yes” right away, it should seem almost too easy.

If your prospect says “no,” then you’re prepared to handle their objection and ask for the sale again.

2. Don’t take it personally.

You can’t get a “yes” every time. It’s not possible. There are circumstances beyond your control.

Some deals just won’t close, and it could have nothing to do with your talent as a salesperson.

Work with your manager to parse out any opportunities for improvement, distill these into action items, and then set up a system for measuring and monitoring improvement.

No ego necessary.

3. Remember: “On to the next one.”

This is something my old sales manager would tell me whenever I was fixating on a lost deal.

It’s like having a hundred fishing poles in the water at the same time. Who cares if ninety of the lines aren’t getting bites? You’ve got your hands full reeling in the other ten.

With this mindset, you don’t have to worry as much about each individual encounter. When you hear a “no,” just remember all the other deals that you have in the works.

If you spend too much time worrying about what you could have done differently on a deal that didn’t close, or you let the rejection affect you emotionally and hurt your productivity as a result, then you are wasting precious time and energy that you could be using to make progress with other deals.

How to master your tone

In a previous article, we talked about Mehrabian’s “7-38-55” rule and why the tone of your voice, in some cases, is more important than the actual words you are saying. You can read the full article here

In this article, we’ll focus on how to master your tone (the sound of your voice) to ensure that what you are saying (and the meaning that you are trying to get across) aligns with how you are saying it.

We’ll focus on four main parts of tone:

  • The tempo of your words (fast or slow)
  • The pauses between those words
  • The pitch of your voice (high or low)
  • The volume at which you speak (loud or soft)

All of these, together, comprise the non-verbal part of your communication on a phone call.

  1. Tempo

A fast tempo is like electronic dance music, it gets you excited. It seems like you’re building up to something and you want to keep moving forward. 

There is one main part of any sales encounter where you want to have a fast tempo, and that’s when you’re showing value. This is the perfect time for your prospect to be getting excited about your product. This is also a time when you want to raise your volume. 

A slow tempo is like smooth jazz, it calms you down. You feel like you can lean back in your chair and relax and mull over your thoughts. 

A part of the sales encounter where you want to maintain a slow tempo is during objection handling. During this part of the call, your prospect is usually trying to rush off the phone (especially if they think they’ve made up their mind that they’re not going to buy).

As a result, your prospect will start to talk fast: “I don’t know … I can’t really think about this right now … Can you just call me tomorrow?”

If you start talking fast right along with them, then the encounter will spiral out of your control, like a snowball rolling downhill and gaining speed.

Instead, if you begin to talk with a slower tempo, this will have a calming effect on your prospect, and they may be willing to stay on the phone a little longer.

  1. Pauses

Pauses are related to tempo. Because tempo is the speed at which a passage of music is played. Pausing stops the tempo.

In a sales conversation, these pauses play a crucial role during transitions (points in the conversation when the opportunity to speak switches from one person to the other).

One of the most common transitions occurs right after you’ve asked your prospect a question.

For example, at the end of the call, when you ask for the sale, that’s a great opportunity for a long pause. 

Or, when you’ve asked your prospect an open-ended qualifying question, a long pause gives your prospect the necessary space in the conversation to provide a detailed answer. 

A more subtle opportunity for a pause is when your prospect has finished talking, but they actually still have more to say. This often happens when your prospect is giving objections.

I’m generally a proponent of punctuating all transitions during a sales conversation with long pauses—it’s a signal of confidence and grants you control over the tempo of the conversation. If you need to slow things down, a long pause will do the trick.

The only exception would be during a part of the conversation when you want to keep up a fast tempo, like when you are showing value

You can read more here about the power of the pause on a sales call.

  1. Pitch

A high pitch (tenor, flute) is sweet and whimsical. It’s hard to get mad at someone when they’re using a high pitch. 

For this reason, you can use a higher pitch when you’re joking with your prospect, building rapport, or being sarcastic. 

A low pitch (bass, drum) is more direct and commanding. It can come off wrong if used incorrectly, but is very helpful for exuding confidence and establishing control over a conversation. 

A lower pitch is most useful when you want to come across as confident and convicted, reasonable and thoughtful, or when you want to show your prospect that you care and that you truly understand where they’re coming from.

On the topic of pitch, it’s also important to be conscious of upspeak and downspeak. 

Upspeak occurs when your pitch increases as you approach the end of a sentence or a word. 

This is typically used by a speaker to indicate that they are asking a question. One often unintentional side effect of upspeak is that the speaker seems like they are unsure of what they are saying.

Downspeak is the opposite. It occurs when your pitch bends downwards as you approach the end of a sentence or a word. 

It’s very important to avoid upspeak during a part of the sales conversation when you want to be inspiring belief in your prospect. Instead, use downspeak as a more convincing tone. 

If you are asking a question, say, during qualifying, then upspeak might be helpful to signal non-verbally to your prospect that it is their turn to respond with an answer.

  1. Volume

Loud volume usually goes along with a fast tempo when you’re building excitement. 

Loud volume should be used sparingly during rapport building (when you’re laughing loudly at your prospect’s jokes, for example) or when you’re showing value (saying something like, “THIS is what sets us apart from our competitors”).

At any other time, you risk sounding like you’re trying to “bulldoze” or talk over your prospect. 

Especially if your prospect has a soft volume, make sure to bring your volume down to match theirs. 

Soft volume usually goes with a slow tempo when you’re speaking with confidence.

It’s a bit like telling a secret. You know that the information you have is valuable.

A particularly good time to talk with a soft volume is when you’re offering a discount: “This is actually the deal we had running last month, [pause here] but I talked with my manager [pause here] and she told me that we can extend it for one more day.”

It should almost sound like you have your hand over the receiver on your phone and you’re talking quietly so that not even your co-workers can hear you.  

Now, we’ve reviewed the four main parts of tone:

  • The tempo of your words
  • The pauses between those words
  • The pitch of your voice
  • The volume at which you speak

Last, but not least: tone-matching (a.k.a., mirroring) is the trump card when it comes to tone. 

Tone-matching is exactly what its name suggests: matching your tone with your prospect’s. 

If your prospect is bubbly and chirpy, then you should raise the pitch of your voice to meet theirs. If your prospect speaks quietly, then make sure to avoid speaking loudly at risk of drowning out your prospect’s voice. 

In all of the examples that we discussed above as we were reviewing the four main parts of tone, you as the salesperson were controlling the conversation with your tone. 

When we’re tone-matching, we voluntarily give up this control. 

There are two situations in which to use tone-matching:

  1. When you’re building rapport (at the very beginning of the call)
  2. When your prospect isn’t following along (at any point in the call)

When you begin the sale, you should match your prospect’s tone as best as you can. 

This is because we want to avoid any possible friction at the beginning of the call. Especially during rapport building, you want your prospect to think, “Hey, this person is like me.”

Studies show that people like other people who are like themselves. 

Once you are both speaking in harmony, then you can start to adjust your tone to see if your prospect will follow along. 

For example, when you’re showing value and talking with a faster tempo and louder volume, your prospect should start talking faster and louder with you. 

If your prospect is still speaking slow and soft, this might mean they’re uninterested or not paying attention (or at least not getting excited about what you’re saying). 

If this happens, you need to return to tone-matching to check-in with your prospect. 

If done correctly, you’ll start the encounter by matching your prospect’s tone, meeting them where they are. 

Then, as you begin to use your mastery of tone to control the conversation, your prospect will start to follow along, matching your tone, without even being consciously aware that they’re doing it. 

This control of tone will allow you to speak to your prospect’s emotional decision-making, while your literal words speak to their logical side. 

You can click here to see different tonal patterns written on staves according to music theory.

What you say is less important than how you say it

The “7-38-55” rule, originally researched by UCLA professor Albert Mehrabian in the 1960s, suggests that communication is 7% words, 38% tone of voice, and 55% body language

The actual numbers are up for debate, but the principle remains true: in communication, the literal words being spoken are only a fraction of what is being understood by the listener. 

In some cases, non-verbal messages (tone and body language) can communicate a completely different meaning than what is being said verbally. 

For example, if a salesperson says to their prospect:

“Trust me, Bob, this is a really great product.” 

But the salesperson has slumped shoulders, he’s avoiding eye contact, and his tone of voice is high-pitched. 

Then Bob might cue in to the salesperson’s body language and tone, instead of listening to what the salesperson is saying.

As a result, instead of trusting the salesperson and believing that the product is great, Bob might get the sense that the salesperson is lying or that they don’t really believe what they are saying.

Body language is especially important in outside sales where you might be going door-to-door or traveling to vendor locations to pitch your product in-person.

But for inside sales (over the phone), body language is a non-factor. Because the salesperson and the prospect can’t see each other.

Therefore, tone (the sound of your voice) becomes that much more important. 

This includes the tempo of your words (fast or slow), the pitch of your voice (high or low), the volume at which you speak (loud or soft), and the pauses between words—all of which, together, comprise the non-verbal part of your communication on a phone call.

You can read more here about how to master your tone on a sales phone call.

How to build rapport

I’m often met with blank stares when I tell rookie reps that they need to build rapport with a prospect. Mostly because they don’t know where to start.

One definition of rapport is “a close and harmonious relationship in which the people or groups concerned understand each other’s feelings or ideas and communicate well.”

That sounds like something that would take years to develop! So how can you possibly get into rapport with a prospect in the first few minutes of a phone call? 

A lot of sales reps overcomplicate rapport building. 

They try to search for something in common with their prospect. They look up the weather in their zip code or read up on their local news—this is trying too hard. 

It’s actually much easier than that, and it starts with a simple question: “How are you doing?” 

I was recently catching up with one of my friends from college and he was telling me about how he admires his girlfriend’s ability to maintain a close network of friends. 

I asked him, “What do you think makes Lauren such a good friend?” 

He thought for a second, and to my surprise, he had a very clear three-bullet-point answer:

  1. Regularly and consistently asking, “How are you?” 
  2. Listening deeply and empathetically to their answer
  3. Following up and checking in on updates in their feelings

He gave an example of one time when Lauren had asked how he was doing and he said that his back hurt. 

She then checked in with him every half hour or so about how his back was feeling and offered different ways that she could help. 

She didn’t stop checking in with him until he finally said that his back was feeling better. 

Now, switching gears back to sales, our relationships with our prospects are rarely as intimate as this. But the principle remains the same.

  1. Ask your prospect how they’re doing
  2. Listen (really listen) to their answer
  3. Build rapport from there

#1 is something most salespeople already do automatically. 

#2 is where improvement is needed.

For example, let’s imagine you’re calling a prospect for a pre-scheduled appointment to pitch them your product.

Salesperson: “Hey Karen, this is Cole from ABC company, how are you doing today?”

Prospect: “I’m alright, just been so busy.”

[Now, here is the golden opportunity to build rapport by asking a follow-up question with a caring tone. Let’s look at the wrong way to respond and the right way to respond.]

“I don’t care” salesperson: “That’s great to hear, so like I mentioned last week today we’ll be going over …” 

[If you respond like the “I don’t care” salesperson, you’ve already missed a huge opportunity to build rapport. Instead, respond like this …]

Rapport-building salesperson: “Oh, busy in a good way or busy in a bad way?”

Prospect: “Well, I guess it’s good, but it’s getting really hard to keep up with our growing clientele and I don’t really feel like we’re making much money from these projects.” 

Rapport-building salesperson: “Wow, that sounds tough, are you doing anything to solve it?”

Our main goal is to build rapport, but you’re also gaining valuable qualifying information.

For example, if you’re trying to sell an advertising product, and Karen is already saying they have too much business and low margins, that’s a red flag. 

On the other hand, if you’re selling a POS system that increases Karen’s margins and helps her business handle more volume, then this is a green light.

But, I digress. This is about rapport building, not qualifying. You can read more about qualifying here.

Now, we’ve established a “point of rapport” with Karen to which we can continue to return throughout the rest of the sales encounter.

For example, when you’re ending the phone call you can say, “Good luck with all those projects!”

Or, if you have to make a follow-up call, you can start that call by asking, “Still crazy busy over there?”

And it all starts with a simple question: “How are you doing?”

The underlying principles of this rapport-building system come from four of Dale Carnegie’s “six ways to make people like you.”

  1. Become genuinely interested in other people.
  2. Be a good listener.
  3. Talk in terms of the other person’s interests.
  4. Make the other person feel important – and do it sincerely.

Prospects buy from salespeople that they like. Rapport building is key to getting your prospect to like you. 

At the beginning of the conversation, follow where your prospect leads you. Meet them where they are. Mirror their tonality and mood. Have an honest and genuine conversation about something other than the product or service you are trying to sell. 

If you do these things, closing the deal gets a lot easier.

Thoreau on how to make a living

The first section in Thoreau’s book Walden is titled “Economy.” It deals mostly with Thoreau’s ideas about “how to get [his] living honestly, with freedom left for [his] proper pursuits.”

The following are quotes from this section of the book along with my accompanying thoughts.

  • “Most of the luxuries of, and many of the so-called comforts of life, are not only not indispensable, but positive hindrances to the elevation of mankind.”

A thought that recurs to me often is about how those in modern poverty are living lives more luxurious than even the most wealthy kings 300 years ago. But despite this, they are still regarded as being “poor.”

Here is a description of America’s “poor” in a 2020 report from The Heritage Foundation:

“According to the government’s own data, the average American family or single person, identified as poor by the Census Bureau, lives in an air-conditioned, centrally heated house or apartment that is in good repair and not overcrowded. They have a car or truck. (Indeed, 43% of poor families own two or more cars.)

The home has at least one widescreen TV connected to cable, satellite, or a streaming service, a computer or tablet with internet connection, and a smartphone. (Some 82% of poor families have one or more smartphones.)

By their own report, the average poor family had enough food to eat throughout the prior year. No family member went hungry for even a single day due to a lack of money for food.

They have health insurance (either public or private) and were able to get all “necessary medical care and prescription medication” when needed.”

It seems that our understanding of poverty is relative to time and place. America’s “poor” are poor, relative to the upper-classes of America in the 21st century. But are they poor relative to the upper-classes of America in the 19th century? Or, relative to people in the Congo or Liberia?

  • “When a man is warmed by the several modes which I have described, what does he want next? Surely not more warmth of the same kind, as more and richer food, larger and more splendid houses, finer and more abundant clothing, more numerous, incessant, and hotter fires, and the like.”

To understand this quote, it’s important to note that Thoreau believed that heat is the fundamental requirement of life. He arrived at this by finding heat to be the element held in common by the four main necessities of life: food, shelter, clothing, and fuel.

With this understanding, the quote above can be read thus: “When a man has satisfied the requirements for his survival, what does he want next?”

Thoreau’s answer: Surely not more of the same thing.

It is like sitting down for a meal. There is only so much food that one person can eat in a single sitting. To pile more than that amount onto one’s plate would be wasteful. When one becomes full, the rest will have to be thrown away.

It is the same principle over the longer duration of a lifetime. A man only needs so much. If he has more than what he requires, there will be some leftover after he dies.

There are at least a couple exceptions to this:

  1. Vanity: A man might seek higher quality in his essentials—”richer food, splendid houses, and finer clothing,” as Thoreau points out in the quote above. But Thoreau and I seem to be in agreement that this seems vain and not worthy of further consideration. Besides, if being honest with himself, a man is likely trying to achieve some higher aim by doing this (seeking esteem from others, for example).
  2. Charity: A man may need to provide for others in addition to himself. Maybe he has a family or a tribe that depend on him. Or, he might donate any of his excess earnings to charities that benefit the broader society.

It is also possible that a man does not think about what he is doing. Or he may be greatly influenced by those around him. He may continue to work a 9-to-5 job because his friends work jobs on a similar schedule and he is lonely at lunchtime on the weekdays if he is not downtown in an office.

  • When he has obtained those things which are necessary to life, there is another alternative than to obtain the superfluities; and that is, to adventure on life now, his vacation from humbler toil having commenced.”

I think Maslow’s hierarchy is a very helpful visual on this point.

The bottom two rows are “those things which are necessary to life.”

The top three rows are, I think, more in pursuit of what Thoreau refers to when he says “to adventure on life.”

My question is: when can a man make this transition? When can he stop working for the necessaries of life and start his adventure? How much money does he need?

A study by economist Angus Deaton and psychologist Daniel Kahneman analyzed the responses of 450,000 Americans polled by Gallup and Healthways in 2008 and 2009 and found that there are diminishing marginal returns of happiness after a person’s annual income increases above $75,000. Read more about the study here.

I think if you asked Thoreau, he would say the number is even less than $75,000 (probably significantly less). But not everyone is willing to build their own cabin in the woods and eat rice and molasses for every meal.

  • “Some are “industrious,” and appear to love labor for its own sake, or perhaps because it keeps them out of worse mischief …”

There are some who fit well into the economy of their time. These are the fortunate few who are well paid for a trade in which they have both passion and talent. For these, the question I pose above (When can a man working for the necessaries of life and start his adventure?) is not a concern. Such a man that fits well into the economy, is already adventuring at the same time that he is receiving wages to pay for the necessaries of his life.

But the economy is not perfectly well-suited for all men. In other words, the economy chooses favorite according to the most productive industry at the time. Today, software engineers are the chosen. Bankers, lawyers, and doctors have been lucrative for some time. In some civilizations of the past, none were richer than soldiers and politicians. Explorers, gold diggers, and oil drillers have all had their times.

But what of those who wish to pursue a trade that has gone out of fashion? What if the trade for which a man has both passion and talent does not pay enough wages for the necessaries of his life?

Thoreau explains how he was able to earn his time to read and write by working as a day-laborer.

  • “For more than five years I maintained myself thus solely by the labor of my hands, and I found that, by working about six weeks in a year, I could meet all the expenses of living.”

In other parts of Walden not quoted here, Thoreau explains how he was able to reduce his own expenses of living in four main categories: food, shelter, clothing, and fuel.

He even provides the exact figures of his expenses from July 4th to March 1st (presumably in the year 1845).

House: $28.12-1/2
Farm one year: $14.72-1/2
Food eight months: $8.74
Clothing, etc., eight months: $8.40-3/4
Oil, etc., eight months: $2.00

Total expenses: $61.99-3/4

Farm produce sold: $23.44
Earned by day-labor: $13.34

Total earnings: $36.78

This leaves a balance of $25.21-3/4. Thoreau explains that this amount was “very nearly the means with which [he] started.”

Also, most of the expenses incurred were involved in building his house by Walden Pond. A house is more often considered an investment or an asset, rather than an expense. Thoreau could have later sold the house to recoup his investment.

All things considered, it could be said that he even turned a profit. Other than the house, he believed he had gained “leisure and independence and health” for himself.

This being almost 200 years ago, it should be even easier for a modern person to achieve a similar system for themselves today, being that our base requirements for human survival (food, shelter, clothing, and fuel) have been mostly unchanged, while our means to satisfy our needs have improved (as a result of technology and modern economies).

  • “For myself I found that the occupation of a day-laborer was the most independent of any, especially as it required only thirty or forty days in a year to support one. The laborer’s day ends with the going down of the sun, and he is then free to devote himself to his chosen pursuit, independent of his labor; but his employer, who speculates from month to month, has no respite from one end of the year to the other.”

I wonder, in our modern times, what other occupations would rank highly on Thoreau’s scale of independence? It must be an occupation that leaves a man, as Thoreau says, “free to devote himself to his chosen pursuit, independent of his labor.”

Tim Ferriss wrote a book called The 4-Hour Workweek that provides some answers to this question. He suggests building an online business that generates a passive income stream (i.e., income that requires a minimal investment of your time).

There are also sites like Fiverr and Upwork, which allow people to work as freelancers from virtually anywhere, anytime.

Another option would be to work for wages in a traditional setting for an amount of time until one has built up a sizable enough nest egg to earn a living from the profits on their investments. A 10% annual return on an account of $100,000 would yield roughly $10,000 per year. This would be ample annual income to survive for one who adopted Thoreau’s low-expense lifestyle.

  • “The whole of my winters, as well as most of my summers, I had free and clear for study.”

Thoreau’s “chosen pursuit” was scholarly—mostly manifested, as far as I can tell from what I have read of his life, in reading and writing.

I realize that some have no “chosen pursuit.” This is a concern that is more fundamental than what we discuss here. These ideas are mainly for those who (1) have a “chosen pursuit, and (2) are responsible for securing for themselves their own necessaries of life.

For any who are not particularly motivated to spend their time on something other than their current daily occupation, or any trust fund babies who have all their necessaries paid for—these thoughts are of little use.

It also seems free time is not a good thing for everyone. Some wouldn’t know what to do with themselves when given the opportunity. Viktor Frankl’s “existential vacuum” is an idea worth reading on this topic.

  • “I was more independent than any farmer in Concord, for I was not anchored to a house or farm, but could follow the bent of my genius, which is a very crooked one, every moment.”

I particularly like this quote because I identify strongly with a crooked bent of, er, I should say “creativity,” and avoid the arrogance of saying “genius,” as did Thoreau.

I have often had the experience of being in the office and wanting to follow my mind on a tangent unrelated to my office work, but instead must resist and remain focused. The necessity of such focus has been a good lesson for me, but I would like also to have the freedom to follow that “crooked bent” where it may go, even when it takes an unexpected turn.

  • “But I have since learned that trade curses everything it handles; and though you trade in messages from heaven, the whole curse of trade attaches to the business.”

I think the general idea here is that you might enjoy something, but once you start doing it for money, then you might enjoy it less.

Thoreau explains that his attempt to become a teacher was a failure because he “did not teach for the good of [his] fellow-men, but simply for a livelihood.”

He also mentions that he tried trade (by “trade” I assume that Thoreau means business in general). This also, he could not do, because he found “that it would take ten years to get under way” and he was “afraid that [he] might by that time be doing what is called a good business.”

I have personally experienced this with my creative writing. There is a natural flow of creative energy that goes where it wants; the writer follows, creating along the way. It is hard enough to write creatively in this natural way.

It is even harder to control this process in a way that money and business require (for example, writing that which a market of readers will enjoy). Because then, as you are writing for “trade” (as Walden puts it), you are no longer following the natural flow of your creative energy. In my experience, the best writing comes from the natural flow.

  • “As I preferred some things to others, and especially valued my freedom, as I could fare hard and yet succeed well, I did not wish to spend my time in earning rich carpets or other fine furniture, or delicate cookery, or a house in the Grecian or the Gothic style just yet.”

I am interested in the concept of “spending” one’s time. This reminds me of something my friend said, “Time is the currency I really care about.”

There are prices for everything. A gallon of milk is $4. A car is $30,000. A share of Google stock is $1,000.

What is the price for a person’s time?

We typically think of this in terms of wages. You make an agreement with a company when you sign an offer of employment. For example, I will trade a year’s worth of my time to the company in exchange for a $100,000 annual salary.

Some form of this bargain is natural. Before economies, man had to make a similar arrangement with nature. For example, I will devote two hours of my time to hunting and gathering each day in exchange for my daily meal.

The magic of our modern economy, is that man can now trade less of his time, in exchange for more. With the same two hours as the hunter, a modern man (working at $30 per hour) could go to the grocery store and purchase a week’s supply of food—a healthy and nutritious balance of fruits and breads and meats from all over the world.

The amount of effort required in order to survive is now less. If this were the case for the hunter, I wonder, would he stop hunting? And I ask the same of the modern man—if he has enough to survive, would he stop working?

Most modern men do not stop. They continue to work in the pursuit of more.

So let me ask that question a different way: If you could trade places with Warren Buffett, would you do it?

On one hand, you would be a multi-billionaire, one of the richest people alive. On the other hand, you would be close to 100 years old, and probably nearing your death.

I have asked several people this question and every one has said “no.”

It wasn’t obvious. They had to take some time to think about it. But in the end, they all came to the same conclusion that I came to myself: I wouldn’t trade the rest of my life for any amount of money.

So this logic must break down somewhere in the middle.

We are willing to give up an hour of our time for $30 or $40 dollars, but we we aren’t willing to give up the next 50 years of our life, even for billions of dollars.

Now, not everyone is making their decisions based on pure economic rationality. People often do what they are told to, or what others around them are doing. Some have nothing better to do. Some genuinely enjoy their work.

But for those like Thoreau, who value their freedom, and find no arrangement in the labor market to fit their needs—then it might be worth considering what exact amount of money is necessary in order to purchase freedom (from the requirements of survival, and therefore from the type of work that is aimed at survival) for the rest of their life.

  • “In short, I am convinced, both by faith and experience, that to maintain one’s self on this earth is not a hardship but a pastime, if we will live simply and wisely; as the pursuits of the simpler nations are still the sports of the more artificial. It is not necessary that a man should earn his living by the sweat of his brow, unless he sweats easier than I do.”

I view this quote as having similar importance to society as this one by Blaise Pascal: “All of humanity’s problems stem from man’s inability to sit quietly in a room alone.”

Our way of life is changing more rapidly than at any other point in human history, yet it seems we have not quite yet figured how to actually live the lives that we have made possible for ourselves. Instead, we go right on making more and more possible.

How do you slow down a system that was built to never be stopped?

Sources:

Heritage Foundation article: https://www.heritage.org/poverty-and-inequality/commentary/how-poor-really-are-americas-poor

Maslow’s Hierarchy image: https://www.yogawallanyc.com/blog/2019/4/24/what-is-health-part-1

Time article on $75,000 study: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2019628,00.html

Tim Ferris blog: https://tim.blog/

Viktor Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning: https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/3403095/mod_resource/content/1/56ViktorFrankl_Mans%20Search.pdf

The art of mini-closing

As a salesperson, your time is valuable. If you’re spending time on a deal that’s NOT going to close, this is costing you time that you could otherwise spend on a deal that WILL close. 

A longer sales cycle exacerbates this problem. Because the amount of time at risk of loss grows in proportion to the amount of time invested into a longer sales cycle. 

Assuming you have a large market of prospect’s to pick from, you should start with the prospects that have the highest chances of closing, in order to get the greatest return on investment for your sales time and effort. 

“Mini-closing” is a strategy that can be used at any point in the sales cycle (short or long cycle) to help you achieve this higher ROI by weeding out prospect’s who have lower potential to become customers.

It’s similar to Sandler’s “up-front contact” in that its purpose is to “avoid surprises.” But while Sandler’s UFC is primarily used to get on the same page with a prospect in terms of expectations before a meeting, a mini-close can be used at any time to make sure that your prospect is still moving in the direction of the sale. 

A mini-close is defined as “any question, before the final ask for the sale, by which a salesperson aims to determine if their prospect is still planning to become a customer.”

In other words, asking your prospect if they’re still planning to buy, at any point before you actually ask them to buy. 

What does a mini-close sound like?

The most direct and brutally honest form of a mini-close sounds like this:

“Are you still planning to buy my product?”

But that’s too rough, and will likely cause an end to the sales encounter. So we need to add a little filler and fluff on the front-end. Something like this:

“I want to take a second to check in here, Bob, just to make sure we’re being respectful of each other’s time, are you still planning to buy my product?”

But still, the question itself is too direct. And the topic of being “respectful of each other’s time” can be emotionally-charged and misinterpreted. 

My preferred language sounds like this:

“I want to take a second to check in here, Bob, just to make sure we’re on the same page, if I can offer you a product that fits all your requirements, would you be comfortable moving forward today?”

It’s polite; it has filler and fluff so that you can save face from the true question. 

It’s specific, because the question asks about moving forward “today.” 

And there is also a little trickery woven in with the line “fits all your requirements.” 

Because if a product fits ALL your requirements, then of course you would be willing to buy. In this way, the question is designed to encourage a “yes” answer.

It also sets the salesperson up for a perfect rebuttal if the prospect answers “no” to this question. 

You can rephrase your question to make it sounds like your prospect is saying they’re no longer interested in that which they already told you that they were interested in, earlier, during qualifying. 

