Exercising Free Will

Some drivers seem to believe that so long as they obey all the traffic laws, they should be fine. 

The problem is that they aren't really paying attention to the drivers around them. 

The light turns green, so they go. And even though they do have the right away, they may not have noticed that someone else tried running the red light... and they crash.

That's part of why defensive driving focuses on being aware of the drivers around you, and thinking about what you'll do if someone is about to hit you. (Or so my understanding is. I've never actually taken a course). 

Maybe there's room on the shoulder to swerve right if someone hits a patch of ice and starts veering all over the place. Or maybe there isn't any room, and you need to hit the brakes (or speed up).

All of it requires paying attention to what's going on around you, and deciding how to act. (And yes, sometimes those actions will break the laws of traffic... but if you're avoiding an accident and aren't making things worse by putting other people in danger, is it a problem?)

That's kind of what I meant when I said that people don't exercise free will. I was referring to the almost mindless way that people follow the path laid before them. Where you grew up, everyone goes to college. Or nobody does. 'Everyone' becomes a doctor or a lawyer, or housewife, or mechanic.

It's not that any of those are wrong. It's that I think people should think about their options and consciously choose them, rather than doing what naturally comes next. 

I suppose that's what some of the wisdom traditions talk about when they want us to be mindful. That we should learn to be present, and learn to develop that awareness so that we're doing so at every part of the day. 

I don't know, again... I haven't had any formal schooling on that. (It does sound like a tall order, though. You can spend a lifetime learning to be in the moment and mindful all the time.)

I said yesterday that there were things we could do no matter where we are in life. 

If we choose to. How much of an impact will vary, and it's not just about resources and access...

We all know that front line leaders have the most impact on the people who work for them. A platoon leader or platoon sergeant has a very strong impact on their team.

What's interesting, though, is that although people higher up in the chain of command have a wider reach (a battalion commander or CEO naturally influences far more people), it can get diffused as it filters down. Your immediate boss generally influences you on a day to day basis far more than your CEO (and are often the biggest reason someone quits.)

Which isn't to say that a CEO doesn't have a profound influence. It's just that it comes more from who they choose as their direct reports and what guidance they give. (People always talk about how you need to look two levels up if you want to be promoted. See what your boss and your boss's boss need, and meet that need. But you also have to look two levels down, I think. Otherwise all you see is that someone achieved your goal... and you may not know how they did it. Maybe they did it by forcing everyone to work like crazy. Maybe they're relying on a really good subordinate. How do you know?)

People in staff positions also have influence, for good or bad. Even if the CEO is the person making the decision, how you frame the decision has a huge influence on what course of action they decide.

A good staff officer does their due diligence, of course, and presents a solid analysis of the options available. But... it's not too hard for them to decide that a particular option isn't even worth researching, or to decide that the answers they found