You could say, “You mean to tell me, Bob, that if I found you a product for half of what you’re paying currently that does twice as much as the product you already have, AND you didn’t have to even lift a finger to get it started, that’s not something you would be interested in?” 

This is a good trick to save yourself if you’ve mini-closed too early and need to buy yourself some more time to show your prospect some more value. The idea is to keep getting yes’s as you move along in your pitch, leading up to a “yes” in response to your final ask for the sale. 

When is the best time to use a mini-close? 

As a salesperson, you are responsible for bringing value to the encounter. This is what entices your prospect to stay engaged.

But you don’t want to give away this value for free. 

In the same way that you wouldn’t give away your product for free when you ask for the final sale, you also want to ask a price for the perceived value of your product throughout the pitch—and that price is buying expectation from your prospect. 

This is the high-level principle that underlies mini-closing: trading buying expectation for value. 

As a salesperson, you are asking for buying expectation and offering value. While a prospect asks for value and offers buying expectation. 

By “buying expectation,” we mean the expectation that the prospect will buy your product. And by “value,” of course, we mean the value of your product. 

Throughout the pitch, if you’re doing it right, the perceived value of your product should increase in the eyes of your prospect. This allows you, in turn, to ask for more buying expectation. The prospect is willing to oblige, because they fear ending the encounter and missing out on the value that you have to offer. In other words, they have F.O.M.O.

The formality and directness of your mini-close depends on the stage of the sales process. In the earlier stages, your mini-closes should be informal and less direct. In the later stages, your mini-closes should be formal and direct. 

This is in accordance with the graph below. A salesperson should ask for less buying expectation while they have still yet to show their product’s full value. 

But in the later stages of the sales encounter, as the salesperson is almost finished showing all the value that they have to offer in their product, then it is time to start asking for maximal buying expectation.

Notice that the red line above is both straight and has a slope equal to one.

The line is straight because we want the sales encounter to be a smooth ride for our prospect. We don’t want to ask for very little buying expectation throughout the encounter, and then all of a sudden ask our prospect for the final sale, as if by surprise. 

This is bad for the customer, because it may be jarring and unexpected. And this is bad for the salesperson, because they won’t have a sense of whether or not their prospect will say “yes,” and have thus lost control of the sale. 

The line has a slope equal to one because a line more shallow than this would mean that the salesperson is offering too much value without asking for enough buying expectation in return. If the line were more steep, then this would mean the salesperson is asking for too much buying expectation without offering enough value. 

The mini-close is our GPS which allows us to determine if we are still on-line. 

If we ask for a mini-close, and our prospect responds in the negative, then we know we need to show some more value before asking another mini-close to check again to see if our prospect is back on-line. 

If we ask for a mini-close, and our prospect responds in the positive, then we know we can keep some value in our back pockets in the meantime, until later in the pitch when we might need to recover from a negative response to a mini-close. 

Here’s an example:

This is a particularly useful strategy if you’ve predicted an objection early on and want to see if it can be handled before you spend the time and effort to go through your entire pitch. 

For example, let’s say you’re selling HR software. 

You’re qualifying at the beginning of the call, and you ask about your prospect’s timeline. 

Your prospect says, “We won’t be able to get anything started until January next year. That’s when our contract with [other HR software company] renews and we want to get everything started on the first of the new year.”

Uh-oh. That’s a non-starter. 

Because you’re having this conversation in June and January is six months away. It’s your company’s policy that you can’t sign any contracts with a start date more than a month in the future. 

So you ask for a mini-close: 

“Susan, if I showed you an HR software that was a dream-come-true for your organization and could relieve a lot of your pain points, would you be willing to get something like that started sooner than January?”

If Susan says “yes,” then you can proceed with your pitch, but you want to continue mini-closing throughout to make sure Susan continues to see that your product really is a ‘dream-come-true’ that they would be willing to start before January. 

If Susan says “no,” then you have a decision to make. 

You can either (1) dig deeper on the mini-close and possibly decide that the prospect isn’t worth pitching any further because their probability of closing is low, or (2) show a little more value in an effort to show Susan that your product really is a ‘dream-come-true’ and then ask the mini-close question again to see if she’s changed her mind about getting started before January. If Susan still hasn’t changed her mind, then it might be time to move on to the next prospect. 

After all, this is the purpose of mini-closing: to conserve your time and energy once you’ve determined a prospect is not a buyer, so that you can then spend that time and energy on a higher-conversion prospect.

Overcoming the price objection

This article is longer than usual, because pricing is a particularly important part of sales. Before diving into a step-by-step example, here’s a high-level overview of what we’ll cover:

  1. Start with a higher price point.
  2. Handle any non-price objections first.
  3. Handle the price objection indirectly.
  4. Determine what your prospect is willing to pay.
  5. How to lower your price.

Let’s imagine you’re a SaaS salesperson selling a VoIP solution. 

You’ve got three different packages: 

  • Basic ($500 per year)
  • Standard ($1,000 per year)
  • Premium ($2,000 per year)

And each package has features that can be added or removed (which raises or lowers the price).

Which one do you present to the prospect? 

Not the Basic package.

Because then you have nowhere to go. The Basic package is your cheapest offering. If the prospect says “that’s too expensive,” then you’re stuck. You can’t go any lower. 

The best shot you have at that point is to overcome the price objection, but even then, your best case scenario is closing the prospect on your lowest package.

But if you start with the Standard or the Premium and the prospect says “that’s too expensive,” then you have some wiggle room. In other words, you maintain your ability to offer a discount

Whether you choose the Standard or the Premium depends on what you learned about your prospect during qualifying and throughout the pitch.

Maybe you learned that their current VoIP solution doesn’t include call tracking and this is something they would really like—then you should offer a package that includes call tracking.

You also learned that their current solution costs $750 for the year.

In this case, you definitely don’t want to start with your bare-bones Basic package. Your prospect’s current solution is already costing them almost as much as your Standard package, and they want to add new features.

For a prospect like this (one who sees the value in what you’re offering and has a current price point that’s not too far off from your top-shelf offering), you should start with your fully-loaded Premium package. 

Now, in a sales encounter like this, there are two unsuccessful mindsets that will cause a junior rep to start with a lower price point than they should: 

(I) If their current price is $750, I can offer them our solution at $500 and they’ll be sure to buy. My commission won’t be as much, but at least I’ll get a guaranteed sale.

(II) I don’t want to offer something too much higher than what they’re already paying (or expecting to pay). They might get mad or scoff at me and tell me it’s ridiculous.

Successful salespeople don’t have either of these mindsets. A successful salesperson thinks like this:

(III) This is the best prospect I’ve had all week. They’re perfectly qualified and seem to resonate with the value from my pitch. I’m going to take this opportunity to bring in a bigger account. If they balk at the price, I’ll remind them of the value that they saw earlier.

Other than having the flexibility to go lower if your prospect objects, there’s also a psychological reason that it’s best to start with a higher price. It’s called anchoring

Put simply, anchoring bias is the tendency that people have to “give too much weight to the first number put forth in a discussion and then inadequately adjust from that starting point.” You can read more about anchoring from Harvard Law School here

For the purpose of sales, anchoring means that starting with a higher price point sets your prospect’s “anchor” higher, so that any lower prices mentioned thereafter seem like a “deal” compared to the price point that was first mentioned. 

Quick summary. There are two reasons a salesperson should start by offering their prospect a higher price point. First, they maintain their ability to discount. Second, they take advantage of the psychological effect of anchoring.

So, for our example, we know we’re going to ask for the sale on the fully-loaded Premium package. Now, what happens next? There are three possibilities: 

(A) Your prospect buys.

Woohoo! Go hit the gong. You just brought in a whale. 

(B) Your prospect objects about something other than price.

Interesting. There still might be a price objection coming, but it wasn’t your prospect’s first thought. This is usually a good sign, as it means your prospect is not blown away by the high price. Proceed with handling objections as usual. Read more about that here (smokescreen objections) and here (real objections).

(C) Your prospect objects about price.

This is what we’re expecting. It makes sense, especially if we offered a price that is above what our prospect is currently paying or was expecting to pay. 

But we don’t want to lower our price right away. Instead, we want to start out by handling the price objection as if coming down on our price wasn’t an option. 

For this specific example, we don’t want to address the price objection head-on. Instead, we want to “deflect” the objection. I learned this strategy from Jordan Belfort. Read more about it here

For this case, we want to respond something like, “I hear what you’re saying. Let me ask you this Roger, do you think our VoIP offering will be better than what you have currently?” 

And then you want to listen very carefully.

(i) If your prospect says “no,” well, then you have a bigger problem. Because your prospect doesn’t see value in what you’re selling. Maybe your pitch was bad, but that’s a separate issue.  

(ii) If your prospect says “yes,” then you want to circle in for the close. Build more value and ask for the sale again at the same price point.

(iii) If your prospect says “yes, but …” then what comes after the “but” will probably be another objection. It will either be a different objection or the same objection (price).

If it’s a different objection, then price might not be the real issue. You’ll need to handle this objection first, before handling the price objection. 

If it’s the same objection (price), then price might be the real issue. 

You can try deflecting and looping one more time to close at the same price point, but then you want to start addressing the price objection more directly. 

Still, don’t come down on your price point yet. Before doing so, you want to get your prospect to tell you the price that they’re willing to pay. 

This strategy is similar to Sandler’s “up-front contract.” Its purpose is to avoid surprises (e.g., your prospect having a much smaller budget than you expected). Read more about it here

Before getting into a price negotiation, up-front contract with a question such as, “For the package we’ve discussed, what price point would you need to be comfortable moving forward today?” 

Hopefully your prospect names a price point that’s higher than your lowest offering. If you qualified for budget at the beginning of the encounter, this should always be the case.

From there, it’s finally time to come down on your price. But your work isn’t done yet. Exactly how you present your lower price is vitally important. 

It can’t appear too easy, because then it seems fake, like the salesperson who tells you that the discount is going to expire tomorrow, even though you know there will always be a discount. 

In other words, you don’t want your prospect to think that all your other customers end up getting the lower price in the end or, worse, that you had the lower price all along but wanted to see if you could get some more money out of your prospect. 

If your prospect gets the slightest inkling of either of these feelings, it might end the encounter.

Instead, you want your prospect to believe they’re getting a deal—the highest possible value for the lowest possible price. This intensifies the “anchoring” effect from before. 

In some companies, you’ll have to get manager approval to offer a discount or sell a lower package. Even if that’s not the case at your company, I still recommend doing something similar. 

You can say, “Okay, can you give me one second, Roger? I’m going to put you on hold and try to figure this out with my manager.”

This creates the perception that you’re really working hard to get your prospect a deal. 

Even if you don’t have a manager, act as your own manager. Take your time to prepare your next offering for the prospect. Add and remove features to create the package that fits both the needs and budget of your prospect.

When you get back on the phone, say something like, “Okay Roger, here’s what we can do …”

You might have to do this one or two more times before you reach a price with which your prospect is comfortable, but hopefully this means you’ll be making a sale on the call.

But let’s not forget all the important steps we had to go through to get to this point. We didn’t just lower the price right away. Here’s a summary:

  1. Start with a price point that’s slightly higher than your prospect’s budget (maintaining your ability to discount and taking advantage of anchoring).
  2. Handle any non-price objections first.
  3. Handle the price objection indirectly (using Belfort’s strategies, “deflect” and “loop”).
  4. Use Sandler’s “up-front contract” to determine what your prospect is willing to pay.
  5. Handle the price objection directly by coming down on your price (make sure to present the lower price in a way that convinces the prospect they’re getting a deal).

It’s possible for your prospect to buy at any point throughout steps 1-5. 

If you start right away with lowering the price and your prospect doesn’t buy, then you’re dead in the water. 

But if you use this strategy, you’ll give yourself every possible chance to close the deal before playing your final trump card—offering a lower price. 

How to overcome “smokescreen” objections

In an earlier article, I wrote about how to handle objections. But not all objections are created equal. And there are some objections that shouldn’t be handled. 

In fact, there are some objections that you’re better off ignoring. 

Crazy, right? When have you ever heard sales advice that tells you to ignore your prospect? 

Never, hopefully. Because it’s a terrible sales strategy, most of the time. But for this specific situation, it’s the right strategy. 

There are two main types of objections that we’ll talk about in this article: (1) real objections and (2) “smokescreen” objections. 

Real objections are like brick walls. Smokescreen objections are like clouds of smoke. 

If you were faced with a brick wall and you needed to get to the other side, what would you do? 

You’d have to deconstruct the wall, break through it, build a door, or find a way around. But you couldn’t just walk through it without breaking your nose. 

With a cloud of smoke on the other hand, if you needed to get to the other side, what would you do? 

Just walk through. 

This isn’t always a natural reaction. Most people are cautious around clouds of smoke. And for good reason: it can be scary because you can’t see and you don’t know what’s on the other side. 

And it’s the same with objections. 

When a junior sales rep gets a smokescreen objection, they don’t know how to handle it. 

Often they’ll try to address the objection head-on in an attempt to overcome it by winning the prospect over to their way of thinking by force. Their response often starts with the word “but” and ends with a statement. Argumentative. Confrontational. All wrong.

A pro salesperson, on the other hand, knows that a smokescreen objection is just that, smoke. 

“They’re not real,” my old sales director used to say. “Just walk through them.”

So, you understand the general concept, now there are two things we need to learn:

  1. How to differentiate between real objections and smokescreen objections
  2. How to “walk through” a smokescreen objection

First, how can you tell if an objection is real or just a smokescreen? 

If a prospect has been repeating the same objection throughout the sales encounter, it’s probably a real objection. 

For example, let’s say you’re selling a recruiting solution to a sales manager. And that sales manager has been telling you, “I’ll need to talk with our CEO to get approval on budget before we can get anything started.” 

There are a few key reasons why this might be a real objection:

  • The prospect has mentioned the objection more than once.
  • The prospect has been mentioning the objection since the beginning of the sales encounter. 
  • The objection makes logical sense (maybe because you’ve heard a similar objection from other prospect’s before or it just seems to fit the prospect’s situation).

If it’s a real objection, then there’s a real problem that needs to be solved before you can close the deal. You can read more about how to handle real objections here

On the other hand, there are some objections that should NOT be handled. As we mentioned before, these are called “smokescreen” objections. 

It’s not always easy, and there’s no universal rule, but there are a couple clear indicators that an objection is a smokescreen:

  • The prospect gives you an objection that was not mentioned at all in the sales encounter previously, despite your rigorous and exhaustive qualifying.
  • The prospect starts to give you one objection after the other, and the objections are not related, nor do they follow a logical line of thought. Even if you handle one objection successfully, the prospect will give you another, and another. This is called “kettle logic” and you can read more about it here

Here are a few examples of smokescreen objections that you might have heard before:

  • I’m busy.
  • Can I call you back tomorrow?
  • I want to think about it.
  • I need to talk to my partner.

Now, we must be careful. Because these objections are not always smokescreens. They are only smokescreens if they also fit one of the two indicators mentioned above (the objection has come out of the blue or it’s not logical). 

When a prospect gives you a smokescreen objection, we know one thing for sure: they’re not ready to buy. But why?

It’s almost always because there is a deeper objection, a real objection, behind the smokescreen. 

So the goal now becomes getting past the smokescreen so that the prospect can tell us their real objection. 

Now, how do you “walk through” a smokescreen objection? 

In the most polite way possible, carry on the conversation without addressing the smokescreen directly.

To avoid making your prospect feel like they’ve been ignored, make sure to use an empathy statement. Here are some of my favorites:

  • No worries.
  • I totally understand.
  • That makes sense.
  • I see where you’re coming from.
  • I appreciate you sharing that. 

But then move right along without skipping a beat. 

The best way to keep the conversation going is to ask a question after your empathy statement. But if the smokescreen objection is particularly weak, you might be a little more aggressive and just rephrase your ask for the close. 

Here’s an example of a more aggressive approach to a weak smokescreen objection: 

Salesperson: “Awesome, so all we need to get started today is just to put a credit card on file and then you’ll be all set.” 

Prospect: (First pauses for a while, and seems like they’re considering it, and then says …) “I want to wait until my partner gets back to the office this afternoon.”

Salesperson: “No worries, Bob. What we can do then is I’ll just take the credit card from you now and then you can call me back once you’ve talked with your partner if you guys aren’t wanting to move forward. How does that sound?” 

(I would especially use this approach in a case where I know Bob is the 100% owner of the company and his “partner” is actually just his son that started working for him.)

Here’s an example of a more conservative approach to a stronger smokescreen objection: 

Salesperson: “Awesome, so all we need to get started today is just to put a credit card on file and then you’ll be all set.” 

Prospect: “I don’t know, Cole. I’m not sure. I’m also pretty busy right now. Actually, I just pulled up to a job. Can I call you back later?”

Salesperson: “No worries, Bob. You’re a busy guy. I bet there are ten guys waiting for your instructions on that job site. Tell me this at least, do you think the program could work for your business?”

Prospect: (Pauses, let’s his fear subside for a second, and actually thinks of an answer to your intelligent question, and then says …) “You know, it just might. I particularly liked what you said about XYZ feature. But I’m just so busy right now” (exhales audibly). 

Salesperson: “I understand, Bob, and I appreciate you sharing that with me. How about this? I know you’re busy right now so I’m going to send the contract over to your email so you can review later. If you think the program could work, I think you’re right, so we could start you on our 30-day trial and then review the results together after that. How does that sound?”

But whatever you do, don’t try to handle the smokescreen objection directly, like this:

Salesperson: “Awesome, so all we need to get started today is just to put a credit card on file and then you’ll be all set.” 

Prospect: “I don’t know, Cole. I’m not sure. I’m also pretty busy right now. Actually, I just pulled up to a job. Can I call you back later?”

Salesperson: “Yea, it does sound like you’re busy. What times are you available later today?”

Prospect: “I can talk again at 4pm …”

And the rest doesn’t matter, you’ve already lost control of the sales encounter.

You let Bob start to steer the conversion as soon as you granted legitimacy to his “busy” objection by asking for times to call back later. Chances that Bob picks up the phone for your 4pm follow-up are low. 

So there you have it, a step-by-step guide for identifying smokescreen objections and handling appropriately. Here’s a review of what we’ve discussed:

  1. How to differentiate between real objections and smokescreen objections
  2. How to “walk through” a smokescreen objection
  3. Different strategies based on whether the smokescreen is weak or strong

Remember, real objections are like brick walls. Smokescreen objections are like clouds of smoke. Real objections need to be handled. Smokescreen objections can be walked through.

10 reasons why sales might not be for you

Sales isn’t for everyone. My goal with this article is to convince you NOT to do sales. If you get to the end and still think that sales is the right career path for you, then I think there’s a pretty good chance that you’re right. 

Whether you’re a recent grad who’s been told “you would be good in sales,” a career-changer looking to make the move into sales, or a new hire in your first sales role, here are ten things to double check before you go any farther down a sales career path.

1. You’re afraid of rejection.

You will get hung up on. You will get yelled at (just for doing your job). And you will hear “no” a lot (like more than 90% of the time). If this scares you, sales isn’t for you. Sales is about staying hungry while chasing after the 10% of your prospects that will say “yes.” And letting rejections roll off your back like rain rolls off a roof.

2. You’re overly emotional.

Some emotion is a good thing. You need to have empathy for your prospect’s situation. You should even be able to feel their pain point. But you can’t let your own emotions get in the way. You can’t get angry when a deal doesn’t close. You can’t get sad when you miss quota. There’s a difference between having emotional intelligence and being emotional.

3. You take things personally.

At some point in history, everyone decided it’s socially acceptable to be rude to salespeople. It’s not because you’re you; it’s just because you’re in sales. You’ll also be getting feedback from your manager constantly and some of it will seem personal (like the tone of your voice). If you can’t separate your ego from your sales performance, you won’t survive in sales.

4. You’re low-energy.

This is important not only for talking to prospects, but also for being surrounded by sales co-workers. You can count on caffeine-loving Energizer bunnies sitting to the left and right of you. If this sounds exhausting, you probably won’t enjoy working on a sales team.

5. You hate meeting new people.

Every new prospect you meet will be a “stranger” and you’ll have to make them like you. Cold calling through a list of leads is a bit like speed dating. Building rapport is similar to small talk at a cocktail party. This one should seem obvious, but antisocial homebodies should steer clear of a sales role.

6. You love the sound of your own voice.

If your favorite thing is to talk about yourself, sales isn’t right for you. A common misconception is that sales is about making a big convincing speech (like Don Draper from Mad Men). It’s not. Sales is about asking the right questions and listening. For example, think of the classic “sell me this pen” sales test. An amateur will start talking about the pen. A pro will ask their prospect a question.

7. You’re an over-thinker.

Sales isn’t rocket science … unless you’re selling rockets (in which case you should probably bring a scientist to the pitch with you). There are parts of sales that can get complicated (like your CRM software). But when it comes to actually talking with a prospect, simple is best. Shooting from the hip will win out over going down rabbit holes.

8. You prefer project-based work.

Some people enjoy working for months on end on a single project—building a model in excel, writing code for a new feature, or putting together a pitch deck. This type of work allows you to put in your headphones and get lost in your computer screen. Sales is the opposite. You’re constantly going from one thing to another: checking email, picking up the phone, preparing for a pitch, picking up the phone again, game-planning with your manager, and talking to your co-workers.

9. You prefer email over phone.

Salespeople pick up the phone. They love talking to people so much that they sometimes do it even when it’s not necessary (like calling a restaurant to check if they’re open when a quick Google search would show their hours). If you plan to beat quota using your email game, you should be in marketing instead of sales.

10. You’re uncomfortable with volatility in your paycheck.

This problem will decrease over time, as your sales skills improve and you’re consistently hitting your commission targets. But in the beginning you might have a few months where you miss quota and have to rely on your base salary. If you prefer a steady paycheck over betting on yourself to hit a bigger financial goal, you would be better off in a role without variable compensation.

By now, hopefully you’ve already stopped reading if you’ve decided sales isn’t for you.

If you made it this far, I’m going to assume that you identify strongly with the opposites of all the bad-for-sales characteristics listed above. If so, then it’s safe for me to tell you, in good faith, how I really feel … sales is awesome! 

Here are a few quick reasons why I love sales:

  • Ability to control your career trajectory and earning potential
  • Learning a fundamental component of a strong business acumen
  • Talking to people for a living

This article would double in size if I wrote out the full list. If you’re just starting on your sales career path, godspeed and don’t hesitate to reach out!

 

Don’t assume the objection on a follow-up

Let’s say you had a pitch last week. You didn’t close the deal on the call because the prospect gave you an objection that you couldn’t handle. So you were forced to set a follow-up appointment and hope for the best.

Now it’s time for the follow-up. The phone rings and the prospect picks up. You say hello and build some rapport, and then what?

Whatever you do, don’t remind the prospect of their objection. This gives the prospect an easy way out. Instead, ask for the sale again, as if you had never heard their objection in the first place.

If the prospect picked up the phone for the follow-up, this means they’re at least thinking about buying. Don’t put doubt back into their mind by bringing up their objection again.

For example, let’s say you got this objection: I need to talk to my partner first.

When you call for the follow up, DO NOT say, “Hey Bob, have you had a chance to talk to your partner yet?”

This is what I mean by “assuming the objection.” Don’t do it.

Because if Bob says “no,” then the follow-up is over before it’s even started.

Instead, after you’ve said hello and built rapport, say, “So Bob, I know last time we talked it seemed like you were pretty interested in our product. Are you ready to get everything going?”

Here’s why: your prospect will take the path of least resistance. If you feed them an objection, they’re going to use it.

Instead, if you ask for the sale again in an open-ended way, then there are three possibilities:

  1. They buy.
  2. They come up with a new objection.
  3. They repeat their objection from the last call.

And here’s what you can do in each situation:

  1. Great! Money in the bank.
  2. This might be a “smokescreen” objection. In other words, if a prospect keeps switching their objections, then they might not be real. There might be a deeper objection (or it could just be fear), so you need to dig in.
  3. This usually confirms that the objection is legitimate. You should come to the follow-up prepared to handle the objection if it does turn out to be real.

Don’t assume the objection. Ask for the sale in an open-ended way. Then take one of the three paths above based on how your prospect responds.

“Put me on hold”

This is one of my favorite lines in phone sales.

It’s perfect for when your prospect is giving you any of the following excuses for why they need to get off the phone:

  • Can I call you back in five minutes? 
  • My wallet’s in the car. 
  • I have a customer in front of me. 
  • I need to talk to my partner.

Your chances of closing decrease dramatically once you let your prospect off of the phone.

Oftentimes, a prospect just needs a chance to breathe before they make a buying decision. If you’re on the phone with them the whole time, it feels like a high-pressured sales call.

This is the reason they’re giving you the objection in the first place. It’s not a real objection. It’s code for: “You’ve just given me a lot of information, and I’m not quite ready to make a decision.” They might be feeling a little nervous or scared. 

Being put on hold is the perfect middle-ground. The phone call continues. But the prospect gets a chance to take a deep breath and gather their thoughts.

In some cases, the objection is legitimate. Maybe the prospect’s wallet really is out in their car. And they have to walk out of their office to go and grab it. 

In either case, whether it’s a fake or legitimate objection, your chances of closing go way down if you allow your prospect to end the phone call.

Because prospects are busy. They’ve likely got a dozen other things going on during the middle of their business day, and even though they might promise to call you back in five minutes, they’re going to get distracted by an email or another urgent issue.

And then you have to spend your valuable sales effort re-engaging them. Even if they do come back later and close the deal, you’ve lost time that you could have otherwise spent closing other deals.

Not to mention, if you’ve done a good job of building momentum throughout the call, all the value and excitement is top of mind for the prospect at the end of the call (this is when they’re in the best emotional state to buy). If they have too much time to think about it on their own, they might talk themselves out of it. 

Using the “put me on hold” trick gets it done on the call, which (1) saves you the time that you would need to spend following up to re-engage the prospect, and (2) increases your chances of closing the deal using the momentum you’ve already built up on the call.

Ask follow-up questions when qualifying

When I listen to junior sales reps that are still learning to qualify, it often sounds “robotic.”

I notice this particularly in the transitions between questions. After a prospect gives an answer, a junior rep will go straight on to the next question, like a receptionist collecting info at the DMV.

There are some answers during qualifying that require “digging in.” This includes any answer that is ambiguous, confusing, or seems like it might be just the tip of the iceberg.

An experienced sales rep will ask follow-up questions to dig deeper into surface-level answers.

For example, if you ask a prospect, “So, Carol, when would you like to get this program started?”

And Carol answers, “Sometime in the next couple months.”

That’s a surface-level answer. 

Junior reps will often accept this answer and move on to their next qualifying question. Because they don’t know what they should be listening for. 

A senior sales rep, on the other hand, knows that when it comes time (at the end of the call) to battle objections and hold the prospect accountable to their qualifying answers, you need something specific and well-explained so that you can set clear buying expectations and action items. 

Knowing this, a senior sales rep is going to dig in for a more specific answer … 

Salesperson: “Carol, did you have a more specific date in mind?”

Carol: “No, not really.”

Salesperson: “I know you mentioned you need to have the program in place before your grand opening. Remind me again, when is the opening?”

Carol: “Oh, that’s right. Yea, it’s on July 4th.”

Salesperson: “Got it, so would you say we should have the program started by July 4th?” 

Carol: “Yea, we should actually start it the week before the opening.”

Salesperson: “What about July 1st?” 

Carol: “Yea, that sounds good.”

It’s a lot easier to get this information at the beginning of the phone call (during qualifying), than it is at the end of the call (when you’re battling objections). 

Because at the end of the call, Carol will be more shy about sharing information that she knows might be used against her to close the deal. 

Now that you’ve asked follow-up questions to dig deeper in qualifying, you’ll have a better response prepared when Carol gives you an objection. 

For example, at the end of the call, Carol says, “I want to think about it.”

If all you knew was that Carol wanted to get started sometime in the next couple months, you might have trouble battling this objection (because Carol’s sense of urgency is ambiguous).

But because you dug deeper and asked follow-up questions during qualifying, now you’re prepared to handle the objection by expediting Carol’s timeline and setting firm next steps … 

Salesperson: “No worries, and remind me, when was your grand opening again? 

Carol: “July 4th.”

Salesperson: “Okay, and you said you wanted to have the program start the week before the opening, right?”

Carol: “That’s right.” 

Salesperson: “Okay, well today is June 22nd. And it will take a couple days for our operations team to have everything set up. So what if we set our onboarding appointment for June 27th.”

Carol: “That sounds fine.”

Salesperson: “One other option would be to get everything out of the way right now, that way I won’t be wasting your time with another meeting. All we would need is to put a credit card on file … ”

Being able to handle an objection like this at the end of the call, is only possible if you qualify correctly at the beginning of the call. 

If you dig into shallow answers with follow-up questions during qualifying, you will have all the ammo you need to battle objections when you ask for the sale. 

3 things you must do before asking for the sale

During rapport building, you become your prospect’s friend. 

During qualifying and pitching, you start to act more as a trusted professional. 

But when it comes to asking for the sale, you clearly become a salesperson.

And the mood on the call will change. Even if your prospect liked and trusted you before, they may become skeptical (even stand-offish) when you ask them to make a buying decision. 

At this point, it becomes far more difficult to keep your prospect on the phone, especially if they’ve made up their mind that they don’t want to buy.

So you need to make sure of a few things before you ask for the sale:

  1. You’ve shown all your product’s value (and the prospect understands)
  2. You’re prepared with all your qualifying ammo (to battle objections) 
  3. You’ve already handled any anticipated objections 

It will be much more difficult to backtrack and do these things after you’ve already asked for the sale. 

Your prospect will be less open-minded about seeing value (because they are now more focused on thinking of and defending their objections).

They will be more shy and protective of their qualifying info (because it’s obvious now that you are going to try and use it against them to close the sale).

And they will now use all of their objections against you (even if you anticipated them), if you don’t verbally address them and put them to bed before asking for the sale.

If you’ve done all this before asking for the sale, then there should only be two possibilities when you ask for the sale: either the client gives you their credit card, or they give you an unanticipated objection. 

Even if you get an unanticipated objection, you’ll still be able to handle it with the value you’ve shown (#1) and the qualifying info you’ve gathered (#2).

Also, because you already handled all their anticipated objections earlier in the call, the prospect will have enough patience to go through two or three objection handling “loops” (whereas it’s much harder to handle all the anticipated AND unanticipated objections at the very end of the call). 

So remember, before you ask for the sale, make sure you’ve (1) shown value, (2) qualified, and (3) handled any anticipated objections. Doing these three things will dramatically increase your chances of closing the deal on the call.

How to re-qualify

As a brief refresher, qualifying is the process of determining whether a lead has the potential to become a customer. This is achieved by asking questions to identify certain “buying” characteristics in a lead (e.g., budget, timeline, pain point).

There are multiple scenarios where you might be going into a sales encounter with pre-qualified info:

  • Your marketing system captured some info from the customer on a landing page. 
  • Your SDR qualified for you and took notes on the appointment-setting call. 
  • You already talked to one decision maker and now you’re talking to the other. 
  • You did your own research before the call.
  • You qualified at the beginning of a long demo/pitch and need to re-qualify before asking for the sale. 

In these cases, you’ll always want to re-qualify.

In other words, you don’t want to take the pre-qualified info at face value. Things may have changed. The prospect could have inputted false info into the form on the landing page. Your SDR may have misunderstood the prospect. One DM could have a different view of things than a different DM. A prospect could change their qualifying answers during the course of a demo/pitch. For these reasons, you want to make sure and confirm any pre-qualified info you already have—I call this re-qualifying.

Now, there’s a right way and a wrong way to re-qualify. When listening to my reps, I notice one bad habit most often, and that’s the tendency to ask leading questions (i.e., assuming the answer within the question).

For example, “Bob, you wanted to get this started today, right?” That’s a leading question. That’s the wrong way to re-qualify.

Qualifying should never feel like an interrogation (whether it’s pre-qualifying, re-qualifying, or any other type of qualifying). You shouldn’t be asking leading questions like your customer is on the witness stand. This makes it obvious to the customer that you’re trying to get them to go in a certain direction, which causes the encounter to feel forced and inauthentic.

Instead, ask open-ended questions.

For example, “Bob, when did you want to get this started?”

Notice the subtle difference between those two questions. The first (the wrong way) is a “yes” or “no” question that assumes the answer. The second (the right way) is an open-ended question that invites Bob to give a more detailed answer.

Even if you think you already know the answer, don’t let the customer know that.

It’s a common expression in product management that users will often “take the path of least resistance.” It’s the same for your customers. If you offer up an easy answer to a leading question, they’re just going to say, “Yea, that sounds right.”

Instead, an open-ended question requires some thought. “Yes” and “no” aren’t options. There has to be more specificity and explanation in response to an open-ended question.

This gives your customer an opportunity to update you with any new information. It also gives you the chance to confirm information that you already know. 

Oftentimes I’ll find that my customers will change their answers in the time between pre-qualifying and re-qualifying. This tells me that they’re not sure and it might be an area where I need to dig in.

All in all, this topic is fairly deep in the treasure chest of sales knowledge. But if you’re already a master qualifier, re-qualifying is an area where you can take your qualifying game to the next level.

Don’t talk over your prospect

You don’t want to be the salesperson that “steamrolls” your prospect by talking over them.

If you go back and listen to your calls, there should never be a moment where you are talking at the same time that your prospect is talking. 

Your prospect’s words are like honey. They are rich with information about your prospect’s thought process and vitally important to closing the sale.

It’s also just rude and annoying to have someone talking over you. It will cause your prospect to clam up or just end the encounter altogether. 

There are three ways to ensure you’re not talking over your prospect: talk less in general, talk for shorter periods of time, and allow for long pauses. 

  1. Talk less in general.

40:60 is a good ratio. In other words, you as the salesperson should be talking less than half the time during a sales conversation. If you could talk 30% of the conversation, while still saying enough to convey your value proposition, that would be even better.

The underlying principle here is described in more detail in Dale Carnegie’s book How to Win Friends and Influence People. He says, “Let the other person do a great deal of the talking.”

  1. Talk for shorter periods of time.

This achieves two things. First, it makes your words more powerful. Like a rare resource becomes more valuable because of scarcity, so should it be for your words.

Second, it gives your prospect an opportunity to talk. If your prospect has a thought about something you’re saying, you need to hear it. In other words, you want to bring your prospect’s internal dialogue out loud on the phone call. 

For example, let’s say an amateur sales rep is talking too much, and they make a three-part statement all in one breath. 

But what if the prospect had a thought about the first part? It would be awkward to bring it up after the third part, because now the topic has changed. So the prospect just keeps quiet and the amateur sales rep never hears that thought from their prospect.

On the other hand, imagine a pro sales rep who splits that long-winded, three-part statement into three separate, short statements with long pauses in between. Voila! The prospect starts talking after the first part of the statement and the salesperson gets an insight into the prospect’s thought process that would have otherwise gone unsaid. 

  1. Allow for longer pauses.

The pause should be long, like longer than you would think. Long enough that it’s almost awkward. Between 3-5 seconds is usually a good pause.

You should allow for these pauses after you’re done talking, as well as after your prospect is done talking. 

Sometimes your prospect stops to take a breath, but they still have more to say. We don’t want to cut their train of thought short. We need to hear everything that’s on their mind. 

As for when you finish talking, you want to hear your prospect’s reaction. 

Sometimes it’s as subtle as just a barely audible noise. It might sound like hmph, ahhh, or ohhh—all of these sounds have different meanings and are important clues for how your prospect is feeling.

Single-word answers (like okay, fine, and great) also have very different and important meanings. Make sure you are listening to these and not talking over them. 

Summary:

If you are doing all the talking, your prospect will just think to themselves, instead of sharing their thoughts with you. 

If you say too many things in quick succession, the prospect will only be able to respond to the last thing you said. And you won’t get to hear their thoughts about the first or second things that you said.

If there is a long pause, the prospect will tell you their thoughts about what you just said (or continue with their own train of thought). 

Talk less, sell more.

The power of visualization in sales

The other day I was walking on the sidewalk and I saw a “No Parking” sign posted on a garage door. But it wasn’t an ordinary “No Parking” sign—it also said “Visualize Being Towed.” 

And I visualized it! I started to think about how terrible it would be to realize that my car was gone. I was even getting stressed about having to call the impound lots. 

Before reading the sign, I wasn’t even thinking about parking. I wasn’t even in a car! I was just walking on the sidewalk. But I still visualized being towed. 

That’s the power of visualization—to make you feel something that isn’t real. 

Which got me thinking about visualization, more generally. There are a ton of applications, but of course, I was thinking about sales. 

It made me remember something that a veteran rep had taught me when I started in my first sales role. He said, “You have to sell the dream. You have to make them live the dream before they’ve even bought it.”

Living the dream—this is visualization. The dream is a life with your product or service. And the nightmare is just one more day living with their pain point (without your product or service). 

But just talking about it isn’t enough. Visualization is about making it visceral. They have to see, hear, and feel their dream. 

The goal is to get your prospect to feel the dopamine hit from their dream. And that’s when people buy.

This could be anything. For example, maybe you’re selling a POS system to an old-fashioned restaurant. The restaurant owner has told you how stressful it’s been to keep track of all their orders on paper tickets. 

So you say, “Picture this, Jan. All your servers will take down orders on their iPads and the orders will automatically pop up on a monitor for the kitchen staff. No more paper! No more sifting through stacks of receipts when doing accounting. No more losing track of orders and having customers get upset with you and your waitstaff. Doesn’t that sound a lot less stressful, Jan?”

The goal is to get into Jan’s world. You want to see the problem from her perspective. This way you’re not missing the mark when you try to walk through a visualization exercise. You want it to be as close to Jan’s reality as possible, so the emotions she feels are real. 

Now, visualization can seem a little over-the-top. If executed poorly, it will just be awkward. Your prospect will feel shy about sharing their imagination with you. 

But consider this: your prospect will be visualizing either way. Without your guidance, they’ll be visualizing the negative—their wallet getting lighter, how angry their boss will be if this doesn’t work, etc.

You need to walk them through a visualization of the positive—how great life will be once they’ve bought your product and finally get some relief from their pain point. 

Take control of the power of visualization to help your prospect imagine a positive buying scenario. Otherwise, visualization will work against you as your prospect privately imagines a negative scenario and convinces themselves not to buy.

Get the prospect to play their cards first

It’s like you and your prospect are sitting across from each other in a card game. Your prospect has their handful of cards and you have yours. Whoever lays down all their cards first loses.

As a salesperson, some of the main cards you hold are value and pricing. The prospect’s cards are answers to your qualifying questions: budget, timeline, pain point, decision-making authority, etc.

The prospect holds more cards than the salesperson (which is why making a sale is always an uphill battle). 

To increase your chances of closing the sale, you as the salesperson have to find out more than you divulge (which is why you have to control the conversation and be the one asking the questions). 

The trick is to get the prospect to play all of their cards before you put down your own (ideally, you can get ALL of your prospect’s cards before you play ANY of your own).

Example #1:

For example, a prospect might ask you in the first few minutes of a pitch:

“To be honest, Cole, I don’t have time for the pitch. Can you just tell me how much it costs?”

If you play your pricing card too early by answering this question, then the prospect might get sticker shock and end the encounter. At the very least, your prospect will have their guard up and resist allowing themselves to fall in love with a product that they think is too expensive. 

Instead, you have to answer a question with a question. 

“That’s why I’m asking you these questions, Susan. I need to know more about your situation before I can recommend a price point. Can you tell me a little more about [insert pain point]?”

Example #2:

Here’s another question you might hear from a prospect:

“Cole, I’ve heard the same pitch from five different vendors. Can you just give me a quick 30-second summary of what you’re offering?” 

Especially if you’re selling a more complicated SaaS product, you can’t summarize your value like this. You have to go slowly through your pitch/demo and it’s going to require some patience from your prospect. Even if they don’t like it, your prospect will be forced to be patient if they think there might be value in what you’re offering. 

The salesperson could respond with something like this:

“I wish my job were that easy, Susan, but it’s going to take a little longer than 30 seconds. We are the #1 vendor in this space so I think you’ll find it worth your time to hear about some of our unique features. Could you tell me a little more about what features are most important to you?”

Imagine playing poker against someone where you got to see their cards and you didn’t have to show them yours. That would be easy winnings. You could bet when you had the better hand and wait when not. 

This is the situation we want to set up for ourselves on a sales call. 

If we can get the prospect to play their pain point card, we can bet big on our specific value that solves this pain point. 

For example, if we know that our prospect has cash flow problems and can’t afford a big down-payment, we can bet big on our pay-as-you-go option. 

This way, instead of unloading your whole arsenal of value and wasting your prospect’s time with unnecessary information, you’re selling them on the exact value that will be most convincing for their specific situation. You can only do this if the prospect plays their cards first.

More than one way to sell

People like comedians because they’re funny. People like talk show hosts because they’re witty. People like professors because they’re smart. 

Different people have different qualities that make them likable. 

Similarly, customers buy from salespeople for different reasons. In other words, there’s more than one way to sell.

Your high emotional intelligence might make the customer more comfortable opening up about their true objections. Your professionalism might make them confident in your recommendation. Your contagious laugh might make them care-free and spendthrift. 

It’s important to remember this especially if you work on a larger sales team. It’s easy to start comparing yourself to everyone else, especially the top performers. 

Whenever you’re trying to learn from top performers, remember that whatever natural skill they have might be different than yours. 

Stay true to your own natural strengths, especially as you take advice from the veterans on your sales team.

Remember, there’s more than one way to sell.

Making up stories

I was doing my laundry this weekend. I put all my clean clothes in a basket. I had everything folded except I couldn’t find the match for one of my socks.

I looked in the dryer. I looked on the floor. I thought of where it could be. I started to make up stories in my head about how socks really do disappear. Maybe the gremlins took it. Maybe the washing machine is a teleportation device. 

I gave up and went on with my laundry and started to make my bed. When I spread out my fitted sheet, guess what I found … the missing sock. 

I felt foolish about making up those stories.

Just like we made up stories about the earth being flat before we sailed the seas and about the gods controlling the seasons before we learned about meteorology. 

Theories abound until evidence proves otherwise.

Increase urgency throughout the sales encounter

As you proceed through each step of the sales encounter with your prospect, your levels of urgency, formality, and excitement should increase, little by little. 

It’s like going on a first date. You don’t want to come on too strong, but you also don’t want to seem bored. 

The intro starts out calm and casual. You want to build rapport at this point, making the prospect feel comfortable talking with you.

If the prospect wants to go on a 5-minute tangent about something irrelevant during rapport building, let them go. It’s worth your time to let them talk. It’s a weird thing that people like you more, the more they talk to you (even if you say nothing). 

As you start to qualify, your questions should be a little more direct and clear. It shouldn’t feel like an interrogation for the prospect, but you need to dig in if they give an unclear answer. 

When you start to pitch, it should get a little hotter. You might stand up from your chair and start to use hand motions. Especially when you’re selling value, you want to get excited and raise your voice just a little bit.

But make sure you don’t “steamroll” your prospect. You can’t keep increasing urgency and raising your voice if they’re not along for the ride. If you’re getting more excited and they’re staying monotone and flat—that’s a bad sign.

The key is to listen. Similar to a musician that can hear a note and tell you what key on the piano is being played, a salesperson needs to be able to discern a prospect’s emotion from the tone of their voice. Make sure you’re matching your prospect’s tone with your own voice.

This all builds up to asking for the sale. You should be able to hear a pin drop for the first few seconds after you’ve asked for the sale for the first time. 

If the prospect viewed you as a friend during rapport building, they should now see you as a professional that has the power to help them and their business. 

After we’ve asked for the close, we won’t let the prospect go off on any more tangents. We don’t want to let them blow wind into the sails of their own objections. Our answers are short and stern, almost like a parent talking to a child, without being offensive. 

If you do all of this correctly, your prospect will both like you and respect you—a winning combination for making the sale. 

Don’t answer unasked questions

I hear it over and over in the pit and on recorded calls. The client asks for one answer, and the salesperson gives two (sometimes three or four). 

Oftentimes, this happens with rookie reps that don’t know what to say, so they end up saying everything. But it also happens with veteran reps that get lazy and loose-lipped. 

Example #1:

Prospect: “I’ll get everything set up today, right?”

Wrong answer: “That’s right. And I’ll also give you the number to our customer support team so you can reach them anytime just in case you have any questions. And I’ll also be available in case our customer support team doesn’t answer.”

Right answer: “That’s right.”

Example #2:

Prospect: “How much does it cost to get started?”

Wrong answer: “Well, it’s $99 per month. But it used to be $120 per month and you had to pay for the whole year. Now we make it way more affordable and you can pay monthly.”

Right answer: “It’s $99 per month.” 

There are two main problems with answering unasked questions:

  1. Overtalking – prospect gets bored
  2. Overexplaining – prospect gets confused

When the salesperson volunteers answers to unasked questions, it opens up a can of worms. This invites the prospect to think of questions that they previously weren’t worried about. It over-complicates the sale and increases the chances that you’ll get the “Let me think about it” objection when you ask for the sale.

The client already has enough questions on their mind: What if I can’t cancel? What if it doesn’t work? What if this is a scam? What if my business fails?

We don’t want to add even more questions to that mix. 

Prospects buy when they understand. They buy when they feel that all their questions have been answered. So we want to answer all the questions that they have, but not one more. 

The only exception to this rule is at specific parts of the pitch when you are selling value. 

Example #3: 

Prospect: “What about this feature?”

Salesperson: That actually solves for the specific pain point you mentioned earlier. Here’s how it works … [the salesperson can be a little long-winded here because it’s a very important part of the pitch].

But after showing value in the main parts of the pitch, especially during the closing part of the call—less is more. Keep your answers brief and don’t answer unasked questions.  

How to know if an objection is fake

Kettle logic is when contradictory statements are used to win an argument. Freud used this example in his writings:

A man is accused by his neighbor of returning a kettle in damaged condition. The man offers three arguments as to why:

  1. He had returned the kettle undamaged.
  2. It was already damaged when he borrowed it.
  3. He had never borrowed it in the first place.

It’s obvious that the culprit is lying about at least one of these statements (he may even be lying about all of them).

It’s the same with a prospect giving “smokescreen” objections during the closing part of a sales call. 

At the end of a sales call, you ask your client to sign the contract and you get an objection:

“I really want to sign this, but I just can’t because it’s not in our budget.” 

You remind the prospect about the return-on-investment that you discussed together earlier. “The program will pay for itself, remember?” The client seems satisfied with this response. 

But then they give you another objection …

“I just can’t sign this because I need to talk to my partner first.”

Well, which one is it? Do they not have a budget? Or, do they have to talk to their partner first?

A prospect will use kettle logic like this when they’re nervous, scared, or just unsure. When this happens, the best thing to do as a salesperson is to switch gears, from logical to emotional.

Because dismantling the logic part of kettle logic does nothing to get you closer to what the prospect really needs to talk about. Instead, it will force the prospect to clam up.

Take some of the pressure off and ask a broad question that invites the prospect to start speaking freely. 

“I get it, Bob. Let’s take a step back. How do you feel about the deal in general?”

If you’ve built rapport and trust early on, then the prospect will open up and tell you the real objection. Sometimes there isn’t one. If they really trust you, they’ll admit they’re just a little scared or unsure. Then you need to dig in.

“That makes sense, Bob. A lot of my customers have felt the same way. What part do you think you’re most scared/unsure about?”

Once you get down to the root of the real objection, then you can start reselling value there.

You won’t win every sale. And sometimes the prospect just needs some time to think. The key here is that you don’t take objections at face-value when they’re really just smokescreens to mask a deeper objection (that may end up being an emotional objection like fear or uncertainty).

Ups and downs are natural in sales

There are ups and downs in sales.

The ups are when you can barely keep up with all your interested prospects. Every pitch seems to be closing. All your warm leads that have been radio silent for weeks seem to come out of hiding all at once. You’re riding an emotional high and dreaming of your commission check. 

The downs, on the other hand, are when you can hear crickets in the sales pit and revenue has ground to a halt. Your phone isn’t ringing with inbound, there are no new inquiries in your inbox, and nobody’s signing up using the self-checkout links.

The downs are when it’s time to get to work. 

When my reps are a little behind their pacing number, I have them send me daily recaps with the following: 

  • Daily pacing number to hit their monthly quota 
  • How much revenue they closed today
  • What they’re going to do differently tomorrow (if they didn’t hit their pacing number today)

In her daily recap from yesterday, one of my reps said, “Sales is all about ebb and flow and I know that, following a low day, there’s a storm of revenue brewing.”

I smiled ear to ear when I read this. First, because she’s already giving herself the same feedback that I would have given her (a strong sign for a future manager). And because it’s SO true! 

When revenue dips, don’t focus on revenue. One of my old bosses used to call this “gripping the bat too tight.” This is when you’re going into every closing call like it might be your last. The prospect feels the unhealthy pressure and you end up burning some of your best leads. 

Instead, focus on the preliminary steps to revenue. Focus on your activity metrics (dials and emails) and pipeline management. These are the foundation of your sales process. When you’re in a slump, you have to build from the ground up. 

It’s a natural undulation in sales. There will be times when you need to inject new leads, dial down, and rebuild your pipeline. Then you need to spend time focusing on getting all those leads through the sales cycle and closing them at the end. Then it’s back to the front of the pipe to set yourself up with more leads.

Where amateurs fail, is they will focus on the revenue number as their only metric of success. So they get down on themselves and lose steam when it’s really just time to switch gears and focus on the front end of their pipeline. A pro takes the lull in revenue as an opportunity to inject new leads and rebuild their pipeline.

Now, all the above advice applies to short-term dips in revenue. If your revenue performance declines consistently, there is a point when you might need to take a look at the later stages in your sales cycle (mainly pitching and closing). This depends on the length of your sales cycle. 

(Side note: sales cycle length is the amount of time between your first touchpoint with a prospect and when the deal closes.)

For our org, the average sales cycle length is 3-5 days (we sell an insurance product, so our customers are usually only shopping when they have a short timeline).

For our sales cycle, if one of my rep’s has a revenue slump for one day, there’s no need for alarm. If their revenue dips for more than five days in a row, then we need to make a change. 

This is because 5 days is the maximum amount of time that a rep would need to inject a batch of new leads into their pipeline and complete a full sales cycle with them.

For an org with a longer sales cycle (like a SaaS product with a 6-month or 1-year cycle), it’s even more difficult to analyze revenue on a shorter timeline. It may take 6 months or a year to determine if revenue has actually slumped, or if there might just be a backlog of good prospects in the pipeline. 

But it’s also too risky to wait 6 months or a year, so you need to make an analysis of potential revenue that is currently in your pipeline. You can do so by multiplying potential deal value by conversion % (based on historical metrics). 

In summary, if you’re a salesperson and your revenue dips, start by getting back to basics. Control the controllables and make sure you’re hitting your dial expectations and maintaining an organized pipeline. 

Do this until your revenue performance has been low for more than one sales cycle. Then bubble up to your manager and ask for feedback on your pitching and closing. 

Wait to reveal pricing until after showing value

There is a night-and-day change in energy during a sales encounter before and after the salesperson unveils the price of their product/service to the prospect. 

If you reveal the price too early, your prospect might get sticker shock and end the encounter before you’ve even had a chance to pitch. 

The best antidote for sticker shock is value. Here are a couple examples: 

Price: If I told you a property in San Francisco costs $500k, you might say, “Wow, that’s expensive.” 

Value: If I then told you that that same property will generate $1.5m in rental revenue over the next three years, then you might say, “Dang, that’s a great investment.”

It’s the same thing for a business owner with a quantifiable pain point. 

Price: If you tell Bob your advertising program is going to cost him $500 per month, that might sound expensive. 

Value: If Bob also understands that he’ll be missing out on $2,000 in revenue per month if he chooses to forego the advertising opportunity, then it sounds a lot more affordable. It would be expensive NOT to buy the advertising program. 

If you reveal the price before your prospect sees value, then the prospect is likely to get sticker shock and rush off the phone. 

Even if you manage to keep them on the phone, they’ll be repeating a non-buying narrative in their head: “There’s no way I could pay that much for this.”

You can’t reveal the price until your prospect sees value. And you can’t show value until you’ve qualified (because the value you show needs to be tailored to the prospect’s answers in qualifying). 

So the order goes like this:

  1. Qualify
  2. Show value
  3. Reveal price
  4. Ask for sale

In summary, always qualify AND show value BEFORE you reveal price. 

Qualify before asking for the sale

Before is the key word here. A salesperson must qualify before they ask for the sale. 

First things first, in case you’re new to sales, qualifying is the process of determining whether a lead has the potential to become a customer. This is achieved by asking questions to identify certain “buying” characteristics in a lead (e.g., budget, timeline, pain point). 

BANT is a popular acronym used by sales orgs to easily remember qualifying questions:

  • Budget: How much is the prospect willing to spend?
  • Authority: Who makes the buying decision? 
  • Need: What is the prospect’s pain point? Quantify this if possible. 
  • Timeline: When is the prospect planning to buy?

If answers to these questions indicate that the lead is NOT a buyer, then you shouldn’t waste your time. Not every lead is a good fit for your product or service, and part of being a great salesperson is quickly differentiating between the buyers and the time-wasters. 

(Side note: this is also true of life in general. Not every date is good for you. There are plenty of fish in the sea. Not every job is good for you. Find one that’s right for you. Not every book is a good book. Stop reading and pick up another.)

There are a few key benefits from qualifying your sales leads:

  1. Save time – by qualifying out non-buyers, tire kickers, and bad fits 
  2. Learn what the client cares about – to tailor your pitch and value accordingly 
  3. Gather “ammo” – to battle objections when you ask for the close

For the rest of this article, I want to talk specifically about #3.

When you’re qualifying a lead at the beginning of a sales encounter and scribbling down their answers on a piece of paper, don’t throw away that piece of paper – you’re going to need it. 

Better yet, get in the habit of typing qualifying Q&A’s into your CRM for each lead right when you’re on the phone asking the questions. 

Then, when it comes time to ask for the close, you should have those qualifying notes in front of you. 

Here are two examples of how you can use qualifying info to battle objections.

Objection #1: I need to talk to my spouse / partner / boyfriend / girlfriend / cat / dog (Authority)

Salesperson: Alright Joe, I’m ready for that credit card when you are.

(Long pause.)

Prospect: I don’t know, Cole. I think I need to talk to my business partner about this first.

(There’s the objection.)

Salesperson: I totally understand, Joe. And I might be misremembering, but didn’t you mention your partner was just a 10% owner in the company?

(Asking this question is redundant. You should already know the answer from qualifying earlier. But we want to see if the prospect changes their answer.)

Prospect: Yea … 

(Make sure you pause here in case the prospect has more to say.)

Salesperson: And he lives in Japan, so you won’t be able to get in touch with him until tomorrow at the earliest? 

Prospect: That’s right …

(And pause here again.)

Salesperson: Hmm … well here’s what I’m thinking, Joe. Since you said you need this set up and ready to go before tomorrow for your big opening, let’s get it started now and then we can make any necessary adjustments after you’ve talked to your partner. How does that sound?

Prospect: Well, I guess that sounds alright.

Salesperson: Great, so all we’ll need to get started is your first month’s payment. 

Objection #2: It’s too expensive (Budget)

Salesperson: Alright Joe, I’m ready for that credit card when you are.

(Long pause.)

Prospect: No way, it’s too expensive for me. 

(There’s the objection.)

Salesperson: I totally understand, Joe. Finances are tight for a small business like yours. Let me ask you this, how much did you say [insert pain point] was costing your business per year?

(Asking this question is redundant. You should already know the answer from qualifying earlier. But we want to see if the prospect changes their answer.)

Prospect: Well, we already talked about that earlier. You said it was costing me $2,000 per year or something. 

(Make sure you pause here in case the prospect has more to say.)

Salesperson: Exactly. And this service is costing you $750 per year. So I know it seems expensive, Joe, but you’d really be saving over a thousand bucks per year. What do you think? 

Prospect: I guess that makes sense … 

(And pause here again.)

Salesperson: So here’s what I’m thinking, Joe. Let’s get you started on our 3-month program, and if you’re not saving more than it’s costing you in that time, we’ll shut it off. How does that sound? 

Prospect: Well, I guess that sounds alright.

Salesperson: Great, so all we’ll need to get started is your first month’s payment. 

>>>

Without having gathered this qualifying info ahead of time, an amateur sales rep will try to play catch-up after they hear an objection. 

When they hear the Authority objection (#1), an amateur rep will think to themselves, “Oh shoot, who’s this partner?” Then they’ll fumble with asking the prospect about their partner and be forced to schedule another call (with all the decision-makers this time).

When they hear the Budget objection (#2), an amateur rep might even believe it. They’ll think to themselves, “Well, $750 is a lot of money.” But if you quantify the prospect’s pain point and how much your service could save him, the value of your service becomes clear.

The point of qualifying is that you’re not caught off-guard when the objections come. Everything is laid out in front of you like a chess board and you know your next move no matter what your opponent does. 

This is why qualifying has to happen before you ask for the sale. 

How to ask better questions

When you ask a question, pause immediately afterward. Pause until your client responds. Sometimes this will take 3-5 seconds, maybe longer. 

Let the silence add some healthy pressure to the conversation. There’s a fine line here — between being awkward and being regarded as a professional salesperson.

Whatever you do, don’t be the first one to talk again after you’ve asked the question. 

A deep exhale (e.g., ugh, hmm, hmph) or a one word response (e.g., Great, Okay, Alright, Interesting) do not qualify as a response from the client. 

A short response like this is often a sign that the client feels the pressure and felt the need to say something (this is good). It also means that the client is still thinking. And you, as the salesperson, shouldn’t interrupt that thought process.

Wait until the client gives you a full and direct response to your question (if you’re asking for the sale, that response can only be one of two things: an objection, or a credit card number). 

Don’t worry about waiting too long. I’ve waited so long on some calls that my client asks, Are you still there? And my response is always the same: Yes I’m here, I’m just listening. 

Now, it’s also important that the question itself is crisp and clear. This is equally, if not more important than pausing after you’ve asked the question. 

It’s similar to a famous person coming onto stage in front of an audience. Depending on how famous the person is, they can often stand on stage for 15-30 seconds in silence while the audience applauds. If a stranger comes onto the stage (like one of the sound technicians) and grabs the microphone, there would be crickets in the audience. 

Your question needs to be like the famous person. It needs to be deserving of a response. 

Here are the three main characteristics of a good question:

  1. Direct: short and to the point
  2. Clear: no umm’s or filler words
  3. Intelligent: it fits in the conversation

Bad question: Well, I mean, what do you think … umm … could we maybe get this started? 

Good question: Awesome, do you have a credit card that I can put on file?

This works on both phone calls and emails. I always end my emails with a short question. It’s usually asking for times to hop on the phone.

Do you have a few times that you’re available to talk on the phone this Friday, February 7?

If a phone call doesn’t make sense, or I’m asking for someone’s advice. I use this question: What do you think?

The natural human response to a question is to answer. In this way, a question invites a reaction. And it’s important to ask for this reaction at the very end, when your client (or coworker) is either going to click onto the next email or click the reply button to answer your question.

The first step is realizing that questions are the key to sales. The second step is mastering how to ask questions. 

Here are the two main takeaways:

  1. Pause after you ask a question.
  2. Make your questions direct, clear, and intelligent.

How to handle objections

Everything has led up to this point. Marketing has spent money on the lead. Your SDR set the appointment. You spent an hour on the pitch. Now it’s time to ask for the close.

And you get your first objection … 

“You know Cole, this sounds really good, but I want to take some time to think about it.” 

Now, an amateur salesperson is going to respond with a statement. If they’re really bad, they’ll start by saying, “But …” 

If they’re kinda bad, but not terrible, they’ll try to re-sell value from earlier in the call, “Bob, my product is going to solve your paint point. It’s great for x, y, and z reasons.” 

Answering an objection with a statement creates confrontation. It feels like your bumping heads with your client. No sales are made this way. 

Instead, respond to objections with a question.

And don’t forget to use an empathy statement before you even ask the question. Here are some examples of empathy statements:

  • No worries. 
  • I totally understand.
  • That makes sense to me. 
  • I appreciate you sharing that. 

All together, it should sound like this:

“No worries, Bob! Remind me, when were you looking to get your project started?”

If you’ve qualified well, you already know the answer to this question because you asked about the client’s timeline earlier in the call. But you ask again anyway because:

1. It makes the conversation flow.

It gets the client talking at a time in the conversation that would otherwise be very awkward. 

The client is usually emotional when they’re giving an objection. They’re scared about spending a lot of money. They’re nervous about upsetting the salesperson that has spent a lot of time with them on the phone. They’re stressed about the pain point that has caused them to be on the call in the first place. 

The last thing you want to do as a salesperson is add more emotion to the conversation by creating confrontation / argument / anger with your client – this is what happens when you respond to objections with a statement. 

2. It keeps the conversation going.

The client likely wants to get off the phone at this point. If that’s the case, hearing the salesperson talk more is not going to inspire them to stay on the phone longer. But everyone loves to talk, especially when it’s about themselves or their company. Make your question good enough that the client is happy and comfortable to continue the conversation. 

3. It forces the client to remind themselves of their pain point, in their own words.

If you’ve pitched well, your client might even bring up some of the value that you mentioned earlier in the call in response to your question. They’ll make the value statements for you!

4. It gives you another turn in the conversation.

Question, statement, question, statement – this is the natural flow of conversation. Have you ever watched two self-absorbed people try to have a conversation? One person talks about themselves, then the other person talks about themselves. Two boats passing in the night. It’s painful to watch. 

But when you ask someone a question, and then listen respectfully for a while, it feels natural that you can take a turn to talk. The client might even ask you a question in return. If so, this is your opportunity to re-sell value and ask for the close again. 

In summary, the process looks like this:

  1. Ask for sale
  2. Objection
  3. Ask question
  4. Listen
  5. Re-sell value
  6. Ask for sale

Jordan Belfort calls this process “looping,” where you loop back to asking for the sale over and over again until the client buys. This seems aggressive, but if you follow this strategy correctly, the client won’t even notice you’ve asked for their credit card 4-5 times. 

Anybody can close a deal when the client has already made up their mind to buy. But this is only 10% of sales, and somebody in marketing should really be the one getting paid commission for cases like these. 

Sales isn’t about searching for yes’s. It’s about turning no’s into yes’s. And the only way to do this is by developing the skill of objection handling.

Asking questions is the key to sales

We used to play a game at my old company called “the question game.” Two opponents would stand up in front of the rest of the sales team and take turns asking each other questions. The first person to give an answer loses. 

The best strategy was to come up with a question so cunning that your opponent was forced to answer (because there’s a natural human reaction to answering a good question).

On a sales call, whoever is asking the questions is controlling the conversation. 

The opposite of asking questions is overtalking. I hear this most often during the closing part of a call. When it comes time to ask for the close, an amateur sales rep will start rambling. 

They’ll overtalk about product features, client testimonials, and on and on with information that they think is helping them to convince the client and close the sale.

In reality, all this extra information is just confusing the client and making the sale more complicated. The more complicated a sale becomes, the more likely you are to get the “Let me think about it” objection. 

A sales pro, on the other hand, will have already made all his statements while selling value earlier in the call. When it comes time to ask for the close, he will be concise and direct. 

Even when he gets an objection, he will ask a question in response. He will get the client talking to find out their true objection, and then when the time comes (after listening to the client talk), he will make a short statement to resell value, and then ask for the close again.

When your client does ask you questions, keep your answers short and to the point. 

But never answer an unasked question. I’m going to type that out again because it’s important: Never answer an unasked question. One of my favorite sales bosses used to tell me this over and over. 

It’s bad enough to overtalk when the client has asked you a question and you’re rambling on, when a short, concise answer would have been sufficient. It’s even worse when you’re going on with an answer that the client didn’t even ask for.

Here are the key takeaways:

  1. Ask intelligent questions and listen.
  2. Keep your answers short and to the point.
  3. Never answer unasked questions. 

A good salesperson never argues

On a sales call, you want to avoid going toe-to-toe with your potential client. You never want your client to see you as an opposing force to the direction they’re trying to go.

The customer is always right.

But what happens when the customer is wrong? What happens when the client doesn’t want to buy your product even though you truly believe they are a great fit?

Most of the time, you are going to be on the opposite side of the table from your client.

Your client wants a discount and you want to sell them on the premium package. Your client wants to keep the product that they’ve had for years instead of buying your new cutting-edge product, Your client wants to wait another week to make their buying decision and you want them to buy right away.

But you can’t let your client FEEL this opposition. You have to be on the same team with your client working toward the same goal, THEIR goal. Like you’ve talked to a thousand other customers that were in their exact same situation and you understand.

Now, there will be very specific points in the language of the call where this plays out.

For example, if a client says, “I want to do it MY way.”

In your head, you know doing it their way won’t lead to the sale. But you can’t say that. You can’t respond to the client with any of these words: no, unfortunately, sorry. Because then you become an opposing force. Then you’re clearly on the other side of the table.

You have to say, “Okay, I totally understand. We’re going to do it YOUR way.”

And then the magic is that you have to make your client’s way and your way seem like one and the same. For example, your client doesn’t want to pay until Monday (and it’s currently Friday).

“No worries, I can collect your payment details right now and then wait to charge your card until Monday.”

Or, your client doesn’t want to sit through your 30-minute pitch.

“You’re right, you’re busy. That’s way too long. How about this? Can I just ask you a few questions.”

And then you can work in the key pieces of value from your pitch after your client has opened up and spoken a little about themselves.

The best way to summarize this whole idea is this way: you have to round the corners. Your client is going straight and you need them to make a right turn. You can’t put a STOP sign in the middle of the road and make your client turn at a ninety degree angle.

Instead, you have to slowly build a curve into the road over the entire sales encounter. The curve is subtle in the same way that the round earth looks flat. Before the client knows it, they’ve ended up where you wanted them to go all along, but at any given moment they thought they were going straight on their own path.

When to coach and when to encourage

It’s hard to hear feedback from a manager at a time when you may be emotional, especially when your manager is giving feedback about the exact thing that is causing your emotion.

In sales, for example, if a rep has just had a tough call—say, they had a big deal that they thought was going to close, but they’ve just found out that their customer bought elsewhere.

Instead of immediately diving into a coaching session with that rep about how they could have better handled objections on the call, this might be a good time to just offer some encouragement, “Good fight! You’ll get the next one.”

Keep that objection handling feedback in your back pocket. Then later on, maybe during a pre-scheduled 1:1, you can ask the rep to recall the specific situation (it’s a good idea to have the account information and maybe a call recording ready to go). Side note: make sure feedback targets a specific example, as opposed to talking generally.

You might be wondering, how do I know if my direct report is emotional at any given time? Ask them!

“How are you feeling?” is a magic question, and you can never ask it enough. It’s natural for humans to want to answer this question. And it’s the key to knowing if your direct report is in the right headspace for feedback.

If their response to that question is emotional, you’re probably better off just offering encouragement and saving the feedback for later.

When the customer asks for a discount

You have two options: hold firm or go ahead and give the discount. Sometimes you don’t have the option, if your company has a rigid pricing model.

If you do have the option, it comes down to what you know about your client from qualifying, and how well you’ve shown value.

There are two pieces of information you need to know from qualifying:

  1. Need: How strong is the client’s pain point? Are they going to buy your product (or a product like yours) no matter what? Would they be willing to wait to get a better price? Or do they have the urgency to buy right now?
  2. Budget / price: What is the client willing to spend? What prices have they seen from other sellers?

If you’ve identified a strong need from the client, i.e., you’re relatively sure the client is going to buy a product like yours no matter what, AND you’ve given them a price that’s within their budget and below all the prices they’ve seen from other sellers, then you can be extremely confident in holding firm when they ask for a discount.

Now, when it comes to the need, even if you’re certain the client is going to buy a product in the market, you still need to be sure the client is going to be buying YOUR product.

This comes down to showing value. If you haven’t done this well enough to be 99% sure that the client is going to buy with you, then you shouldn’t have given your client a specific price in the first place. 

Maybe you have given a range or an estimate at some point in the conversation, but you shouldn’t have asked for the sale with a set-in-stone, sign-on-the-dotted-line price. (Side note: only ask for the sale once you’re as sure as possible that the client is going to buy).

Another possibility, is that the client has told you a budget or competitor price in qualifying that is lower than the price that you’re asking for.

In this case, you have two options:

  1. Sell on specific value that explains why your product is worth the premium.
  2. Give the discount.

Even once you’ve decided to give the discount, if you’ve built enough rapport with the client, I would still recommend giving the high price at first (to anchor the client’s mentality higher).

And then handle one or two objections, before finally pausing and exhaling (and maybe telling the client you have to ask your manager) and then finally giving them the discount.

This makes it feel like the discount is a big deal and not everyone gets it. It also creates a sense of urgency for your client to buy right away (while the discount is available). 

But remember, before even thinking about giving a discount, make sure you qualify (for need and price) and show value.

Always give your client options

Always give your client options, and make the last option the one that you want them to choose.

For example, “It’s totally up to you. You can wait to get a few more quotes or I can collect your credit card right now and get everything sent over to your email so you don’t have to worry about it anymore.”

Better yet, make every option lead to the close, so no matter what the client picks, it results in the deal, but they feel like they chose it.

For example, “So we have two options here: I can send you a link where you can input your credit card on your own, or I can collect your card over the phone and then I can get started on your paperwork right away. Whatever works best for you.”

Both options lead to the close. Asking for the close this way is better than asking a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ question.

With a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ question, the client feels the pressure to choose ‘yes’ because they know that’s what the salesperson wants, but maybe they’re not ready and then they get nervous and choose ‘no’ because that’s the only other option.

Instead, if you ask a ‘yes’ or ‘yes’ question, the client still has the freedom to choose. And instead of making a big decision about whether to do the deal or not, they can just make a small decision about how they want to do the deal.

People love choice. They don’t want to feel like they’re being pressured into something where there’s only one outcome—the buying outcome that the salesperson is pushing them towards.

Let the client feel that they have the power to choose, while you, as the salesperson, maintain control over the choices that they have to choose from.

All this being said, I wouldn’t recommend giving the client options the very first time that you ask for the close. The first time you ask for the close, it should be more direct, with only one option—to buy.

Then, after you start getting objections, and you’re looping back after asking more questions and selling more value, then you can start using the options format when you’re asking for the close a third, fourth, and fifth time.

What I learned from writing 5,000 poems and 2 books in 2019

I’m breaking Hemingway’s rule on writing about writing—he said it was bad luck. But I figured I’d run the risk to reflect a little in this short article about what I’ve learned in my past year of writing. 

1. Write in a way that comes naturally to you.

At the beginning of last year, I was trying to follow in the footsteps of Hemingway and Stephen King by writing 1,000 to 2,000 words per day. 

I would wake up early in the morning on weekends, trek to a coffee shop, and plop myself down with my laptop. I probably got to 1,000 words about half of the days, but only about 10% of those words were anything I wanted to keep, and 10% of that was what I would be willing to show to anyone. There are a couple reasons it wasn’t working. 

First, I wasn’t inspired. I’m most inspired in the moment. It comes to me all at once and I write what I feel. This is hard to do when you’re seated in the same scenery, having the same experience, for hours on end. 

Second, I couldn’t sit still. It’s one thing to sit down and write when you’ve got a plot developed, but to sit down and pull the creative process out of a void is pretty tough. 

Not to mention, I didn’t have the time to sit in a coffee shop all day. I had to work during the week, and by the time I got home I was too tired to write. 

So I started writing on the bus on the way to work, in line while waiting for lunch, when I woke up in the middle of the night, on a hike, on the plane—in all these places where scenery and characters are constantly moving around me, so there was no shortage of inspiration and no interruption to my schedule. 

And this has been my most prolific year yet—having written over half a million words, five thousand poems, and two books. 

2. Publish often.

When is the right time to publish? Will it negatively affect my writing career later on if I publish my amateur works now? Will I miss my chance if I wait too long? I have these thoughts all the time.

I have a friend Keith who makes music. He refuses to release anything to the public until it’s absolutely perfect. I wonder if this strategy is outdated. Maybe it made more sense when a lot of effort went into publishing and releasing. But now it’s as easy as uploading your track to Spotify (for music) or self-publishing on Amazon (for books). 

Nowadays, I think the Gary Vee model for content creations wins (he puts out 100+ pieces of content per day). Granted, not everyone is Gary Vee and going viral might not be your goal. 

But at the very least, I think it’s healthy—especially for artists. There is a natural flow, similar to metabolism. You consume inputs (thoughts and feelings) and produce outputs (works of art). 

Those outputs create experiences (more thoughts and feelings) for yourself and others. You have interesting conversations, meet new people, find new artists with similar styles, and then the cycle continues. But the cycle stops when you stop publishing.

3. Editors are invaluable.

You can only read your own work so many times. You start to miss things. Your mind will skip over mistakes because it has already read over the mistakes a dozen times. 

Also, your readers are not you. If you want to be read by people other than yourself, you need to be edited by people other than yourself. 

Your unique identity is important to your writing, undoubtedly. And you cannot pander to all opinions. But you need the help of a few that you trust to catch the parts in your writing where you are just being selfish and ignorant of how others will read your work. 

4. Ask for edits early on.

It’s hard to show your work to others, especially when you’re not sure if it’s good enough. But you need to ask for edits and second opinions as early and often as possible. This will save you from going off into the completely wrong direction and wasting time when you could have course corrected sooner.

Be careful of asking for edits if the feedback is consistently poor. This might be a sign that you need to hone your craft in certain areas before making your next attempt at producing a completed work.

In the startup world there is this concept of MVP, which stands for Minimum Viable Product. The term was coined by Eric Ries. An MVP is a product that has just enough features to satisfy early customers and provide feedback for future product development.

It’s the same with writing. As soon as a body of work is ready, show it to someone before you go any further. Make sure it’s someone that knows what they’re doing. They’ll tell you whether you should keep going or pause to make a change. 

5. Be prepared to cut 99% of your work.

Your readers have much less time to read than you have to write. People only read during a small percentage of their time, and even then, they have a literally (ha) endless supply of books, magazines, articles, blogs, and podcasts to choose from. 

Like Faulkner said, “In writing, you must kill all your darlings.” Remember this when editing your work. There might be a chapter or a poem that seems decent to you. It’s a B+ and you spent a lot of time creating it. You think to yourself that it’s “good enough” and readers probably won’t notice it amongst the rest of your work. In times like these, there is only one thing to do: cut it. 

Part of the beauty of being able to write a lot is that you can cut a large percentage and still have as much as you need. After you’ve cut 99%, take the remaining 1% to your editors, and then what’s leftover should be the best of the best of your work.

Buy my new book!

My third book of poetry is a collection of free verse poetry inspired by a girl who lives on California Street in San Francisco. 

The poems are about seeing art and finding gratitude in the little things. I think we are more inundated and overwhelmed with information and emotion than ever before. My poems in this third book are meditative and simple. I read them myself sometimes as a reminder that it’s alright to slow down and enjoy the little moments that are otherwise rushed past or overlooked. 

You can buy the book on Amazon here: https://www.amazon.com/Girl-California-Street-Book-Poems/dp/0996360832/

Lots more to come in 2020, stay tuned! You can follow along on my Instagram here: https://www.instagram.com/colefeldman_/

To get better at sales, learn from buying

I went to buy a bottle of cologne at a shopping mall—bad idea from the start, I know. But I had tried to order a bottle of Nautica on Amazon and the scent went away after 10 minutes, almost like the product had been watered down. So I followed some advice to buy cologne in-store.

I found myself giving the exact same objections that annoyed me when they came from my own clients—”I want to think about it” and “I’ll come back tomorrow.” The salesperson at Macy’s had three bottles on the counter.

He had already qualified me on the scent of my last bottle not lasting long and he said, “If you want a quality cologne that lasts longer, this is the one.” Of course, it was the most expensive one. But I bought it. Because he qualified perfectly and sold value to solve my specific pain point.

Now, this isn’t an article about selling cologne. It’s about putting yourself in a buying situation, as a salesperson. You’ll find yourself giving the same objections you hear all day, but now, you’ll actually understand WHY your clients give these objections, because you will FEEL it yourself.

Better yet, put yourself in a buying situation for something that you actually plan on buying, and then you’ll feel the moment when you make your buying decision.

Take a quick minute to reflect on why you bought. What specific piece of value sold you? What did the salesperson say? You might have some realizations about your own sales process.

The power of the pause on a sales call

In sales, there is a natural back and forth. If you’re making a cold call, and someone on the other end picks up the phone and says, “Hello?” Then you better have something good to say in response.

Or, if your SDR sets you up with a killer meeting, and in the first 30 seconds of that meeting, the potential client stops you and says, “Listen, I’ve only got 5 minutes for this meeting. Can you tell me why I should buy this product?” Then it’s your turn to talk.

Now, both of these examples put the pressure on the salesperson. And a lot of salespeople go through the entire sales encounter this way—fighting from their back foot, rushing to get the last word in, and overall losing control of the sale.

But there are also times when it’s the client’s turn to talk.

For example, at the beginning of a cold call, once you’ve given your elevator pitch, and there’s a pause, and then the customer on the other end of the phone says (in a cautious tone), “Okay, I might be interested.”

The wrong thing to do after the client says something like that is to rush in with more value, making more statements about why your product or service is the bee’s knees, and talking more about me, me, me, my company.

Instead, here is a crucial point in the conversation where you, as the salesperson, can turn the tables and make it clear to the potential client that it’s their turn to talk. You do this by starting with your qualifying questions.

The first question might sound something like this: “So, Mrs. Business Owner, tell me a little more about why you think you might be in the market for XYZ product?”

And then, immediately after that question, comes the most important part … PAUSE. Don’t say anything. Put the phone on mute if you have to.

If you can’t handle the silence here (for 5 seconds, maybe 10 seconds) and you start talking again, then you’ve lost all power in the sales encounter—making it a one-sided presentation, instead of a two-sided conversation.

There is another very crucial part of the sales encounter when it’s the client’s turn to talk, and that’s at the very end of the call—when you ask for the sale.

If you’ve done everything right up to this point—qualifying the client for fit, getting an increasing amount of buy-in, and showing the value of your service in a way that specifically satisfies your client’s pain point—then there is only one thing left to do, and that’s to unveil the price and ask for payment.

Ask clearly and confidently for the close, and then (you guessed it) … PAUSE.

I’ve had some closing calls where I wait for 2 or 3 minutes of silence after asking for the close. Sometimes you can hear the client huffing and puffing. Other times they’ll put their hand over the receiver and talk to their business partner that has been sitting there listening the whole time.

But no matter how long you wait, the client only has two options for what to say next: they can either give you an objection or sign the deal. It has to be one of these two, and the only way to mess that up is if you talk first.

The most important graph in sales

In a sales encounter, both sides have something to give. In a traditional encounter, the buyer offers the value of their product or service and asks for payment in return. The seller asks for value and offers payment. 

There are other encounters not typically viewed as “sales,” for which the same rules apply. 

In recruiting, the candidate asks for salary and offers their skills. The company asks for skills and offers salary.

In dating, both sides are asking for a valuable partner. At the same time, what both sides have to offer, is being a valuable partner themselves. 

A sales encounter is never one-sided. Both sides have something to offer, so there is a give and take, a push and pull, as both sides ask questions to figure out the actual value of what the other side is offering. 

At the same time you’re asking questions, you must also be making value statements to keep the other party interested and happy enough to tolerate your questioning. 

In the initial phone screen of a recruiting encounter, for example, it’s usually the company that starts by asking questions of the candidate. But let’s say the company is a startup that nobody’s ever heard of, then the candidate might be less patient with the questioning. 

If they’re a savvy candidate, they might interrupt and ask a few questions themselves: How much funding has the company raised? Who are your backers? Is the company profitable? 

Then it’s the recruiter’s turn to show some value. If the candidate, is not impressed by the answers, they might choose to end the call and forego any further questions from the recruiter, because they’ve made a decision that the company is not offering a valuable position.

Recruiters at a well-known company like Google or Goldman Sachs, on the other hand, rarely have this problem. Because the value being offered is obvious to the labor market. Candidates are more willing to endure multiple rounds of interviews and longer timelines with minimal questioning just for a shot at the valuable position. 

It’s the same with sales or dating. If the client really wants your product, they’re willing to sit through a longer demo. If you find someone to be attractive, you’re more eager to seem attractive yourself (especially when you have their attention). 

To sum it all up in one easy graph, it looks like this:

I call this the ask / offer graph (creatively named). Imagine the red line as a timeline of the sales encounter. As you progress, there are equal amounts of ask and offer at each point. 

You cannot ask all your qualifying questions upfront.

You cannot talk only about your own value without asking the other party about theirs. 

You cannot talk too much about your value at risk of sounding desperate.

Now, the question from here is WHICH questions do you ask first and WHAT value do you offer upfront.

Which questions are the clear knockouts that you might as well get out of the way. Questions that would disqualify a lead as a potential client or disqualify a candidate as a potential hire.

What value will signal to a buyer that you have what they are looking for in the market. Value that keeps the client interested to sit through your pitch while still saving a trump card to overcome their objections at the end. 

A thought on work-life balance

I went to dinner with my friend James last Friday night and we eventually started talking about work. James works in private equity and has a relatively demanding schedule. Whereas most people are exhausted or frustrated by their long workdays and worry about losing their work-life balance, it was refreshing to hear James’s take.

He said, he feels like most people usually waste their free time. But when you work such long hours, you don’t have that option. Every minute of free time matters. And the first thing on which you spend that free time isn’t leisure. First comes the necessary basic chores just to stay healthy—getting groceries, going to the gym, doing laundry.

James said there was a period during his first year in banking when he was leaving the office at 2:30am, going to the gym, taking a shower, and then a quick nap before being back in the office at 7:30am. And he did this for 2-3 weeks straight. During that time, he said, even 5 minutes of free time seems like a gift—like a rare resource that must be spent wisely.

One could even argue that there is a quantifiable value to be gotten from spending your time, just like the value you would get from spending money on a product or service. When James spends his 5 minutes of free time, he seems to get more value out of those 5 minutes than someone with more free time on their hands than they know what to do with. They might waste that time watching TV or just twiddling their thumbs deciding what to do next.

To draw a more abstract conclusion from this specific example, there seems to be a definition of work-life balance that is not based on time, but value, when we consider that more time spent on work can bring greater value to the rest of your life.

How to build rapport and avoid the friend zone

When we’re building rapport or qualifying, at the beginning of a sales encounter, we want our clients to like us, so we’re happy to banter or follow the client off onto a tangent. The goal at this point is not to be doing business, but rather to be building the relationship. 

When it comes to closing, however, the rapport building is over. There should be no more banter, no overtalking or answering unasked questions. Pauses should be embraced, because the burden of action is on the customer. Responses should be short and clear, e.g., “that’s correct” and “exactly right.”

We build rapport to spend it, not to save it. You should not be building rapport throughout the entire sales process.

There are difficult points in the sales process when you need to ask something of your client, whether that is volunteering their time to sit through a demo or handing over their credit card to close the deal—these are the times for which we’ve built the rapport, when we need the client to trust us, especially when we are testing their patience or asking them to do something uncomfortable. 

If you build too much rapport without keeping the interaction professional and moving the ball forward, you’ll end up in the friend zone where the client steamrolls your attempts to steer the conversation, banters at the opportunity cost of doing business, and misses your meetings and deadlines because they think you’re there just to be nice to them. 

The key is to balance the rapport like a barometer. There are times when the sales encounter is necessarily high-pressure—this is natural when it comes to spending money.

The key is not to avoid these high-pressure moments. Instead, seek to win the client over in the low-pressure moments of the call or meeting, when you’re talking about the weather or sharing a drink. 

Then, when the high-pressure comes, the client will be comfortable enough with your relationship to lean in, rather than clamming up just because it feels uncomfortable or like they’re “being sold.” If you’ve built rapport correctly, your client will open up with you in that moment and tell you their honest objections—then the real selling begins.

The perfect opening lines for a sales call

The words barely even matter, it just needs a catchy tune. Think of tone and rhythm. 

Your tone can’t be too excited right off the bat or you’ll be immediately recognized as a salesperson. You also can’t talk too fast or you’ll seem as if you’re expecting to get hung up on. 

The first words need to be very clear and casual. If you have the client’s first name from your list of leads, I recommend simply, “Bob?” 

Just the first name with an inflected tone at the end to make their name sound like a question. The tone is everything here. The knee-jerk reaction to hearing your name asked like a question is to say, “Uh, yea, who’s this?”

Now, consider the alternative that most sales people use: “Hi, this is Cole from ABC Company, how are you today?”

Too wordy, and you play all your cards at once. In other words, the client knows exactly who you are and they have the power to hang up on you if they don’t want to hear from the ABC Company. Whereas, with the client’s first name, asked like a question, Bob is going to start the conversation for you and ask who you are. 

Then you can express a little excitement: “Hey Bob!” Not too much, just a little to let him know you’re glad to be on the phone with him. And then introduce yourself casually, and always end with a genuine “How’s it goin?” I prefer this as opposed to a stiff “How are you today?” Which can seem a little overly formal and robotic.

So, all together it sounds like this: “Hey Bob! This is Cole from ABC Company, how’s it goin?” Notice we include the company info at this point (because you have to introduce yourself sooner or later). But the key here is to mask your statement with a question. You don’t want to leave a cliffhanger after you introduce yourself—this would give Bob the opportunity to hang up again. If you end with a question, again, the knee-jerk reaction from the client is to answer.

So Bob’s going to say, “Fine, how are you?” Now you’re in, and it’s time to build some rapport (if the client is friendly and you have some breathing room): “Oh, I’m alright, a little rainy outside. How’s the weather in (client’s city)?” It sounds cliché but weather is the safest topic imaginable—everyone can talk about it.

Or the client might be short and you have to get straight to showing value: “The reason I called today, Bob, is that …” 

And that’s the opener. If you get this far, next it’s about starting your elevator pitch, showing some value, and giving the client a reason to stay on the phone.

Cull the weak, for the health of the herd

Editing a section, I want to keep everything. I can remember writing this particular poem and believe that, as a poem itself, it is quote good. But that is not how a section or collection is constructed. There must be a theme. Each poem is valued not only as an individual, but for its contribution to the theme and progression of the section as a whole. So that sometimes I’m forced to omit one of the best poems from a section, strictly because it is an outlier from the others.

I think of this also in terms of constructing an identity. There must be a theme to a person, not because a person cannot be eclectic or cannot have multiple seemingly contradictory characteristics—in fact, these seeming contradictions can turn out be synergies. Rather, I mean that a person must have a theme because your pursuits must be focused if you hope to make progress.

For example, I started a career in sales. But I also had a desire to learn to play the keyboard. When I discussed this with my sales director in my first job out of college, he told me, “Well, you have to choose.”

I am also reminded of some advice I have read somewhere regarding writing, to “kill your darlings.” Commitment is about sacrifice. When considering the value of something, it can be valued as a thing itself, or valued for its contribution to the whole.

As I progress in my career and take on longer-term projects in my art, I realize it is much more about wholes—team, community, society, family, collection—than it is about parts or individuals—me, myself, and I, thinking only for the fast and short-term.

I see a good poem that doesn’t fit in with the chapter, and it reminds me of my young self—sometimes it must be deleted for the sake of a more cohesive whole.

Writing in the moment

After reading The Rum Diary by Hunter S. Thompson, I continue to wonder how talented writers are so clear in the moment. I wonder if, in some cases, they actually have their pen and paper or typewriter with them on hand, and plop it out right in the middle of the bar while everyone is drinking. Or else, they must remember it, or make it up completely after the fact, only loosely based on memory.

For me, it has been easier to sit in the moment, and let it pour in through my senses, without risk of forgetting what it is I am writing about, because it is still there pouring in. The situations that Thompson write about: dancing in the streets, driving drunk, making love on the beach—would all make it very difficult to write concurrently.

The difficulty with this, for me at least, is to make the moment seem real. Whereas when you are in it—writing about it as you see, touch, and hear—then it is not so difficult, because it is real, right there in front of your face. If you were to mess it up, it would be like the failure of a realist painter—the landscape is right there, and it is your own fault if you can’t get it down clearly.

But with writing from memory, it is completely different. Because what you think you remember, is really only a picture of a picture, and so on as time passes.

The underlying truth that causes this problem is the “cohesion” of a moment. How you are feeling affects the way you describe things, and what you are seeing and hearing affects how you feel. It all has to make sense together in a way that is intuitive and comes to one naturally, but is very difficult to piece together after the fact. Like putting together the puzzle pieces of a Frankenstein—putting the pieces together isn’t the hard part. The hard part is giving life to the Frankenstein.

The opportunity cost of follow-ups

In a sales pipeline there are various stages that typically progress from cold (unqualified lead) to hot (already pitched and close to closing). I often see salespeople swinging to one side of the pipeline or the other.

On one side, they are only calling brand new leads because that is where there seems to be the most opportunity and no fear of rejection by clients that have already been pitched. On the other side, they only call accounts that have already been quoted or pitched, because these are “closest to the money” and seemingly require the least work to push over the closing line.

The middle path is based on opportunity cost. After an account has been pitched or quoted, the chances of closing that account decrease with each day. Time kills deals. If the client isn’t responding to your follow-up emails or calls, they’ve likely made up their mind. Still, the follow-ups are worth it, for the one account out of ten you will catch that has been legitimately busy and fully intends to move forward and just needed a reminder.

For this reason, it is important to draw a line in the sand for the appropriate period of time to follow-up with an account after it has been pitched. After an account crosses this line, it needs to be kicked out of the pipeline, or sent to a more junior salesperson for follow up. Otherwise, further follow up comes at the cost of calling new leads.

There is a natural sinusoidal wave in sales that involves prospecting in the valleys and closing in the peaks. Any salesperson who goes on a “hot” streak of closing many accounts in a short period of time likely had to endure a period of drought in order to prospect for all those accounts. Rarely are sales made over time completely linear.

To keep the peaks high, a salesperson must maintain diligent hard work in the valleys while prospecting and calling new leads, keeping in mind that this work makes the peaks possible.

When agility is better than sprinting

I was riding the 10 bus on the way to work this morning and saw this advertisement on a newsstand: “Agility moves you forward … when it comes to the twists and turns of enterprise recruiting.”

Working at a startup, I could relate to the twists and turns. And the word agility caught my attention because of what I’ve written before about sprinting. But the benefits gained from sprinting don’t count for much if you blow through your stop and cause more damage than the value you created from working fast during the sprint.

I think it comes down to the type of work you’re doing. In one of my previous sales roles, the sale and the client didn’t change much day-to-day. There was a seemingly endless list of leads and the only metric for success was how many of those leads you could contact and close.

In a more management-style role, like the one I’m in now, and especially a role at a startup where everything is more dynamic than a larger company, there is a high frequency of decision-making—whether that is establishing a new script for your sales team to adopt when onboarding, building a separate pipeline in your CRM for a new marketing channel, or training a new member of the team.

If you go into a day full of these decisions with the SPRINT mentality, then you’re likely to build up too much steam on one project and miss a pivot when returns on your time are greater in another part of your organization.

I’m not sure what exactly the creator of the recruiting advertisement had in mind, but this seems to be where AGILITY comes in — the ability to make those pivots at a ninety-degree angle (and sometimes one-eighty) like an NFL wide receiver turns on a dime on 10-yard out route.

In summary, there are generally two modes: execution and decision-making. When you’re executing, the key is to keep your head down and move as fast as possible without making mistakes and without getting distracted. When making decisions, you have to keep your head up so you can turn in the right direction and at the right time—and then it’s right back to sprinting.

It’s a little like calculus: you’re on the second order of things, rather than picking one rate and running along the linear line, you’re determining the rate of the rate of change, and hopefully you have a rockstar execution team to run along that line for you.

There is a certain frequency of decision-making where your ability to be agile becomes more important than your ability to sprint, because you’re making those turns and pivots often enough that there’s not a lot of time to pick up speed on any one task. Instead, your speed comes from how fast you make decisions (and how many of those decisions are the right decision).

Just getting it out there

I was having a conversation with my friend Matthew about Bob Dylan and how incredible his lyrics are. It made me think about how Matt has great taste and the art he sends me (mostly music and movies) always resonates with me. Then I remembered when we had a writing class together in college and I was constantly impressed by the creativity of Matt’s short stories.

But Matt never really makes any art himself, or at least not anything that he’s shared with me. So while we were texting I told him that he should, make some art.

And he texted back, “It would be nice to have an outlet just not sure what would be best. And then motivating myself to create something just for (the sake of) creating it I think is another struggle.”

I think the audience is key for motivation. We want to share our art with others. I’m a big believer that lifestyles are art as well. We want to get out and have conversation, dance, and generally appear and perform for others.

It’s the same for art, and I think one of the most defining things about art for our generation is that there are so many low barrier outlets to get your art out there, e.g., blogs for writing, Instagram for photography, Spotify for music, etc.

Just getting it out there, even if you only share it with people while you’re out at a party and meet someone new and they say, “Hey, what do you do?”

Instead of responding with your title at work (which is just a convenient identifier) you can pull out your iPhone and open your Instagram and be like, “Here are the photos I take of the tops of building because I think it’s art where the defined industrial buildings of man meet the sky with stark contrast.”

And all of a sudden you’re having a real conversation with that person about something deeper and more artistic and personal that makes you feel, which is something we all want on the weekends, especially after a long week at work.

Finding success by being yourself

“When I look around I always learn something, and that is to be yourself always. Express yourself and have faith in yourself. Do not go out and look for a successful personality and duplicate it. Start from the root of your being and ask, how can I be me?” — Bruce Lee

Part of having an identity is constantly choosing to forego other identities. The same goes for success; succeeding in one opportunity is largely dependent on committing and therefore passing up on other opportunities.

Successful people often say, just be yourself. It takes time to learn yourself and improve at being yourself. The same as any skill or profession.

If you started with piano, then switched to flute after six months, and then picked up the violin after a year of the flute, and so on—then you’ll never be the best at any instrument. You’ll just be mediocre at a few.

The same goes for being yourself. If you are constantly seeing others and saying, oh, I want to be like that. And starting to model that person until you see another person that you want to be like. Then you’ll never be the best at being yourself. You’ll just be mediocre at being like other people.

Not expecting magic

I was talking with one of my mentors recently and he told me, “You want to make sure that they’re not expecting magic.”

At the time I was still deciding whether to accept an offer at my current company as part of the sales team. What my mentor was telling me was that because it’s a very early stage company you want to drill down during the interview process on what their current sales system looks like and what they expect from sales performance.

When the reward is high enough sometimes we get excited and throw out expectation management because we jump at the opportunity too fast. This happens in relationships, too. We want the immediate satisfaction of the new job, new relationship, or closing a deal. So we forget to have an honest conversation about the road ahead after the honeymoon phase.

If something is hard, your boss needs to know it’s hard, otherwise he’s going to expect magic from your performance. If something about your partner is upsetting, they need to know, otherwise they’ll expect magic from your patience.

Same with a client, if you sell the dream in order to bring the client onboard, they’re going to be expecting a lot and might churn if they don’t get it. But if you have an honest conversation ahead of time about the pain point and make clear that it’s a big one, then you and the client are on the same page about the difficulty of the task he expects your firm to complete.

We can pull off a few miracles now and then, but we can’t do magic all day, unless you’re actually a professional magician, then just make sure your audience has an understanding of how difficult it is to pull bunnies out of a hat.

Don’t think too much

Observations are good. They inform action. They give feedback on actions you’ve already taken. But actions can only be so informed.

I’m an incessant note taker—in meetings, on calls, even watching movies when I’m supposed to be relaxing. I’ll open a text/slack conversation with myself and jot down a few bullet points.

Seems like a good thing, right? But what happens when you observe more than is reasonably digestible? More than is possibly implementable? There’s only so much time in the day, not to mention friction costs from switching between pursuits.

Same with reading. You can only spend so much time in the armchair next to the bookshelf before you have to get up and try for yourself what others have written about.

There’s also an element of recency. If your memory is mediocre like mine, you can only hold a thought in your head for so long before it’s displaced by something more recent (why I take notes).

Metabolically, you can only burn so many calories thinking of high-level theories with your brain before there are no calories left to execute on those theories with your physical body.

So I’ve learned to let a lot go. Even ideas that seem really good, sometimes they’re not worth the startup cost, especially at the opportunity cost of what I’m already doing.

Synergies from reverse-specialization

There are benefits from specialization, e.g., less time to learn and quicker improvements, as a result of focusing on one skill. But what are the limits? How specialized can a role get? One such limit would be a threshold whereby certain synergies are given up by limiting a role too far.

For example, an insurance company wants to write a policy for a big client. The underwriter prices the risk. The salesman takes it to the client. Client says the premium is too high. Salesman goes back to the underwriter and says the premium is too high.

The salesman on his own doesn’t have knowledge of how the premium was calculated in order to have accurate price negotiations. But what if the underwriter were also the salesman? And he knew that he baked a 5% additional profit margin into the premium. If he were also a talented salesman, maybe he could negotiate with the client to decrease the premium by 3% while still maintaining a 2% additional margin for the company and still winning the big account.

Or, consider customer support and product development. If an angry customer calls in to complain about a very specific part of the product that the customer support person isn’t familiar with, then the customer support person has to put the customer on hold and call someone more knowledgeable about the product. But what if the person taking the customer support calls was the same person that built the product?

It’s easy to see the onboarding costs (longer learning curve, more learning materials) and frictions (switching between different tasks, not getting into flow state) from allowing too much bandwidth for any one role.

Sometimes these costs might be worth building certain “hybrid” roles in your org where individuals act as bridges between two departments that should be talking more than they are.

Justify pricing by quantifying pain point

It’s a lot easier to sell a high-ticket advertising platform if you can calculate for a client the amount of revenue they’re missing out on by not being on the platform.

Client: $1 million is too expensive.

Sales: Yes, I agree, but it’s three times as expensive for you to forego the $3 million in revenue you’re missing out on by not being on the platform.

Client: Oh.

Or, let’s say, something more intangible, like brand. $100,000 sounds like an expensive salary for a full-time brand designer. But the designer pays his salary twice over when your $2 million dollar Instagram campaign increases conversion from 2% to 10% because your ads look that much better.

This is worth keeping in mind especially if you’re trying to sell your services as the brand designer. “I can add $200,000 in revenue,” works a lot better as a value prop than a portfolio of work—albeit, beautiful work—that might not make monetary sense to a CEO or other profit-driven buyer.

The cure for writer’s block is reading

I read on a blog somewhere that the best cure for writer’s block is reading. When you run out of your own material, read someone else’s.

Just like you can imagine a whole puzzle from just one piece, read a small sample of someone else’s puzzle and build out your own from that one piece. And if one piece isn’t enough, read another piece and another, until you start to fill in the rest of the puzzle on your own.

My friend told me about an interview with Aziz Ansari where they asked him, “When’s your next show coming out?” Aziz said something like (paraphrasing), “I have to go out and live more to get more material.”

It’s really hard to sit in your armchair and think up new material from scratch. It’s better if you have a book to read while you’re sitting in the armchair. But it’s best get up and go outside to live as much as you can and get your material that way (especially if you’re a fiction writer or a stand-up comedian).

If you write philosophy or anything more esoteric, might be best to stay in the armchair with a book, because there are fewer people out walking around who are likely to have that sort of information. But then again, Newton thought up gravity sitting under an apple tree.

So maybe start with a book. And if that doesn’t work, get up and go outside.

Stress is pressure without a plan

Stress is motivation misinterpreted. Stress is energy with nowhere to go. Stress is when your challenges temporarily outmatch your abilities. Stress is the emotional version of what is actually just a problem to be solved. Stress is holding your breath when it’s most important to keep breathing. Stress is a river disguised as a flood. Stress is thinking about the deadline before thinking about first steps. Stress is pressure without a plan.

Staircase model for personal growth

Sometimes people look back, summarizing their life, or forward, projecting their life. If you’re really type-A, you’ve imagined your life as a graph once or twice. If you’re idealistic, or just a perfect person, you’ve imagined it like a straight line, up and to the right.

What seems more realistic is a line that bounces up and down erratically and eventually gets somewhere up and to the right by either luck or hard work.

A model that I think is both realistic and helpful to conceptualize is one where you sprint, jump, then repeat. It looks like a staircase (see below).

To start out, you’re sprinting. You just need to get farther along, so you put your head down and run as fast as you can. Then you have an opportunity to jump up to the next level. The key to cutting years off your growth here is: how high can you jump? Maybe you can skip one or two steps. But then you’re sprinting again, to get to the next opportunity for a jump.

The sprints are execution and hustle: the what, chopping at the roots. Once you’ve gotten to a step and decided that’s the one, you’ve just gotta go. If you try jumping up from there, there will be nothing to grab onto, no matter how high you jump. The distance that needs traveling is horizontal and it’s all about sprinting.

The jumps are about strategy and purpose: the why, surveying above the treetops. These are times to take a deep breath and think about what’s important to you. Talk to mentors who have been through it before. Visualize and weigh your different options.

The synergy between the two is when you jump high into a big enough challenge that you can start sprinting on something that you care about, motivating you to hustle and execute as fast and hard as possible. Your why speaking fluently to your what. Your treetop surveying making sure your chopping in the right forest.

How to know when you’re wasting your time

In a highly specialized economy, everyone has employable skills and, as a result, a value placed on their time. For example, a software engineer that specializes in the architecture of some esoteric enterprise product might be worth $200 per hour to a certain company that sells that product. So, when that software engineer spends time doing anything other than working for that company, she is doing so at the opportunity cost of $200 per hour.

Not all time can be valued in terms of money. It’s difficult to place a dollar sign on spending time with your family or doing a hobby you really love. In a strictly business context, however, when the main objective is to optimize for the y-axis of profit using the x-axis of time, it’s worth being wary of situations in your organization where individuals that have a very high opportunity cost, spend time doing things at a lower rate of return for time spent.

For example, if I’m selling an insurance policy to the same software engineer previously mentioned. And I quote her at $900 per year. But she thinks she might be able to get a quote for $700. It’s financially irrational for her to spend any longer than one hour price shopping, because at any time after one hour, she will be working to save only $200 at the opportunity cost of more than $200 per hour from her normal wages.

Another example, if you’re stuck at the airport and a flight home that will get you back to the office one hour earlier is $100 more expensive, it makes sense to book the flight if you make more than $100 per hour, and doesn’t make sense if you make less.

This assumes away a lot of messy variables like additional cost from impatience sitting at the airport for another hour, or additional value from doing anything other than your software engineering job for an hour.

But in a role with a lot of decision-making on time management, it’s important to know what subtle value you might be giving up in terms of opportunity cost, by chasing what’s right in front of you at the moment.

Always reading

Sometimes I kick myself for not reading enough. Especially as a writer, I ask myself, how can you call this your craft if you don’t read?

Reading is a big source of creativity for me. Fiction inspires my personal life and non-fiction inspires my work. So when I don’t find time to read sometimes I notice a slowdown in new ideas.

In almost all cases I think the “I don’t have time” excuse is just prioritization in disguise. But still worth thinking about how to fit more reading into your day.

I had this thought sitting in South Park in SF the other day. It’s been dark and rainy lately and the other day was beautiful—sunshine, sixty degrees. I was sitting on the bench eating my sandwich and so many thoughts were occuring to me—stuff that I could work on when I got back to the office and even little poems about the dogs playing and tug-of-war between the seasons. It gave me a similar feeling to the one I get when I learn something new from reading.

Which made me think: there are ways to read into stories and ideas not on paper and bound in a cover.

Stories are constantly being told all around. In the city especially, you can look around and see a hundred lives that could all individually be movies with a talented director and cast. Look at a taxi cab and think of its story: the garages it’s lived in, the drivers it’s carried, the crash of ‘09 and the hard times in the auto shop.

There is non-fiction around you, too. Principles played out, like the importance of teamwork on the soccer field or the law of large numbers in your insurance work at the office.

There is a certain mindset that we get into while reading, and that is to pay complete attention to what you’re focusing on—therein lies the power of reading in my opinion. It is not that you are taking time to sit down with pages that have words on them, but that you are taking time to sit down and focus deeply and exclusively on something, anything at all.

You could just as well sit down on your front porch and watch the scenery. You would not necessarily gain the type of knowledge that our economy tends to value, but there is a lot to learn if you focus on anything deeply and exclusively.

So next time your behind on your new year’s resolution to read more or you notice dust has collected on your bookshelf, pay a little more attention on your walk to work or listen intently to a conversation with a friend, and see what you can read there.

Social rules are breakable

Sitting on the plane, waiting for the beverage cart, I was pretty thirsty so I asked the flight attendant for the rest of the bottle (about 3x the water in a cup). She gave it to me, no questions asked.

A half hour earlier, two gentlemen asked to cut me in the security line because they were late for their flight. They asked politely and directly so I said, of course. Nobody behind me complained. They cut probably 10 minutes off their wait time—maybe the difference in making their flight.

At dinner a couple nights before, the waiter sat my girlfriend and I at the bar near the entrance at one of my favorite sushi spots in SF. I asked her if it would be possible to get a table for two in the back nearer the music. We had to wait five extra minutes but we got the table.

Physical laws are set, seemingly. You cannot negotiate with gravity about jumping out of the plane and you cannot negotiate with sushi to taste differently (not including soy sauce).

However, you can ask people to break the rules that are set by somebody else and stay that way just because everyone agrees to play along.

Not everyone can do this at the same time. And no one person should do it all the time. But you should remember to do this when you need/want something that only a social rule would keep you from getting.

Assumptive language “normalizes” the sale

Assumptive language is the same thing as a flight attendant getting on the loudspeaker and telling passengers that we might hit a few bumps of turbulence in our descent. Think of her tone of voice when she says this: calm, cool, and collected. Like it happens all the time. What’s the result? Everyone stays calm and fastens their seat belt as they’re told.

If the flight attendant got on the speaker and sounded nervous like, “Um, okay, I don’t want to alarm anyone (voice audibly shaking) but the pilot said there’s a lot of turbulence (talking fast) and everyone needs to fasten their seat belts right now.” Then what would the passengers do? People would start to stand up, look around nervously at what everyone else is doing, look out the windows to try and see what will cause the turbulence, get worried, maybe start asking for parachutes—everything except for staying calm and quiet and fastening their seat belts.

Same thing on the credit card screen during a sales call. If you use assumptive language and “normalize” the situation like, oh this happens all the time. I collected three credit cards this morning already. This is what other clients do to get their product/service started. Then the client feels like they’re weird if they don’t, not the other way around.

Saying something like, “So the only thing we have left is setting up your payment details (talking confident and slow) and then I’ll have the certificate of insurance sent right over (brief pause), I’m ready when you are.” Short, succinct, almost like you’re yawning, but still maintaining sincerity—just not putting any additional stress on what is, in reality, the most stressful part of the sales encounter for both parties.

Quick decisions

When the marginal difference between worst possible and best possible outcomes from any given decision is less than the opportunity cost of time needed to decide (combined with the decision fatigue) – just choose randomly and move on.

More subtle than making the right decisions is knowing which decisions you actually need to sit down and spend time thinking about. For all other smaller decisions, you actually stand to gain more by just closing your eyes and pointing your finger (as long as you’re quick about it).

For example, let’s say your significant other asks, “Hey dear, how do I look in this dress?” And you’re deciding between “beautiful” and “stunning.” But you pause and scratch your chin. Now she’s storming back into the closet to change for the tenth time because you paused when she asked you how she looks and any remotely positive answer would have done the job.

Another example, choosing a font for an email. Let’s say you’ve got it narrowed down to Times New Roman and Helvetica. Chances that whoever you’re sending to will notice a difference? Very small. And if they do, it’s an extremely minimal difference. So the only way to lose is by spending any time trying to decide between those two.

Decide quick when it doesn’t matter. This will save time for when it does.

You can’t change your client’s mind

It’s unlikely that you’ll be able to change any of your client’s beliefs over the course of an hour-long sales call. At best, you’ll be able to educate them on something they didn’t already know about it. Even then, they might not trust you because they know you’re trying to sell them something.

Instead, sift through your client’s beliefs. Ask questions and respond with positive support to their answers, regardless of your personal opinions. This way your client will start to trust you and share information more freely.

So, with an inventory of your client’s current convictions, instead of doing the heavy lifting of changing their mind about any one thing, you can pick and choose which of their beliefs are most likely to convince them to buy.

For example, if their business is their baby and their passionate about their work, say, “Because I know how much you pride yourself on your quality of service, let’s make sure to highlight that when we’re advertising you to our users.”

Or, if they believe strongly in the millennial demographic and the idea of online advertising, say, “This program is perfect for adding to your strong online presence that’s been working so well for you.”

One of my mentors likes to say it’s like martial arts, where you can use your opponent’s momentum against them, instead of just standing and exchanging blows.

Let your client tell you why they’re going to buy.

Arnold Schwarzenegger’s shocking principle

I was watching an interview with Arnold Schwarzenegger last night. He was talking about “shocking” his muscles. He described how he would play a game trying to “beat” his muscles. When they thought they had figured out his “tricks,” he would switch it up.

“One of the main things of course in order to create size and to create muscle growth … sometimes the body will hit the wall and what that basically means is that the body is saying, ‘Look, I know all your tricks. I know you’re gonna start first with benchpress and then I know you’re gonna walk over to the chin up … I know that routine. I know exactly everything you do and I am prepared for that.’ So you have to go and use the shocking principle.”

[Insert Arnold’s description of how to shock his pectoral muscles.]

“Let’s see if the pectoral muscle is used to that, and then all of a sudden you will find that your pectoral muscle is shaking. After that, you don’t know what to do because it’s cramping and it is being tortured and it is in pain because you’ve now shocked the muscle.”

The same “shocking” principle applies to your lifestyle.

Having a routine is a good start. Setting your sights on a goal and building the plan to achieve it. In my experience, however, running through the same routine over and over will result in diminishing marginal returns—in terms of both enjoyment and effectiveness.

You get bored. You burnout. You stop paying attention.

To some degree, you have to push on. As long as the routine is effective, even if it’s boring, it’s worth enduring to get to your goal.

At some point, however, it makes sense to make a change—to “shock” your lifestyle. The goal remains the same. The method changes.

Like Arnold switches up the order of his exercises, switch up what you’re doing on the weekends, who you’re hanging out with, when you wake up in the morning, when you go to bed at night, what genre of books you’re reading, what kind of art you’re making, where you’re traveling, what you’re thinking about during your commute, etc.

Notice you’re not stopping or starting anything. You still do the same types of things and work towards the same goals. With the “shocking” principle, you’re just going about your normal routine in a different way in order to avoid getting bored or burning out; the newsness will get you excited to work even harder and make progress on the same goals with a different approach.

Here’s the link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9zCgPtsups

You have time

I was in the car with my friend Natalie the other day. We were talking about our favorite authors. Natalie said, “I wish I read more, I just don’t have the time.” Natalie is full-time at university, rows on the varsity team, and also works part-time.

Even given her full schedule, she corrected herself and said, “Well, that’s not true, I could be reading right now if I wanted.” We were in the car with friends and it would have been slightly unusual if she were reading and not engaging in conversation. However, what she said was technically true. She had the time.

What she would have said was, “I wish I read more, but in times like these I value in-person conversation more than reading.”

Twenty-four hours in a day is a lot of time.

Habits beforehand help you focus when the time comes

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi describes how some surgeons go on “automatic pilot” the morning before surgery. They eat the same breakfast, put on the same clothes, drive to the hospital via the same route.

Habits like those of a morning routine are mostly unconscious. Your body knows how to go through the motions, especially in the morning when your mind is still slowly waking up.

This applies to habits throughout the day as well: eating your meals at the same time (even eating the same foods); following a strict schedule, especially for mundane tasks like responding to email, adding events to the calendar, sending progress reports to your manager, etc.

Similar to how a weightlifter moves slowly and sparingly in between sets as he puts away equipment and changes weight on the machines, so that when he actually gets under the weight of the bar, his muscles are primed and rested to push the limits of his maximum strength.

Routine habits allow you to perform necessary tasks consistently while also freeing the rest of your mental energy to focus on the part of your job that actually requires your creativity, innovation, and dynamic skill.

Source: Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow, pg. 157.

Finding a balance between work and meditation

Aldous Huxley wrote about whether it is possible to transcend self in a Western world that is largely based on self-consciousness.

Huxley’s brother Julian said of him, “One of Aldous’s major preoccupations was how to achieve self-transcendence while yet remaining a committed social being—how to escape from the prison bars of self and the pressures of here and now into realms of pure goodness and pure enjoyment.”

For example, walking down the street in the city, I try to focus on my consciousness. I try to remove the subjectivity of what I am seeing. I look at the streetlamp and the store signs but I try not to use my language. I try to wonder, what are those? What are they for? Like I’ve never seen them before.

However, there are certain subjectivities that are important for my survival, e.g., the danger of passing cars or hostile strangers. I cannot simultaneously meditate outside of my ego while also protecting my physical body from potential dangers.

Similarly, I’ve noticed that my meditations at night have worsened as my effort in my career has increased. It is more difficult for me to detach and just focus on my breath after my thought has been so deeply invested in work all day.

Part of me thinks there is an optimal, even synergistic, balance to be reached between the two, at least in the early stages. As you go deeper, however, each one requires a certain commitment that doesn’t allow any devotion to the other.

Being the best at your work requires non-stop attention, even dreaming about work sometimes. Whereas spiritual life and meditation require a purity and detachment that takes time to foster and needs to be uninterrupted.

So at some point, if you want to go far, you have to decide between the two. There are benefits to both, certainly.

Source: Huxley, Aldous. Island. Harper Perennial Modern Classics, 2009.

Get paid more by staying longer

At a lot of companies, you don’t make that much more money for great effort in the short-term, relative to the amount you can make by just staying longer than everyone else and earning your golden handcuffs.

Sell more by asking questions

“Sell me this pen.”

When given this classic sales test, 90% of amateurs will start talking about the pen.

“This pen here has blue ink and the grip feels like this and it’s better than other pens because …”

This isn’t sales. It’s lecturing, and the client is likely already bored of your voice. When you’re selling anything, the best strategy is to get the client talking as soon as possible, ideally about themselves or something else they care about.

“Tell me more about why you’re in the market for a pen.”

“Do you use pens more for note taking or document signing?”

“What other pens have you been looking at?”

“What do you know about this pen?”

A big misconception about sales is that it has anything at all to do with explaining or otherwise talking about your product, your service, yourself, or whatever else you’re selling. A successful salesperson, instead of making statements, knows to ask questions.

If you ask the right questions, you’ll find the client can even give you the whole pitch on your product, in their own words. They’ll even tell you what price they’ll pay when you innocently ask, “For a product that can relieve that pain point for you, what’s your budget?”

As far as asking the right questions, sometimes you’ll ask the wrong ones. That’s okay. Just say, “Interesting,” nonchalantly. Then ask another question, and when they give you the right answer, “That’s exactly right!” Get excited, drop an emotional landmark right there to let them know they’ve made a point—something that you can recall together at the end of the pitch right before you ask for the sale or when you’re handling objections.

In sales encounters, ask more questions. Let the client do the talking. It’s about them, not you.

Underpromise and overdeliver

During junior year in college my buddy and I had an interview at the same bank.

About halfway through the interview they asked, “How good are your math skills?”

I said, “They’re alright, but my qualitative skills are better.” (Truth be told, I knew my math skills were inferior to my peers’). 

So they asked me one math question, “What’s the square root of one thousand?” I reasoned that it must be above 30 and below 40, closer to 30 (because 30 times 30 is 900, and 40 times 40 is 1600). They seemed satisfied with my answer and we moved on.

When I talked to my buddy after the interview he said they asked him the same question,“How good are your math skills?”

Except he answered, “They’re really good.” (He thought this was the right answer because it was an interview and he needed to be impressive.)

So they drilled him with math questions. He answered the first few right (I probably couldn’t have even gotten that many), but eventually he started getting them wrong and it broke his confidence for the rest of the interview.

Underpromise and overdeliver (especially with managers and investors). You don’t want to sell yourself too short, but just long enough to meet minimum expectations and then you can really make an impression when you exceed what was expected.

Confusing cause with effect

Are hipsters more likely to buy Himalayan salt lamps because they’re hipsters? Or do Himalayan salt lamps make people more likely to turn into hipsters?

Seeing the correlation is easy; it’s harder to see which way the cause-effect runs.

Are tall people more likely to be rich because they’re tall? Or does being rich make people tall? Based on what we know about anatomy and how human beings grow, this one seems a little more obvious.

The point is you can’t make assumptions just based on correlations. You have to break the thing apart and find out how it ticks.

The philosophy that turned things around for me

At my first job out of college, I used to hate coming into work. For a while I struggled. I took other interviews. People told me, “You have to do your first year somewhere.”

The philosophy that turned things around was this: whatever it was before that led to this, sitting in my desk at the office, doesn’t matter now. My friends making six-figures doing banking, doesn’t matter. The startup that wants to hire me on to build out their sales org, doesn’t matter. The trip I’ve always dreamed of taking, being an expat in Spain like Hemingway, doesn’t matter.

When I step into the office at my inside sales role at a big tech company, everything else doesn’t matter. I’ll be in my desk for 8 hours no matter what and the outcome is binary—I can work with the tools and situation I’ve got and get better for whatever that’s worth; or I can worry about everything else that I haven’t executed on for whatever reason and not get better where I’m at presently.

The same applies for relationships (“love the one you’re with”), working out (don’t text while you’re in the gym), meditation (sit still and don’t get distracted), etc. Focus fully on what’s in front of you. Block out everything else.

On the scale of a lifetime it’s the same thing, too. If you can’t come in on just one workday committed to hitting daily goals (whether you agree with them or not) and focusing where you’re at now (with what you’ve been given), then you sure as heck won’t be able to achieve your goals over the much more strenuous and long-term frame of a lifetime.

Correlation isn’t causation

A lot of decisions at my company are based on observed correlations. “We did this and that happened. That was good so let’s do more of this.”

That reasoning only works when all other variables are held constant, which is inevitably almost never the case.

Correlation does not imply causation. Consistent progress on the effect can be made only by first finding out the right cause and then focusing effort on changing it in the desired direction.

It’s the same thing with lifestyle. We feel bad or fail and start to blame it on obvious culprits, often the same things we’ve blamed in the past. When you feel bad or fail, consider all variables and do control tests for the one that’s actually predictive. This is the only way to get better.

Slowly and consistently

You cannot do everything all at once. Some things you can only do slowly and consistently; they require a large investment of time and diligent focus.

The challenge is then choosing what you’ll do with the time you’ve got. The irony is that you can’t see the future. Of the options you have, you can’t look out ahead and see which one will be successful or make you happiest.

This is the anxiety that causes a lot of people to be fast and sporadic. They burn out and move on to something different.

Chip a little bit off the block everyday. Don’t strain yourself to pick up a big boulder all at once and break it open with one heave. You’ll only end up breaking yourself.

When to stay and when to go

You have to decide when to stay and when to go, whether to stay focused where you’re already at or to move on to something new.

In the macro, these are big life decisions like moving cities, changing jobs, ending a relationship, etc.

Sometimes, even if you’ve plateaued, things are getting boring, or times are tough—it makes sense to stay if you’re close to a breakthrough, learning a valuable lesson, or if you made a promise. Other times it’s all bad and you need to go.

In the micro, these are the thoughts that run through your head. Some stay longer. Some come and go quickly, one after another.

When I write, for example, I am walking this mental tightrope between staying focused on one idea or scanning on the surface, sifting through many ideas, looking for a good one, but even when I find one that I think will be good, I can’t be sure until I stop and start to focus on it.

Most failures can be described in terms either of staying too long or going too soon.

New motivations

Go until you can’t go anymore. Don’t think about what you’ll do when you get there; new motivations will push you even farther.  

There are only two ways to make money

Okay, there are more than two. But the difference between these two, in particular, demonstrates a point.

The long way around is spending your time building something of value.

For anybody—company, entrepreneur, inventor, non-profit, artist, entertainer—no matter how valuable their thing is, somebody still has to pay for it. In other words, they still have to go to market.

So if they’re going to make money, they have to either learn sales skills themselves or partner with a salesperson.

Other than the mythical money tree or a money-making machine, there is no achievement in physics, psychology, health, even business, etc. that makes money in and of itself. The closest thing is working in finance.

To be honest, the world needs people that build something of value more than it needs salespeople.

But the short path to making more money is being the person that sells the thing.

Meeting them where they are

I was recently having a conversation with someone. They began to talk about vibrations and frequencies. Some of the science they were citing seemed anecdotal.

But then I tried to see it from a different angle. I tried to literally see it through their eyes based on their experience. These beliefs were part of their culture and their family heritage. I was using an academic lens based on my Western education; it was the wrong lens.

We have shared frameworks like language and the physical world that allow us to communicate, but there is a lot about each other’s subjective experience that we still don’t understand.

Try to resist the urge to subject another person’s experience to your own. Try to see what they’re seeing and understand where they’re coming from.

Not only will this aid your conversations and relationships; it is also like traveling, taking a drug, being young again—in the sense that you get to see the world anew and refresh your perspective.

“You can’t stay in your corner of the Forest waiting for others to come to you. You have to go to them sometimes.” — Winnie the Pooh

Losses due to specialization

Let’s pretend that when you become more educated in a field or more skilled at a trade, you gain “knowledge points.” These “knowledge points” are universal among all fields and trades. You get more points the more educated or skilled you are in any given field or trade. 

So, a really proficient plumber could have 26 knowledge points while a mediocre banker could have 14 knowledge points. You don’t get more knowledge points if your field or trade garners higher wages.

Now, think of a diversified dilettante. Lets say they’re educated in ancient Greek (15 points), Turkish history (21 points), and rocket mechanics (30 points). They are also very skilled at violin (13 points), several different forms of martial arts (22 points), and cooking (11 points).

On the other hand, think of a highly specialized lawyer. They don’t have much interest in anything other than an encyclopedic knowledge of precedent court cases on patent claims for a very particular kind of semiconductor technology (57 points). Additionally, they play tennis (8 points) on the weekends, but they aren’t very good.  

The diversified dilettante might have a sum of 112 knowledge points between all his interests and skills, while the highly specialized lawyer might have 65 knowledge points just from his law research and tennis skills.

But who will be paid more? In our modern economy, it’s the highly specialized lawyer, every time. And rightly so, if we assume economic goals. Just like international trade benefits from countries specializing in certain resources or services, there is a lot of economic value from synergies between specialized individuals in the labor force.

I do wonder, however, if we have lost some non-economic value due to a capitalist moral system that applauds the high pay from specialization and therefore discourages cultivating a wide array of interests and skills, which might have synergies in their own right, just not economic ones.

Arbitrage between personal value and market prices

I was online shopping for a turtleneck sweater. One was priced at $65 and another at $32. I thought to myself, I would pay at least $65 for the $32 sweater, while at the same time I wouldn’t pay more than $5 (maybe less) for the $65 sweater (I didn’t like the fit).

So if the company were pricing just for me, they could have maximized profits by raising the price of the $32 sweater to $65 or more and I probably still would have bought it (because it was worth that much to me).

Of course I’m not the only consumer on this clothing retailer’s website. But still, how is it that I can get away with paying half-price for a sweater that I would have happily paid twice as much for?

Prices for products and services sold by large companies are calculated based on data for hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of consumers.

Therefore, these prices are averages (based on aggregate supply/demand graphs). In some cases, your personal preference might be a significant outlier to the aggregate graph.

Keep your eyes peeled for these cases. Even with your income static, you can create more value for yourself based on the unique arbitrage created by your own tastes and preferences.

Remembering fundamentals when things are going well

A couple weeks ago I had a flood of creative output after an inspiring vacation. I wrote about 25,000 words across three different writing projects in a little over a week.

But now the flood has dried up and I’m struggling to write my daily post here (the drafts I wrote ahead of time are coming in handy), not to mention adding content to my other projects.

When things are going well, we forget the fundamentals. We make the mistake of thinking it’s the “new normal” and it won’t require the same daily effort that was required to ramp up to such a high level of output in the first place.

So we end up riding the wave and hoping it just carries us along and we forget to put in the daily, basic, fundamental work.

Then when the wave runs out, we don’t have a foundation that we’ve kept up with maintaining, and we’re back to rebuilding from square one.

It happens on our sales team, too. We’ll have a great stretch. The energy is high. Everyone on the team is working hard and closing deals.

Until at some point, if we’re not careful, we forget about the fundamentals—sending emails, having important conversations with non-decision-makers, vetting new leads, etc.

We come into the office thinking “we’ve got this.” We think, because things went well yesterday then they must go well today, right?

Consistency and commitment to daily (sometimes boring) routines is key. Emotionally, it helps to remain jaded about your success.

So when things are going well, you can remain hungry like you still have work to do.

Staying patient when things slow down

When things slow down, I start “gripping the bat too tight.”

My first inclination is to somehow artificially make up for the slowdown in the short-term.

On an individual level, I try to drink more coffee and hype myself up.

On a team level, I give an inspirational speech or demand too much of my reps all at once.

But these are only band-aids that might be cosmetic quick fixes but they do nothing in the long-term for a consistently high level of output.

Better to remain patient and work on the small daily habits that build a strong foundation for consistently performing at a high level, both for myself and my team.

Critiques from amateurs

Imagine if Michelangelo was sitting in the Sistine Chapel and a tourist walked in and looked up at the ceiling and said, “Oh, wow, that’s really well done.”

Michelangelo might be polite and smile at the tourist and say, “Thank you very much.”

But wouldn’t he be thinking to himself, “How would you know?”

Because the tourist isn’t a painter, let alone one of Michelangelo’s caliber.

Versus if Raphael walked in and said, “Oh, wow, great work.” Michelangelo would feel a sense of pride and say, “Really? You think so? That means a lot.”

Product handcuffs

You’ve heard of golden handcuffs, but what about product handcuffs?

When you learn your company’s product so well that your value in the job market is much higher at the company where you’re already employed (and have been for a while).

If you were to move, you’d be at the bottom of a new learning curve. So you stay where you are because you’re “unconsciously competent”—the work has become so easy, almost mindless, and your output is still better than your peers even if just because you’ve been there longer and you’ve spent more time with the product.

So your company is willing to pay you more to stay than any other company is willing to pay for you to leave (and for the time you’ll spend climbing a new learning curve).

At some point there’s a trade-off between compensation and learning new skills, change of scenery, mission you actually believe in, etc.

Results-only work environment

If we assume that an employee’s output is directly correlated to the amount of time they spend at their desk or in the office, then it makes sense why a company would try to limit and discourage vacation and sick time in order to maximize time in the office.

On the other hand, if we assume that an employee’s output is directly correlated with anything else like effort or motivation, less calculable variables that vacillate—troughing when an employee is at their desk too long and peaking when an employee is well-rested—then it makes sense why a company would offer unlimited vacation and flexible work hours.

Also assuming that the employee is adult and professional enough to manage their own time and still meet expectations.

It’s all selling

Getting your boss to pay you more, persuading your friend to come out with you, agreeing on a restaurant for family dinner, convincing the cop not to write you a ticket, motivating a group of people, pitching your company to investors, growing the guest list for a house party, etc.

It’s all human communication. It’s all selling.

Time dilates when things are changing

The other night I was talking to a friend who went to Berkeley. She said that since she graduated it feels like time has moved very fast. I thought that was interesting and told her that, for me, even though we graduated the same year, I felt like time was moving very slow, or at least that it was very dense and full of things that I could remember.

I think maybe the difference is that less changed in her life. She became familiar with the Bay Area during college and even spent some weekends in the city so when she started work in the city, a lot of things stayed the same: her friends, proximity to her family, general geography, etc.

For me, moving from my school in the Midwest after graduation, a lot changed. I didn’t know many people and in a lot of ways I had to go about rebuilding my life. With so much change, my guess is that’s why time seemed more full for me. There were a lot more inputs that my mind wasn’t yet regarding as normal.

So the unsubstantiated and anecdotal hypothesis is this: when there’s a lot of change in your life, time will dilate and seem more full and might even seem to pass slower.

Don’t be afraid to get your shoes wet

I was hiking up to the Kanarraville Falls with Ford. We passed an older man with a walking stick and a straw hat. He asked Ford, “Are your shoes wet yet?”

Ford looked at his boots and said, “No, are they going to be?”

Up to this point, we’d been stepping carefully on rocks and logs to cross back and forth over the river so our shoes were still relatively dry.

The man with the walking stick pointed at his own shoes, dripping water into the dirt where he stood.

He said, “There gets to a point that I call the f*** it moment.”

Ford and I both laughed and the old man carried on stomping down the middle of the river.

Sometimes you have your plan, your routine, your diet, your rules. And then an opportunity comes along to have some fun and get off the trail and hike straight up the river.

Don’t be afraid to get your shoes wet.

When to show pricing

Pricing is the only “card” the salesperson has to play. On a chessboard it’s like our queen versus our client’s full board of pawns (tennis ball objections), rooks and bishops (previous advertising experience and decision-making process), and king (business need). We have to defeat a full chessboard while protecting our queen. In other words, we have to get our client to play all their cards before we play our one.

So when the client asks, “Okay okay, how much does it cost?” We have to parry with, “I’m getting to that, but first let me show you one more thing / ask you one more question.”

And we do that over and over, skillfully nonchalant, until we’ve fully qualified the client, upfront contracted, and basically ensured that when we show the client prices, they’re going to pick a program and sign up.

If we don’t have all the clients cards played and we get to pricing prematurely, we’ll get an objection we weren’t expecting or a part of the program where the client doesn’t see value will go unspoken. Handling these issues when the client has a credit card screen in front of their face is near impossible. They get nervous about putting down their card and cease to be rational.

Their mind needs to be almost fully made up by the time they’re looking at pricing so you can make a final emotional push to get them over the edge.

If you don’t have all their cards played and their rational mind convinced at this point, however, no amount of emotional push or salesy last-ditch efforts (like lowering the price, money-back guarantee, offering promos, adjusting contract length) will get the client to ignore their brain and sign up.

The key is that when you get to the point of showing pricing, the only objections you’ll get should be related to pricing. In other words, the client is convinced of the value of the program and understands how it works, so none of the objections should be about whether this is a product or service they want or need or if it will work for them; all the objections on the pricing screen should be just about finding a  budget that the client is comfortable with.

Fast starts and strong finishes

Give a burst of energy in the beginning when you’re well-rested and ready to go.

Like the runners who sprint ahead at the beginning of marathons so that you can see them way out in front of everyone else in the starting photos (they also avoid all the pushing and shoving).

On the starting blocks, while everyone else is still at zero, it’s the easiest time to be seen as leading the pack. This is the time to soak up attention from your boss, critics, fans, etc.

Once you’re out ahead, you’ve bought yourself time and slack in the middle to relax and do just average and still be seen in the lead.

Then at the end, when the adrenaline kicks in anyway, the finish line is in sight, and whatever incentive you’re after is right in front of your face—then you can make an almost superhuman final push to pad your stats and add some icing to the cake.

Enjoying your slack

Sometimes I get to the airport with not a minute to spare and I’m anxious waiting in line for security hoping I don’t miss my flight.

Other times I get there two hours early and I’m waiting for what feels like forever to board.

Sometimes I try to plan things out too perfectly and I forget to leave margins for where something could go wrong.

Then one thing goes awry that I didn’t plan for and the whole thing breaks.

It’s important to leave yourself slack. And what’s more, it’s important to enjoy the slack when you have it.

When everything goes as planned, you have to be patient while you wait for the slack to let out. It helps to remind yourself that you would have been thankful if you needed it.

Working hard when others aren’t

Sometimes a lethargy strikes our sales floor. People say things like, “Energy is low on the floor today.” Most reps are affected by it.

On these days, those affected reps have lost their day before it’s begun. Such a loss is beyond their control because they don’t determine their own success. They let external factors—e.g., the energy on the floor—determine how hard they’re going to work that day.

There are other external factors, too, such as it being holiday season, meetings during the day, your manager not giving you enough attention, etc. Non-autonomous reps have their success controlled by these external factors.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are a few autonomous, internally-motivated reps on our floor that recognize these “slow days,” holiday season, etc. as opportunities to get ahead.

Which is why you’ll see them outperform on days that everyone else underperforms. Twice the progress is made, relative to the pack, than outperforming on days when everyone else is already performing. So at the end of the month when we look at numbers it’s days like these that account for internally motivated reps rising far above their peers.

Switching into the management mindset, it’s the difference between teaching a man to fish versus just feeding him for a day.

Addressing the low energy on one day is swinging at the leaves. Teaching and reinforcing an internally motivated mindset is planting deep roots that will grow a strong tree over a whole career, even after that rep has left your team or company.

Winning the respect of your teammates

I’ve started playing pickup soccer on Sundays. At first I was new to the team and honestly did not play too well the first Sunday. This Sunday I played better, communicated more, and was a better member of the team.

We naturally want to earn the approval of other people in our community. In an organized game, especially, there’s a certain joy from winning the respect of your teammates.

In a game, the rules and your job are well-defined. Unlike everyday relationships in work, personal, etc. that can sometimes be political or nebulous, in the context of a game it is more clear how to do your part to make progress toward a common goal.

Politics are different firsthand

Politics change when you’re actually involved. It’s one thing to think about people’s lives in theory. You set a goal and come up with a policy and wipe your hands and say, “There! That should do it.”

But once you live it and experience it, especially pain and suffering. Your policy goes out the window and your survival instincts kick in.

The poor man

In a capitalist society, our lifestyles are determined by what people are willing to pay for.

Woe to the poor man who cannot find his place in the economy.

Though he may have many great skills, his misfortune is that they are not the ones that consumers are willing to pay for.

The problem with a big sales organization

Everyone is always trying to sell everyone.

When a rep asks their manager a question, the manager says something to motivate the rep to get back on the phone. When a manager asks their director a question, the director sells the manager on their career path and the long-term growth of the company.

The best and worst thing about having good salespeople in your organization is that they’re always selling.

And when you have a whole org full of just salespeople that are giving quick, emotional and motivational answers, rather than the strategy guys who actually say “let me think about that” or the finance gals who ask “can we afford that?” or the engineers who ask “how does that actually work?” then that’s when you end up with an org that is cosmetically very healthy in terms of its human resources and new revenue acquisition but fundamentally ailing due to the lack of insight from those who are essential for making a business healthy holistically.

Take a break

This week I came back from a vacation and everything was refreshed and new.

If you’re not enjoying something anymore, take a break and come back to it later. You’ll see it new and remember why you enjoyed it in the first place.

Creating new ways to describe reality

You have to have your art form.

Audio, visual, tactile; graffitiing buildings, singing opera, sculptures made entirely out of cereal boxes; whatever it may be. Whatever your art is.

Because you see the world differently than everybody else. And everybody else needs to see that.

Falling off giant shoulders

A theory like relativity was probably discovered for the first time by Einstein, what with the essential preceding discoveries (that Einstein had read) and time-tracking devices available. So that he could reason about the ticking of clock hands as an observer in a fast-moving vehicle.

But I wonder about novels and how many plots or characters are extremely similar if not said to be almost identical. Or even ecology, how much does a modern ecologist discover now that has been known by the natives for centuries?

How many great ideas have we forgotten? Because culture doesn’t always move in the right and true direction on its own. And now we try to repeat them, starting from scratch. Instead of standing on the shoulders of giants.

Any one person in one lifetime builds mental models and avoids redundancies in their memory. Over time from generation to generation, however, this isn’t always the case.

So it becomes important to take your knowledge not just from your space and time but look back in history and across cultures to find completely new (to you) schools of thought that can fill important gaps.

Permanent employee

If you’re waiting for your manager to give you the piece of feedback that’s going to change your career, it’s not going to happen.

If you’re just following the script/process and not being creative and testing things at the margins, you’re not going to improve.

If you’re not being your own leader, you’re setting yourself up to be a permanent employee.

Choosing your art

Literature and acting—compared to music, painting and sculpture—are more closely connected to the rest of the non-art world.

Language is at the basis of almost everything we do. A writer can draft business proposals and stories for the news. Acting, too, is closer to the world. An actor can have great success in relationships and sales meetings.

The other arts are more contained within themselves. Music, for example, can be performed at a concert or recorded for playback later, but outside of the music industry itself, cross-applications are limited for the skills of musicians.

Painting, too, is something to look at but not necessarily something that can be “used” except maybe for its applications to graphic design or creating marketing images. Sculpting is even more niche.

Granted, I may have this option because I’m more a writer than a painter or musician. It’s possible there are applications of painting and music that I’m not familiar with.

Still, I imagine there’s a scale on which all the arts could be placed from “worldly” to “non-worldly,” or from “useful and applicable” to “totally out there.”

The art of cooking would be toward worldly. The art of splatter painting with curdled milk would be toward non-worldly.

I wonder if we trend toward art that is more worldly, more useful and applicable. So that more people can access it and even if the art doesn’t work out in and of itself, the artist is left with skills that can garner success in the non-art world.

Writing is good or bad

Writing is good or bad, if we assume an objective.

Like a realist painting is good if it accurately depicts the reality that it aims to, and bad if it doesn’t.

Or, a motivational speech is good if it motivates, and bad if it doesn’t.

Clickbait writing is good if it gets clicks.

Informative academic papers are good if they inform.

Emotional eulogies are good if they emote.

Granted, clicks are easier to quantify than to what degree a piece of writing informs or emotes.

Even for non-quantifiable objectives, however, you can ensure your writing trends toward “good” if you begin with an objective in mind.

Needs-based motivation

Two questions that cross your mind when you think about doing something:

Can I do that?”

“Do I need to do it?”

When we say, “I can’t,” it’s only partially a matter of ability. It’s also a matter of need, sometimes even more so.

If you don’t need something, it’s hard to muster the motivation to do it.

If you need something bad enough, you can become capable of doing it.

For example, Maslow explains how the need of hunger turns a man into a hunger-gratifying machine in his “Theory of Human Motivation:”

“All capacities are put into the service of hunger-satisfaction, and the organization of these capacities is almost entirely determined by the one purpose of satisfying hunger. The receptors and effectors, the intelligence, memory, habits, all may now be defined simply as hunger-gratifying tools. Capacities that are not useful for this purpose lie dormant, or are pushed into the background. The urge to write poetry, the desire to acquire an automobile, the interest in American history, the desire for a new pair of shoes are, in the extreme case, forgotten or become of secondary importance. For the man who is extremely and dangerously hungry, no other interests exist but food. He dreams food, he remembers food, he thinks about food, he emotes only about food, he perceives only food and he wants only food.”

Source: A.H. Maslow, A Theory of Human Motivation.

Pushing your client

Imagine you’re a personal trainer. Your client has told you they want to lose twenty pounds. You’ve done this with countless clients before and you know the perfect diet and workout regimen for you client.

Day 1: your client is towards the end of the workout and they’re sweating and breathing heavy and they tell you they can’t do anymore pushups. What do you do?

You ask your client, “Do you still want to lose twenty pounds?”

Your client says, “Yes!” In between breaths.

Then you say, “Okay, give me ten more push-ups.”

“I can’t,” they say.

“Yes, you can,” you snap back. “I’ll count them for you, 1 … 2 … 3 …”

Same with clients in a sales encounters.

Bob tells you he doesn’t have a budget for advertising.

You ask, “Bob, do you still want to get those 10 more clients per month?”

“Yes.”

“Awesome, let me know when you have your credit card and then we’ll get you started.”

If your client has trusted you with their needs/goals, and you legitimately believe your service/product can help them, you would be cheating them not to push them to sign up.

Two-person conversations are better than three

Thoreau had three chairs in his cabin by Walden Pond: “One for solitude, two for friendship, three for society.”

I think Thoreau could have thrown out the third and been just fine.

You can talk to the third person later, when it’s just you two.

Imagine a dance, with two partners the interaction is clear. With three, one is left out.

In conversation with two, it’s obvious whose turn it is to speak and whose turn it is to listen.

With three, two listeners and a speaker. Toes get stepped on. And even when a speaker does take the stage, she averages her words for two, instead of talking directly to one.

If you find yourself to be the third, just be a fly on the wall and listen. So the interaction between the other two is still clear. They’ll respect you for listening, and ask for your opinion when they need it.

Source: Henry David Thoreau, Walden.

Balance between spiritual East and material West

On an individual level, as I try to progress in both my meditative practice as well as my professional career—working during the day and meditating at night—I continue to encounter something between the two that is the opposite of synergy.

When I sit down to meditate at night, the stress and constant go-go-go of the workday distract from my focus.

In the morning, returning to the working world, I find it difficult to break from my meditative detachment in order to jumpstart my energy and perform at my sales job.

On a societal level, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi compares the meditative calm of the Eastern cultures and the modern working world of the West.

“In many respects, what the West has accomplished in terms of harnessing material energy is matched by what India and the Far East have achieved in terms of direct control of consciousness.”

However, according to Csikszentmihalyi, neither are independently sustainable long-term.

“The Indian fascination with advanced techniques for self-control, at the expense of learning to cope with the material challenges of the physical environment, has conspired to let impotence and apathy spread over a great proportion of the population, defeated by scarcity of resources and by overcrowding.”

“The Western mastery over material energy, on the other hand, runs the risk of turning everything it touches into a resource to be consumed as rapidly as possible, thus exhausting the environment.”

Csikszentmihalyi believes, “The perfect society would be able to strike a balance between the spiritual and material worlds.”

The same holds true for the individual. We cannot survive without control over the material world and we cannot avoid suffering without control over consciousness.

My question remains: how do we maintain a balance between the two in our personal lives when it seems that the mindset and skills required for each are counter-productive to the other?

Source: Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow, p. 103.

Sunday scaries are a social construct

Viktor Frankl calls it “Sunday neurosis.”

He defines it as, “That kind of depression which afflicts people who become aware of the lack of content in their lives when the rush of the busy week is over and the void within themselves becomes manifest.”

The calendar week is a social construct. There is no difference between Sunday and Monday other than the invented social norms that go along with each day.

If your Sundays are getting too scary, it might be time for a change.

Source: Viktor Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning.

Perfect moments

A few moments are perfect, like the movies. Everyone is beautiful. The conversation is clever. Laughs are haughty. Someone speaks another language to the foreign waiter. Everyone is having a good time. We think to ourselves, it can’t get better than this.

I think of Nietzsche’s idea of eternal recurrence. The idea that even just one perfect moment can make an entire life of less-than-perfect moments worth reliving.

Unsuccessful people give into short-term pleasures in normal everyday moments. Successful people spend the normal moments preparing to make the perfect ones possible.

Getting your friend out of bed

Imagine you’re trying to get your friend to come out with you. They’re laying in bed. They’ve had a full day already and they’re exhausted.

You’re dropping all the value that you can. Their favorite band is playing tonight. Their crush is going to be at the bar you’re going to. And you’ve got them right at the edge …

There’s this window of opportunity, where your friend is half-leaned up in bed, and they’re interested, but they’re still not 100% sold. But you know that they see the potential.

They want to try it. But they have the pain right in front of them—they have to get out of bed.

Or, they can stay under their safe, warm sheets and not risk putting forth a bunch of effort just to have a dud night.

You know the value of your product. You know the night won’t be a dud. But if you don’t get your friend up and showered and dressed in the next two minutes then they’re going to lay down and go to sleep and tell you to leave them alone.

It’s the same thing with clients in a sales encounter. They’re interested. They see value and potential. They want to try it. But they’ve got this pain right in front of their face.

They have to open their wallet and give away their hard-earned money. They can stay in the safe world of their “budget” and not change anything and get along because they’re already doing “just fine.”

Fast forward a couple months after they’ve signed up, when their business is thriving and your client is calling you back saying, “Thank you for signing us up!” Just like your friend will high-five you later in the night when he’s having fun and say, “Thanks for getting me to come out tonight, man!”

You know this. You’ve seen it happen before.

But your friend/client doesn’t have the fortune of knowing this ahead of time (or else your job would be a lot easier). All they see is the pain right in front of their face.

Your one and only job is to get them past the pain and over the edge to where they can enjoy the value. And you only have that small window of opportunity to get it done.

Why your employees aren’t bought into your mission

It’s not that your employees don’t believe in your company’s mission. They probably do, to a certain degree. They just have other missions that are more important to them—e.g., their families, their side-hustles, or their volunteer work.

So when they have the option of doing an extra hour of work, it’s a no-brainer when the alternative is wrapping up work early and going home to the missions that matter most to them.

Especially when that extra hour of work might not get noticed by their manager or might not have a substantial impact.

4-7-8 breathing technique

My friend told me about this breathing exercise.

You inhale for 4 seconds.

Then hold your breath for 7 seconds.

Then exhale for 8 seconds.

Then do it again.

Slows the whole world down.

Doing what you say

The other night around seven o’clock I sat down to read East of Eden. I was getting towards the end and wanted to finish it so I promised myself that I would read fifty pages before I went to sleep.

Before I knew it, it was almost ten o’clock. I had gone to check the mail and texted some friends and whatever else, I don’t know. I had only read six pages of the book.

Then I said to myself, “Well, I still need to cook dinner.” I ate dinner and got tired and said to myself, “Maybe I’ll just go to sleep and read more of the book tomorrow.”

I lose sight of my ‘why,’ my deeper purpose.

I rationalize that the goal is not essential to my purpose.

I think maybe I’ll just push back the deadline.

I tell myself I need to be relaxed and healthy, not always so determined and gritty.

I give into my desires for sleep, pleasure, and social life.

I allow short-term feelings to supersede my long-term goals.

“Commitment is doing what you said you would, long after the mood you said it in has left.” — Inky Johnson

Growing up (a little)

When I was a little kid I had a bad habit of throwing a tantrum when one little thing didn’t go my way. Like I’d be building a sand castle and trying to carve out a parapet on one of the towers and the parapet would crumble and so I’d give up and stomp all over the whole castle.

I still do the same thing with my lifestyle sometimes. Things aren’t going well at work or a relationship turns south and I jump to drastic conclusions like I should move to Spain and write a novel or I should go work for my buddy’s startup in Chicago.

Part of growing up for me has been about seeing where something starts to go wrong and rather than throwing a tantrum and running away from the whole thing I try to take a deep breath and look at it and say, “Okay, what’ve we got? And what do we need? And how do we get it? Okay, let’s get it done.”

These small changes allow me to keep some of the progress I’ve made while also avoiding being too unhappy if something starts to irk me (e.g., working 45+ hours per week for a large company). The trade-off for long-term progress, of course, is a certain level of commitment to doing the same thing for an extended period of time.

Mini-vacation

We have a tendency to be “all or nothing” about our vacation time. We plan a trip months in advance. Then we drudge through our routine looking forward to the trip like a light at the end of the tunnel.

Sometimes you just need a small change-up in your routine. When you’re no longer excited about what you’re doing day in and day out, give yourself the freedom to make a minor one-off detour from your normal schedule.

Skip the gym and read a book.

Stay up a little later and sleep in an extra half hour.

Go to a concert on a weekday night.

Eat out at a nice restaurant instead of cooking.

Meet a friend for a drink.

Mini-vacations are like the flex in airplane wings. Stiffer airplane wings break sooner and make for rougher turbulence.

You have to allow yourself flexibility at the margins of your normally rigid routine. Commit fully to the flex, resting assured that you can return to the safety of your routine. When you return, apply what you learned, and the routine improves a little.

The opportunity cost of remembering

When something’s “on the tip of your tongue.”

When you thought of something but you lost it.

When you have an idea that’s almost complete but you know there’s more (like the tip of a glacier).

You sit there and rack your brain and try to remember what you can’t. And you’re faced with a decision: whether to stick with it or just forget and move on.

The opportunity cost of spending time remembering is the time that we might otherwise spend thinking of something new.

On a macro scale, this is living in the past and ignoring the present. Recalling memories instead of making new ones.

On a micro scale, this is working on a bug in your code or writing a new scene for your novel or anything else that requires creativity and problem solving. And you forget a new idea or good solution. You know there are other ideas and other solutions but you like the one you had, so you try to get it back; all the while, you’re losing out on the others.

Most of the time you should just forget and move on, I think.

The artist’s day job

For artists who make a living from their art, it’s dependent on somebody being willing to pay for their art. I guess this is true for the monetary value of anything—it’s worth however much someone is willing to pay for it.

But if your quality of life is correlated with the income that you get from your art, then you are faced with a very hard decision if your art takes a turn in an unprofitable direction.

An honest artist will still pursue the art they care about, but then their quality of life will decrease because nobody is paying for their art anymore.

Or they can sell out and make art that people are willing to pay for.

Or they can get a day job and still pursue their art in their free time.

I think of the undiscovered artists working in back offices or waiting tables. Or the guy that I met at a Thai restaurant in San Francisco who has a job in tech but lives in a one-bedroom apartment that he calls “the studio” with his art and paint-covered canvases all over the place.

Art and money are two different worlds. One is chaotic and unstructured and even unhealthy at times. The other is based on our primal needs and fuels progress in the material and physical.

When we can, there seems to be a purity in keeping the two separate.

When to sprint

When you’re up for a promotion.

When you have a deadline.

When you and a competitor have a duopoly.

When your family’s depending on you.

When you’re only in Rome for one day.

When you’re doing cardio in the gym.

You can’t sprint the whole time. Even if you could, it wouldn’t be smart. You need time to slow down and look around to see where you’re at and figure out where you want to go next.

But when it’s time, stop thinking about “why” and just put your head down.

The elephant and the rider

The first chapter of The Happiness Hypothesis by psychologist Jonathan Haidt is called “The Divided Self.” He explains a dichotomy between Elephant and Rider as a metaphor for the human self.

The Elephant is our emotional side and the Rider is our rational side.

The Elephant “has its finger on the dopamine release button” and the Rider is an advisor.

The Elephant provides the energy and the Rider provides the planning and direction.

On its own, the Elephant exerts great energy and stampedes around, without direction. And the Rider, without his Elephant, would just sit around and overthink things.

In order to move forward you need the energy and drive of the Elephant. And in order to move in the right direction, you need the planning of the Rider.

If the Rider could somehow build a very deep canyon, just wide enough for the Elephant to fit into. And then whisper to the Elephant, “Just move forward, big guy. Don’t worry about what’s behind you. Don’t try to break down the canyon walls. Just keep moving forward.”

Let your Rider mind and rational long-term planning be involved insofar as you are building the canyon and setting the path with no alternate routes. Just make sure it is pointed in the right direction. Then let your Elephant run and rejoice in the freedom of just running and stretching his powerful muscles without worrying about where he’s going, because he trusts the Rider.

Source: Jonathan Haidt, The Happiness Hypothesis.

Commitment is liberating

It frees you from all the “what if’s” and allows you to go deeper.

It shields you from the distractions of everything else and grants you clarity and focus for what’s right in front of your face.

It gives you the pressure of a pipe so you can move forward, instead of listlessly in all directions.

It liberates you from the frenzy that masquerades as freedom.

Follow the rules first

You can chop up a tree and make it into a house, but there first has to be a tree.

You can roast a marshmallow and put it on a graham with chocolate, but there first has to be a marshmallow.

You can write Lewis Carroll nonsense and made-up words, but there first has to be the English language.

You can be an anarchist and a vagabond, but there first has to be society mainly comprised of people who play along.

You can have a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but there first have to be sheep.

You can have art, but there first has to be reality.

You have to start with the fundamentals. You have to learn your base ingredient. You have to follow the rules before you can start breaking them and making up your own.

Challenge the status quo

I was cooking dinner for my friend the other night. We got onto the topic of baking cookies.

“I was so bad at baking,” she said. “Then at some point I realized it was an exact science and I just started to follow the recipe meticulously and I got better.”

Then we talked about whether it was possible to be “good” or “bad” at something that requires you to follow an exact recipe.

I asked her if she’d change the recipe just slightly if she thought it would make the cookies taste better. She said she might.

If we assume there is one universal recipe for cookies, then yes it seems to be an exact science. In the same way that gravity’s acceleration is about 9.8 m/s squared and Cobalt has 27 electrons.  

However, if we remember that at some point a baker sat in a room and tested many batches of cookies until he came up with the “perfect” recipe (in his mind), which then became the recipe everyone else uses—then that recipe seems to be more of a theory than a scientific law for cookies.

Especially if we imagine that the original baker had a slight aversion to salt. Or maybe he liked his cookies just slightly more doughy. Or whatever else that would have caused his recipe to be the way it is, subjective to his own tastes.

Society is made up, just like recipes. You can follow the rules and get a pretty good result. But that’s not to say you can’t break the rules and get an even better result.

The same applies to language and business and health. Everyone else is inherently worse at making up rules for your life, if only for the fact that they aren’t you.

Follow the rules when you don’t have an alternative. But once you’ve got the hang of the popular recipe, start testing at the margins to see if you can’t make something better.

I for one leave my cookies in the oven a little longer. I like them crispy around the edges.

Who’s asking everyone to lunch?

Sometimes it’s hard to make friends in a new city. Sometimes I think, why’s nobody asking me to lunch? I start to think: What have I done wrong? Does nobody like me?

Then I realize other people are thinking the same thing. So I ask someone out to lunch.

You get out what you put in. If you’re not getting enough, stop thinking about how to get more. Instead, put in more. Give more. It will come back to you.

Desireless action

This morning I read about this concept called “nonself-conscious individualism” from psychologist Richard Logan. It describes survivors like Viktor Frankl who have exhibited strength through adversity. It’s about having a strongly directed purpose that is not self-seeking.

This reminded me of something I read in the Bhagavad Gita. After some googling I found the quote I was looking for: “You have a right to your actions, but never to your actions’ fruits.”

After some more googling, I found the more general concept called “Nishkam Karma,” which refers to self-less or desireless action.

In my work as a sales manager, I watch my reps succeed and fail on the phone. We have a very short sales cycle so every call has a binary outcome. The deal is won or lost. For this reason, the role has high highs and low lows. This can often be disruptive to have such volatile emotional swings in your day-to-day career.

There is a way to succeed. There are rules to follow. Emotions about outcomes will not help. At the very best, you go on a successful streak and you put your excitement and energy from previous wins and achievements into the next challenge.

Do your work without expectation. Enjoy the process itself like a game. This will lead to consistent and long-term progress without emotional highs and lows.

Sources:

Bhagavad Gita.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow, pgs. 92-93.

A healthy psychosis

There’s a healthy psychosis far beyond a fixed mindset and just short of delusions of grandeur. Reality is not static. Perception is reality. Your perception is not static. The way you saw the world as a child was different from the way you see it now. Even the way you saw the world yesterday is different.

There is an unhealthy psychosis, a disconnection from reality that makes daily life impossible. The healthy disconnection comes from looking at everything and saying, “That’s not how things have to be.” Then you see the way you want things to be. The healthy psychosis comes from seeing how truly thin is the veil between these two—what you want and what is.

Nobody’s going to give you anything

I was in a sales manager meeting this morning. Our office head Mark (not his real name), held up a $100 bill (one of the new ones with the blue stripe) and said, “Who wants it?”

I’d seen this at least a half-dozen times. It was usually a contest based on hitting a revenue goal or some other metric.

Mark repeated again, “Who wants it?” I was waiting for him to ask a question or play a game or explain the contest.

He repeated a third time, “Who wants it?” And now it was getting awkward and us thirty or so sales managers who were just sitting in the conference room blinking and wondering what was going on.

Then there was a commotion in the back of the room. I turned around and saw two of the managers fighting to get out of their aisle and then they ran around the chairs and one of the managers, Kevin (also not his real name), grabbed the $100 bill right out of Mark’s hand.

“Nobody’s going to give you anything,” Mark said.

Then we realized this was the point of the exercise. There was no game, no competition, no rules. You just had to take it.

I sat there and felt like an idiot while Kevin grabbed the $100 bill. I pride myself on seizing opportunities. Still, I can’t help but think there are a lot of situations in my life when the $100 bill is right in front of my face and I just sit there.

(Kevin also happens to be a consistent top manager in the office.)

Less time, same money

In Daniel Pink’s book Drive, he argues that once our basic financial needs are met, people are motivated by three things in the workplace: mastery, autonomy, and purpose. What if, however, these motivators are best satisfied outside the workplace—e.g., mastery of hobbies, autonomy over free time, and purpose in relationships?

There is a lot of value in having an income that is just that, an income. In post-industrial America, we demand a lot of our jobs and our jobs demand a lot of us.

The status quo seems to be: invest more time to make more money. When the opportunity cost of more time at work, however, is doing what you actually enjoy outside of work (and you’ve already achieved a comfortable quality of life), then maybe the criterion for advancing your career should be a little different: invest less time to make the same amount of money.

Source: Daniel Pink, Drive.

The prehistoric day job

I imagine there were hunter-gatherers who didn’t like to hunt or gather. Maybe they got away with being hieroglyphic artists or fireside storytellers. Otherwise they hunted and gathered anyway, or they starved. Or maybe the others who were 9-to-5 hunter-gatherers gave them food out of charity because they enjoyed the art and stories.

The inside view

I was jumping rope in the gym the other day, watching myself in the mirror. I noticed I started to feel weird, like I was out of rhythm. I kept hitting the rope on my toes and having to stop and swing the rope back around to start jumping again. I realized it was because my mind couldn’t decide which body was jumping rope—the one in the mirror or the one holding the rope. What I saw in the mirror was just slightly out of touch with the physical reality of the rope in my hands and this caused a delay that disrupted my rhythm.

There are two views of yourself: inside and outside. The mirror is the outside view—what you would be able to see if you were another person looking at yourself. The inside view is what you feel and think—the sensory and mental inputs that are only yours. In the case of jumping rope, it’s my breath and my feet touching the mat and my hands gripping the jump rope and the sound of the rope hitting the mat and the mental counting to keep a rhythm.

I catch myself sometimes thinking in terms of what other people will think. I wonder what will “they” think if I look this way or do this. I wonder if it will make me more attractive or make me seem more successful. So we build up this idea of ourselves that we want other people to see. This is the “outside” view. It is exhausting to maintain an outside view that is inconsistent with the inside view. It’s like telling a lie that you have to remember. As you tell more and more lies, it gets to be like a house of cards.

Instead, build yourself on the inside view. Be honest with yourself about what you think and feel, whatever it is. Then build the idea of yourself based on the solid foundation of who you actually are. Or better yet, don’t build an idea of yourself at all. Allow your inside view to constantly be the outside view.

Where you are looking

Imagine you are in a city, walking along.

If your head is held high, you will see the beautiful building tops, sunshine shimmering off the windows, and pretty women waving from the patios. If your head is laid low, you will see the sewer gates, the trash, and the homeless men laying on cardboard.

What you perceive depends on where you are looking. You have the power to fill your mind with whatever you want.

Rushing rivers and lethargic lakes

“Thou must also take heed of another kind of wandering, for they are idle in their actions, who toil and labour in this life, and have no certain scope to which to direct all their motions, and desires.” — Marcus Aurelius

A river rushes with force because it is defined by its banks. The water rushes in a particular direction on a defined course. A lake, on the other hand, is still and static. It is large and broad and lethargic. All the water of a lake holds immense potential power, but power that could only be exercised if focused into a smaller space and in a specific direction.

Every human is full of passions and desires. They are beautiful and tragic. But in terms of physical reality, emotions are a dime a dozen (kind of like startup ideas). In order to achieve success in a physical world of cause and effect, you must focus your efforts. You must make a plan and stay committed. You must cut a deep river and let your whole lake break through one dam at a time.

Source: Marcus Aurelius, Meditations.

Why you should stay

I read on a poster somewhere that “the 80% of people that quit their first job work for the 20% that don’t” (or something like that). I was also thinking about this in the context of accepting other offers or otherwise moving from job to job.

When you’ve been in a role for a while, you get bored, feel like you’re not progressing, or just want a change. A lot of times we expect all of that from our job. I’ve tried to think about my job as more static. I try to keep my career on a linear projection where I’m moving forward and learning skills and taking on challenges—but for the most part it’s a routine that doesn’t change too much. So when I feel the need for a change, I try to look for that outside of work: a new hobby, a new habit, a new weekend routine, or a new group of friends.

As I’m learning about the world of promotions, bonuses, and vesting stock, etc. Not to mention the inherent skills gained and personal development from sticking with a tough challenge for a long time. I’m realizing there’s a lot of value in staying.

I think this applies to relationships too. We get bored. We want something new. But often it doesn’t have anything to do with the relationship itself and it has everything to do with us just being human and needing creativity and inspiration in our lives.

But work and relationships are not the only two variables that you have to change, and there is a lot of value from keeping these two static and committing to a job and a relationship long-term. In the meantime, you can cure your boredom with new hobbies and new friends.

Now obviously there are toxic relationships and bad jobs. And that has a lot to do with making smart decisions ahead of time. But if you’ve got something good, stay with it.

Culture is not truth

Describing the selfish Ik of Uganda, the violent Yonomamo of Venezuela, and the fearful Nigerian tribe studied by Laura Bohannaw, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi wrote this:

“Such practices and beliefs, which interfere with happiness, are neither inevitable nor necessary; they evolved by chance, as a result of random responses to accidental conditions. But once they become part of the norms and habits of a culture, people assume that this is how things must be; they come to believe they have no other options.”

It is important to remember that we have other options. Other societies have had equal conviction that theirs was the true way to live. We would be foolish to think that we are the lucky ones who’ve gotten it right.

Source: Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow, pgs. 4, 79.

Money is a social invention

When I was young and in school, the mark of grand achievement seemed to be to grow up and get a good job that paid a lot of money. So I worked hard in my math and science classes, thinking that if I could be as smart as possible then I could get the highest-paying job.

As it turns out, hard knowledge of math and science (i.e., “book smarts”) is not the best predictor of earnings. It guarantees a certain earnings “floor.” Usually a very high floor, relative to those without book smarts. However, if two competitors are equal in book smarts, it is the one with a slight edge in social skills that will win a higher paycheck, investment, bonus, etc.

This is because there is always a sale at the end of the line. Money cannot be created like the alchemists tried to turn lead into gold. All the money is already out there and in people’s pockets. Which is why finance attracts book smart quant traders because sometimes math can allow a very talented trader to basically reach in and extract small percentages from very large retirement and pension funds.

Even in finance, however, it is still the guys with the social skills that win. When I worked as an intern at a trading desk on Wall Street, I noticed that the smartest (in terms of book smarts) guys in the room were busy plugging away on algorithms and theories. But the highest-paid guys were the ones who had played the politics game and climbed the ladder, or they were top salespeople who brought in the big fish.

Money is a social invention. There is a certain level of book smarts required to get into the room with a group of successful people. At some point, however, you have to convince a human being to part ways with their money.

That may be in the form of employment. A smart employer might realize how to put your book smarts into play in a business model. So she’ll hire you and she might even pay you a very high salary with bonuses and other compensation. However, she will still control the distribution of earnings (between you and herself) if she plays the role of convincing the investors, clients, patients, customers, etc. to part ways with their money. And if she decides to cut a larger slice of the pie for herself, you can’t talk to the investors, so your only option is to find another job. But if the pay is high enough, you might not want to, so you’ll be stuck. Still not a bad place to be though.

Money is time

During lunch the other day I walked by a new restaurant and there was a line out the door of no less than 100 people. I asked a couple people why and found out the restaurant were giving away free nachos.

Sometimes I’m with a group of friends and we need to get across town and somebody will suggest we Uber and someone else will suggest public transportation because it’s $2 cheaper.

On a bigger scale, I know some people who are working 100-hour-weeks in their twenties to have higher earning potential in their sixties.

Sometimes I think we forget to value our time. If the opportunity cost is just a few bucks (unless you’re really strapped and just making ends meet) always opt for spending time on yourself.

Do what you do

I think some people spend all their time trying to get discovered for what they do. One day their efforts pay off and they do get discovered. But then they realize they have to keep doing what they do and they can’t keep up because they haven’t spent their energies practicing the skills that are required to perform consistently at a high-level. So they have a one-hit wonder and then get left in the dust.

This applies to a lot of things. I think of it mostly in the context of an artist producing art. It also applies to a businesswoman trying to get a promotion. She spends all her energies playing politics and trying to get the promotion. When she finally gets it she realizes she has to keep doing the same job, just with more responsibility. It also applies to dating. A guy spends all his energies trying to find a perfect partner. When he finally does find someone, he realizes that he has to rise to the standards of a perfect partner.

Don’t waste your time on marketing before the product is ready. Just do what you do, and keep on doing it.

Three strategies for pain and suffering

There are three strategies (that I know of) for dealing with pain and suffering. The first is dualist. You can go low and say to yourself, “It could be worse than this.” Or you can go high and chase pleasures until all your dopamine is spent (and the pain will probably resurface in the end).

The second is Buddhist, say to yourself, “This is this.” Look at the pain and say, who are you? How do you make me feel? And realize that the feeling of pain is no different from the feeling of pleasure, objectively.

The third is logotherapeutic. Frankl would say to find meaning in the pain and suffering, like he did while working as a slave laborer at Kaufering. He would say, life has meaning under all circumstances, even when you’re suffering.

Thinking outside the glass

I was standing at the aquarium with Quinn. He said, for these fish, the aquarium is their whole life. Kind of like the Allegory of the Cave.

“What do you think the fish think of us, standing outside the glass?” I asked Quinn.

“I don’t know,” Quinn said. “They probably don’t even notice us. Fish have memories of like five seconds, so they’re just like, ‘Live, live, live.’”

Telling yourself the truth

It’s harder to remember a lie. Because the only way to remember is to think back to when you told the lie, and remember exactly what you said. It’s easier to remember the truth, because you can just look around you, and check with reality.

If you lie to yourself, it’s harder to remember who you are and what you need to do. If you lie to yourself about what you want, for example, you will soon find that the reality of what you actually want is at odds with the reality of what you’ve actually gotten. Same for your abilities; you might find that you’ve bitten off more than you can chew and your real abilities are not matched with the reality of your challenges.

Better to tell yourself the truth, so that you are always working with reality.

Early mornings

The last two days I haven’t been able to sleep. Things have been exciting at work. So I’ve been waking up at 5 a.m. Early mornings are simple. Everything is dark so there isn’t much to see. Your mind has just barely woken up so all of your focus is devoted to very simple tasks like brushing your teeth and putting on a shirt.

When I call a Lyft, it’s easier to find because it’s the only one on the street. When I get into the office, I have easy access to the elevators and kitchen, because I’m the only one here (I also play my favorite tunes out loud on my laptop speakers). I have easy access to my own thoughts because nobody else is awake yet to send me a message or ask for my time.

I also noticed in my morning meeting yesterday, when my boss asked me a question, I was sharp and ready to go, because I’d been awake 3 hours and my colleagues were just waking up. Maybe if you already work a job with a lot of time alone, it’s not so valuable. But in a people-role like sales, the mornings offer valuable time to start your day alone.

Play your role

You have to pick a part. Imagine a play. Now imagine a character without lines or stage cues. What would she do? She wouldn’t know what to say or where to stand. And the audience would get upset. They would say, who is this fool on stage? Gone with them! And on with the play! If everyone else is going to play their role, and we’ve agreed to be organized, we must play our roles too.

Keep your shoulders down

I was having trouble throwing punches in my Muay Thai lessons, so I asked my instructor Dave for some pointers. He told me, “Fighters are always relaxed until they strike.” They conserve energy this way, only releasing with each punch and kick. Dave showed me how to punch correctly, keeping my shoulders down and relaxed until I’m ready to draw energy up from twisting my foot, through my rotating hip and then through my throwing shoulder. “Stay relaxed with your shoulders down until you’re ready,” he said.

We spend our energy on unnecessary things throughout the day. Checking our phones, worrying about things that don’t affect us, focusing on non-urgent tasks like emails. If you can avoid dancing around the ring with your shoulders pulled up to your ears and reacting violently to every small movement, you’ll have that much more energy to use your muscles when it’s actually time to strike.

Following the recipe

I made some apple walnut pancakes from scratch this morning. There are certain ingredients I’m willing to guess on. The cinnamon and the honey won’t affect the structure and makeup of the pancakes. The baking powder and the flour, on the other hand, can make or break the batch. If not measured out precisely, you’ll end up with your pancakes either falling apart or too dry.

There are things that you must do “exactly” right. For example, you must show up for the train on time (unless you’re in Italy) and you must not lie when numbers are involved. With some other things, however, perfect is the enemy of good and you could save a lot of time by just eyeballing it.

Flow

Schopenhauer noticed a problem with humans: “Mankind was apparently doomed to vacillate between the two extremities of distress and boredom.”

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi came up with a solution that he calls “flow.” He defines it as, “the state in which people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter.”

When someone is bored, they must increase the challenges they are facing to get back into flow. When someone is anxious (or distressed, as Schopenhauer put it) they must increase their skills.

But even the state of flow itself is not stable. It is not long before you stop enjoying yourself if you’re doing the same thing at the same level. You become either bored or anxious and then the desire to get back into flow drives you again to either face new challenges or hone your skills.

Source: Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow, pgs. 4, 75.

Liberation

If it doesn’t matter, there are two sides of that coin. In one sense it’s depressing because there seems to be no goal or purpose. In another sense it’s liberating. If there’s no purpose then we’re free to do whatever. And we know what feels good and what we like. So it’s like we got access to a free amusement park ride. Like a ferris wheel is never going to go anywhere. It just spins on its axis. But it’s at least fun to ride.

Beliefs are crowd-sourced

If you ask someone why they believe something, chances are they don’t have an argument. They might have a quick rebuttal or a cliché one-liner. But if you ask specific questions and keep digging, you’ll find out more often than not they believe it because everyone else believes it. Particularly everyone else by whom that person is surrounded in their daily life.

The influence of those around us is far more powerful than truth or logic. This is a positive thing when the crowd is headed in the right direction. When they are not, however, you must be ready to quickly and quietly slip out the back door.

Emergence

My friend Devon explained the idea of “emergence” to me at a party the other night.

Emergence is when a complex phenomenon (an emergent property) can result from the interaction of simpler parts. This occurs when “the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.” In math, it looks like this: W = P + E. Where W is the whole and P is the sum of the parts and E is the emergent property. The idea is that the whole has properties not contained in the sum of the parts.

The idea came up when we were talking about meditation and psychedelics. We were talking about the “third eye” and spaces of higher consciousness. Devon pointed out that these experiences may be emergent properties of sensory phenomena. This made me think more generally that many aspects of spirituality may be emergent properties of physical phenomena.

Source: Wikipedia

Ego death by travel

You strip away everything external about you—leave the town where you grew up, make new friends other than your classmates and workmates, sweat or freeze in a new climate, see new scenery, grow your hair out, wear different clothes, and speak another language.

All of a sudden, one night in some far-off country you’ll get back from the bars and look yourself in the mirror in your dingy hotel room with a roof that leaks and say, who am I? And after a brief period of panic, you’ll discover that there’s something buried deeper that’s been there all along but you had to sift through all the muck. And what you find there, deep inside, that’s you.

What we focus on

My friend taught me this trick the other day. She said, “First look at everything red in the room. Now look at everything blue.”

I realized two things: First, I had no explicit consciousness of either color before she drew my attention to them. When I first walked into the room where we were talking I conceptualized everything into objects like “chair” and “computer” and barely noticed the colors.

Second, when I was looking at the red, I wasn’t thinking of anything else. And when I was looking at the blue, I couldn’t think of the red. She told me to imagine as if the blue were positive thoughts and the red were negative thoughts. I had complete control to fill my consciousness with one or the other.

Tattoos are marks of freedom

Tattoos, piercings, and eccentric fashion are marks of free will. The most base body modification is none at all. Think of how a man would appear naturally, like an animal, with unkempt hair and long fingernails and naked. There is no choice at all in the natural appearance. Man appears as nature determines.

Next, think of man in society. He looks around him and sees how everyone else looks and for the most part dresses and grooms himself to not look any different, or at least not different enough to attract attention. Businessmen in suits, for example. In this case, man appears as society determines. In both these cases, natural and social, man does not himself necessarily choose how he appears.

It is only in the third case, that man chooses for himself how he will appear, makes his body like a painter’s canvas, and creates himself as art, such that his aesthetic appearance aligns with his metaphysical beliefs.

Truth and principles

They asked Einstein, “How many feet are in a mile?” He replied, “Why should I fill my brain with facts I can find in two minutes in any standard reference book?”

I used to think really hard about what was true. I also used to try and memorize facts. More recently my truth is whatever happens the same way more than a couple times. And I focus a lot more on principles than facts.

Decision fatigue

I have a bad habit sometimes of starting to ask ‘why’ after I’m already deep in the ‘what.’ Ideally I figure out why I need to do something and how I’m going to get it done, then I start on what’s actually required to get it done without thinking anymore about the ‘why.’

Sometimes when I’m in the gym doing a particular exercise I’ll start to think, why am I doing this? Is this the most efficient route to my fitness goal? And all of a sudden my motivation is sapped. I’m no longer concentrating all my energy on the exercise itself. Instead I’m distracted thinking about the ‘why’ and ‘how’ that I already spent time deciding on before I started the workout.

Your motivation is like a muscle too. Every decision you make taxes the muscle a little more. Decision fatigue happens when you’ve fatigued your motivation from making too many decisions.

I have my best workouts when I spend time to decide on my exact training program: what exercises, lengths of rests, number of sets and reps, weight amounts. So all my decisions are made before I begin. And my only focus once I start the workout is all execution and getting each exercise done the right way with max effort.

Why democracy fails

The same reason the mainstream doesn’t appeal to hipsters. Government is not a one-size fits all. Each of our individual preferences are mismatched with policies and leaders that are designed for the masses. The best elected representative would be the one that caters to our individual needs only, which is impossible for any electorate with a population larger than one. And the problem gets worse as the nation gets larger and the government gets more bureaucratic and bogged down, which inevitably happens as a nation matures, as history has shown time and time again. Any honest conversation about a successful government boils down to a social contract: what are you willing to sacrifice in terms of your personal preferences in exchange for the benefits of belonging to a large and powerful nation?

Needs before abilities

If you really wanted the money you could have it, as much as you want. But you don’t really want it. Same goes for fame, beauty, and power. It’s not a matter of whether your abilities are strong enough, it’s about your needs. Rather than spending time honing your abilities to pursue a weak and artificial need, you’ll be more successful in the end if you first focus on the needs that you’re seeking to satisfy. Most of the time people discover their needs aren’t their own; they were planted there by nature or nature. If you do find a strong need that holds up under scrutiny, then you have a stronger sense of purpose and your motivation will persist through the hard times.

Goals and feedback

You need two things to enjoy your work: clear goals and immediate feedback. A pro golfer, for example, knows after each stroke whether it was a good or bad shot. The goal is clear: to get the ball in the hole. And the feedback is immediate: he is closer to or farther from the hole.

Other activities are more ambiguous. Designing a brand, for example. The goal in profit terms is clear: design a brand that will sell the most units. How this translates into the design is less clear, however. So that setting intermediate goals—for deciding on the color scheme, drawing the logo, and launching campaigns—may be more nebulous.

And feedback is not immediate. Until units hit the market there is no data on how the brand is performing. So for these ambiguous tasks like designing a brand it becomes important to set clear intermediate goals that provide feedback. And these intermediate goals must be in-line with the ultimate goal.

Source: Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow, pgs. 55-58.

Momentum

The hardest part is getting the stone rolling in the first place. You make sure you’ve got a big enough stone and a tall enough hill. You spend the time rolling it all the way to the top and then aim it at your target. There is the period of planning and the period of execution. For me as a writer it is more like a period of creativity and a period of editing. The key is that you do the first part so that the second part is set up to gain momentum, this is where you get your exponential gains and true breakthroughs.

Once you’ve put it into motion then you just have to keep up and do small maintenance things to make sure it stays in motion. Most people can’t even get to this point because they can’t decide what direction they want to roll or can’t find a big enough stone or a tall enough hill. The tough part is when you want to change directions after you’ve built up some momentum. So that you have to stop the whole system and spend some time away from the world to rebuild everything. Until you’ve set it into motion once more and breathe a sigh of relief when the momentum picks back up again.

A working world

It’s a working world. You can pursue art, non-profits, love and anything else that doesn’t pay. But on the front lines someone is doing hard work on a farm, in a factory, or at a desk to pay for your essentials. If survival is human, then so is work. It is important to remember and be thankful for those who keep us alive.

Investing your time

There is always a trade-off between spending time in the present and investing time in the future, just like spending money now or saving it for later.

If you only spent your time in the present, then you would ignore needs of the future. You might still find food and shelter in the present but it likely would not be as good as if you spent time planning and growing to find better food and shelter in the future.

On the other hand, if you spend all your time investing in the future, you’ll likely have no joy in the present. And there’s great risk, in the case of unexpected death, of losing all your investments all at once.

Investing in yourself

When buying a stock, you’re exchanging capital for a share of a company that will hopefully result in paid out profits. When signing a contract of employment you are exchanging your time for a certain wage over a certain time, and maybe commission and/or stock.

Think about taking a job more like choosing an investment. What value do you place on your own time? What premium should your employer have to pay? What other opportunities for investing your time are you passing up?

Potential and Actual

A potential product doesn’t sell. It is much harder to entice an investor with an idea, and much easier to do so with actual sales. Same with promises: much better to do something than say so.

Moving from potential to actual is creative power. In one sense, potential is equal to nothing. In another sense, actual isn’t possible without potential, and therefore all actual is really just potential.

In some ways it seems to be the balance between idea and reality, mental and physical. In man, the balance between thinker and doer.

And sometimes cause for our confusion in self-awareness. We see in ourselves all our ideas, our mental. Others see only the physical, what we have created. We have an image of ourselves that is sometimes a combination of potential and actual. Others see only the actual.

An unborn author doesn’t write books, but neither does a live author who chose to be an accountant instead, or an author afraid of what others might think. Actualization is already in us, potentially, intangibly. We spend a lifetime pulling it out, making it real.

The veil between potential and actual is thin. Powerful men move easily from one side to the other.

Facts and Principles

Hume spent a great deal of time studying cause and effect. He thought, “The same motives always produce the same actions: the same events follow from the same causes.” He believed you could learn something about the French and English from studying the Greeks and Romans. In other words, Hume believed in principles.

He writes in Enquiry:

“Mankind are so much the same, in all times and places, that history informs us of nothing new or strange in this particular. Its chief use is only to discover the constant and universal principles of human nature.”

He though this was not so different from the uniformity of cause and effect in nature. Societies are governed by certain principles, just as nature is governed by certain principles. Hume believed there are laws of life, just as there are laws of nature:

“These records of wars, intrigues, factions, and revolutions, are so many collections of experiments, by which the politician or moral philosopher fixes the principles of his science, in the same manner as the physician or natural philosopher becomes acquainted with the nature of plants, minerals, and other external objects, by the experiments which he forms concerning them.”

Some say college teaches you how to learn—one of those clichés that becomes a cliché because it’s true. A very intelligent person is not necessarily great at trivia.

They asked Einstein, “How many feet are in a mile?” He replied, “Why should I fill my brain with facts I can find in two minutes in any standard reference book?”

A true genius understand principles, and therefore understands facts, not for having memorized them, but for understanding their patterns that manifest principles which then predict future facts.

Like in fifth grade, we used flashcards to memorize our multiplication tables, but our known products were limited to the number of factor combinations we could fit in our stack of flashcards; while a true genius knows all products from any combination of factors because she understands the principle of multiplication.

College teaches us to learn for the same reason the proverb is true: “Give a man a fish, feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.” Give a man a fact, or teach a man to learn—the latter is the superior education.

As a business major in college I learned a lot of, frankly, useless facts—international accounting rules, business law minutia, commercial real estate best practices. But from these facts I found cross-disciplinary patterns, i.e., principles. 

Marketing a product for optimal sales is not so different from constructing a personal brand optimal for social interactions; investment decisions to maximize return are not so different from scheduling decisions, investing the currency of time in securities of present and future; lean manufacturing maximizes output of success and happiness from inputs of food, sleep, exercise, work, play and socializing.

Ray Dalio, $16-billion-net-worth hedge fund manager, writes in his self-published, 123-page volume called “Principles:”

“Principles are concepts that can be applied over and over again in similar circumstances as distinct from narrow answers to specific questions. Every game has principles that successful players master to achieve winning results. So does life. Principles are ways of successfully dealing with the laws of nature or the laws of life.”

Dalio is one of the most successful investors ever, not because he understands finance, but because he understands principles.

The facts change but the principles stay the same. The key is learning how to learn: pattern matching cross-disciplinary facts and developing paradigms based on true principles.

Friendship and Society

Thoreau had three chairs in his cabin by Walden pond:

“One for solitude, two for friendship, three for society.”

I wonder are there diminishing returns after two? Surely not in the economy. Since specialization, there are enough machines to require many men for the benefits of scale. Nor in primal tribes; strength in numbers afforded protection to each.

Also the orchestra benefits from a diversity of instrument, and the scientific community from a diversity of opinion—instances, it seems, where the best way to serve the individual is to serve the society, to become a part of something greater.

Why then, of the third chair, does Thoreau say:

“When visitors came in larger and unexpected numbers there was but the third chair for them all, but they generally economized the room by standing up.”

Not random, I think, that Thoreau uses the word ‘economized.’ Diminishing, he might agree, are his returns from visitors beyond three. So sharp, he thought it not worth the space to have a fourth chair.

Because friendship is one thing, and production—scientific, musical, economic, or otherwise—is another.

A relationship is a straight line between two nodes, not a web.

In conversation, for example. With two, always a listener and a speaker. The listener empathic and the speaker expressive. Each speaking in the other’s language. With three, two listeners and a speaker. The speaker averaging his language for the listening two. And the averaging increases with number of listeners.

In lecture at school, the professor averages for a hundred students. The style of teaching increasingly mismatched with any one student’s individual style of learning.

So too with empathy, how to look out to the mass and discern an emotion other than what has been democratically agreed upon? Versus to see the dilation in one pair of eyes.

Keep two chairs, three at most, lest your home become a factory.

Finite and Infinite

In the 2004 film Troy, Achilles (Brad Pitt) says to Briseis (Rose Byrne):

“I’ll tell you a secret, something they don’t teach you in your temple. The gods envy us. They envy us because we’re mortal, because any moment might be our last. Everything is more beautiful because we’re doomed. You will never be lovelier than you are now. We will never be here again.”

From the song “Spirits” by The Strumbellas:

“I don’t want a never ending life, I just want to be alive while I’m here.”

Is there such thing as an infinite man, or is he God? Does infinite imply the other qualities: omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent?

Assuming not, what does man’s behavior look like subjected to infinity?

A fun hypothetical: What would you do if you died tomorrow? But I want to consider the other extreme: What would you do if you never died? Nothing, I think.

Mortal men strive to live forever: to reproduce, to create classics, to be remembered. Living forever, for what would man strive?

In infinity, surely man would strive, but then again, maybe not, saying to himself, “Eventually.” But eventually might never come.

Assuming inevitability in infinity, lazy and unmotivated by an otherwise foreseeable end, anything, the happening of which would seem to have been inevitable, might never happen.

It is similar, I think, to omniscience: What would you decide, if you knew everything? There would be no pros and cons, no probability, no hypotheses. If everything is known, all decisions are obvious; in some sense, they’re all already made.

Death, then, is a useful tool to hold in our minds, contemplating the impending proof of our mortality, urging us to live swiftly. In this way, death is God’s great gift to humanity (which He himself cannot partake in), that we might be forced by time to live.

Virtue and Appetite

Two quotes, one from Greek philosophy and one from modern self-help—both about the same principle: a dichotomy between soul/divine/virtue and body/mortal/appetite.

Socrates in Phaedo:

“When the soul and the body are united, then nature orders the soul to rule and govern, and the body to obey and serve … Temperance, which is being calm in the face of appetites, and keeping an orderly disposition that attaches little importance to them—isn’t this proper only to those who more than anyone else attach little importance to the body, and spend their lives in philosophy?”

Stephen Covey in 7 Habits:

“The ability to subordinate an impulse to a value is the essence of the proactive person. Reactive people are driven by feelings, by circumstances, by conditions, by their environment. Proactive people are driven by values—carefully thought about, selected and internalized values.”

The body is a good servant but a poor master. At the margins of survival, however, isn’t the body a better master? Because the soul cannot survive, at least not in this life, without the body. So survival is the prime good, insofar as it makes possible future good.

Survival is the biological law that underlies much of our morality. But even the appetite for life itself is foregone by martyrs, for virtues of freedom and religion.

Besides, the majority of our choices are not life or death, but day-to-day decisions about health, relationships, and work—what to eat for breakfast, what to read, when to set an alarm, how hard to work.

The answers are balanced between appetite and virtue: an appetite for entertainment, a virtue for education; an appetite for sleep, a virtue for work; an appetite for safety, a virtue for justice; an appetite for sex, a virtue for love; an appetite for money, a virtue for meaning.

How do we decide?

According to wisdom, says Socrates. But does not some wisdom say there is no such thing as virtue? Not that wisdom, Socrates might say. Then what wisdom?

The optimal opposition of your appetites is, I think, up to your own morals. But the important thing here is a paradigm of balance.

A morality somewhere between animal and divine. An animal’s morality is all appetite; survival is the prime good. God’s morality is all wisdom; surely He knows the Truth, which remains, tragically, beyond our reason. Hence, our uncertainty.

But we still have our principles, our balance.

Not like the young hedonist who appalls rules, ignorant that ethics might actually unfold a deeper pleasure. Nor like the old ascetic who opposes all appetites, yearning for the divine, forgetting that his nature is part animal, and having forfeited much joy.

A balance between two parts of our nature: body and soul, mortal and divine.

Man will be animal so long as he must survive. But we might reach nearer the divine, and in the process become more human, balancing appetite and virtue.

Hunger and Satiation

Hungry, I sit down for dinner. The first bite is the best. But less and less so the second and third. My animal instinct pushes me forward to fill my stomach and soon I’m not tasting at all, only transferring nutrients. Until I wash my palette with wine between bites. The diversity of tastes makes each seem new.

Hiking, I step up to the first vantage. My eyes drink in the river and my smallness feels the mountains. This, I thought, is the first bite. None after this will be so good. And as I thought they might, less and less were the second and third. Until Peterman offered me some of his wine: “Sometimes, when I’m in a wondrous place, I close my eyes, take deep breaths, and imagine a common place. When I open my eyes, the place is wondrous again.” So I did, imagined Kansas plains. Then drank the river and felt the mountains new. And I wonder, are there limits to what this forest can give, other than the capacities of my receipt?

“Feeling lurks in that interval of time between desire and its consummation,” writes Huxley in Brave New World.

But what about after the first and before the second consummation? Does some desire, and therefore feeling, remain left over for the second? Or is it fully consummated with the first and new for the second?

“‘Think of water under pressure in a pipe … I pierce it once,’ said the Controller. ‘What a jet!’ He pierced it twenty times. There were twenty piddling little fountains.”

I wonder if we might pierce the pipe many times over but retain equal pressure in each additional jet. Or is it more than human to feel so much?

Minority and Majority

A minority is a group whose members have significantly less control over their lives than members of the majority group. A minority is smaller, especially a number that is less than half the whole number.

But what about a number that is significantly less than half of the whole number? An eighth, a sixteenth, or even a sixteenth of a sixteenth: a minority not majority enough to be recognized as a minority.

To what extent do members of a minority have more control over their lives because their minority is actually more of a majority, especially relative to smaller minorities. Is there a hierarchy of minorities?

To what extent do individuals find control and power within their group, just by virtue of belonging? What about those who don’t belong? At least not to the majority-minorities.

Is there a name for these groups? Minor-minorities, perhaps. Those groups to which larger minorities seem majorities.

And even further, a minor-minor-minority or even triple-minor-minority. A minority that trends toward a singularity: an individual identity.

You can join no organization or protest that will represent perfectly your unique identity, in the same way that democracy represents very well “the people,” but represents inaccurately any one individual person—and this inaccuracy increases with each additional member.

Minority is about identity. But no two identities are the same, just as no two members of the same minority are the same—not even in their minority-ness.

You are your own minority.

Present and Future

Worn out adages: be present, focus on now, seize the day. Meditation, anti-anxiety techniques and spiritual self-help often prescribe some form of hyperfocus on the present as a well-being-cure-all.

And to a great degree this seems right. Other than memories and dreams, our ideas and sensations are about what we experience presently. It makes sense to match our focus to our experience.

But it’s not a complete framework, ignoring past and future—also significant parts of how we experience time.

Sophocles says, “Tomorrow is tomorrow. Future cares have future cures, and we must mind today.”

But I wonder if some future cares might have present cures, if some of tomorrow is in today. For example, it’s hard to carpe diem, if you haven’t studied for your exam tomorrow.

A skeptic of extremes, I want to see if there is a balance between present and future (there also seems to be a past-present balance, but in this post I want to talk about present-future).

Carpe diem—a.k.a., “seize the day”—comes from the longer: carpe diem quam minimum credula postero. Which appears in Book 1 of Horace’s Odes and more literally translates to: “pluck the day, trusting as little as possible in the next one.”

So Horace has the present-hyperfocus, but at least allows for some future “trust.” I want to think about how much is “as little as possible?”

Mathematically, we’re working with something like this:

Utility = {(present time) * [(utility from present focus) – (non-utility planning for future)]} + {(future time) * [(utility from future (now present) focus) + (utility from previous planning for future (now present)) – (non-utility planning for (more distant) future)]}

Where utility is all the joy, happiness, success and other “good stuff” that we get out of life from now until death; time is some finite unit of time; utility from focus is “good stuff” from smelling the roses, etc.; planning is something like studying for an exam or investing in a 401(k) that makes more “good stuff” in the future. And we assume that “present focus” and “planning for future” sum to some finite unit of time.

And it gets way more complicated if we consider the future as individual successive present moments and that certain planning “targets” certain futures, and way way more complicated if we consider time is continuous not discrete.

But the equation now allows us to state clearly our objective: “as little as possible,” or, in each finite unit of time, the least possible time spent planning for future, while still maximizing future utility.

And this actually gives us a decision framework for splitting time between focusing on the present and planning for the future:

If (future utility from planning for future * probability of survival to experience that future) > (utility from present focus), then spend more time planning for future.

If (future utility from planning for future * probability of survival to experience that future) < (utility from present focus), then spend more time focusing on the present.

This assumes we are indifferent between experiencing utility now versus later (which, I actually think is a bad assumption, considering we get old and slow, but again that’s too complicated).

The most variability in this decision comes from your estimate for “probability of survival,” where a high probability will tilt the decision toward future planning, and vice-versa.

And this is where adages like “you only live once” and “no such thing as tomorrow” have relevance because life is short and probability of survival might not actually be that high, in which case I think it makes utility-maximizing sense to err toward investing more time in present focus.

But then again, there are heights to be achieved that require a commitment to the future, a bet on the probability of survival, which then subjects the decision framework to risk-preference.

Where I think the true synergy of the balance exists is in habits and activities that simultaneously allow for both present focus and future planning, present enjoyment and future benefit: reading, doing work your passionate about, exercising in a form you love, eating food that both tastes good and is healthy.

But then again, I can imagine things in the present that are very bad for your future but so great in the present. Maybe having one or two too many drinks at the bar: it will hurt in the morning, probably kill some brain cells, but maybe it makes one of your best memories.

It’s not as easy as the math makes it seem. Because when you’re chopping at the roots it’s hard to see above the treetops. When you’re having fun, it’s hard to think about the future. When you’re working hard, it slips your mind to stop and smell the roses.

At least now, at a party or late-night conversation when your friend asks: “What would you do if you only had [insert small amount of time] to live?”

Instead of giving your usual answer: “I don’t know, tell my family I love them, go paragliding, then jump off the Empire State Building at the right moment so my time runs out in mid-air.”

You can say: “I’d make a present-future utility maximizing decision.” And if they don’t leave immediately after that, you can show them your calculations.

Pluck the day my friends.

Solitude and Society

“We don’t have a word for the opposite of loneliness, but if we did, I could say that’s what I want in life,” wrote Marina Keegan upon graduating Yale in 2012.

Is it even possible to be alone anymore? Certainly not with a cell phone or Internet. At least the possibility of instant connection is always there.

Connection is our zeitgeist.

Some time ago we discovered we were better together. We discovered trade, specialized and the togetherness became irreversible.

Thoreau writes in Walden: “The cost of a thing is the amount of what I will call life which is required to be exchanged for it, immediately or in the long run.”

He also writes: “A man is rich in proportion to the number of things which he can afford to let alone.”

Thoreau thought that the cost of things was less for a man alone in nature, and that man was richer for it.

In a 2016 film called Captain Fantastic: Ben Cash (Viggo Mortensen) raises his six children “off the grid” in the mountains of the Pacific Northwest, teaching them survival skills and philosophy; he trains them to be self-reliant, physically fit and athletic, relying on classic literature and music without technology, demonstrating the beauty of life in nature.

Like a modern-day Swiss Family Robinson—Thoreau’s solitude rendered to a family. Not one man alone but one family alone, one unit of the fundamental building block of society singled out—in some ways still interdependent, but in a smaller way than society at large.

“Man’s habits,” the historian Charles Coulston Gillespie once wrote, “change more rapidly than his instincts.” We have habits of an advanced age: texting, swiping, clicking, grocery shopping. Yet it seems our instincts of natural survival are still leftover—these are what Thoreau and Emerson must have felt.

But our economies now stand between man and nature. We do more with less and man specializes in order to participate in the economy rather than mind all his necessaries alone in nature.

The successful man is no longer one who controls nature, but one who best navigates networks and markets. Yet the fundamental motivation of networks and markets is still to control nature.

The great man is social, with a memory for how societies are motivated by solitude.

Emerson says this another way: “It is easy in the world to live after the world’s opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own; but the great man is he who in the midst of the crowd keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude.”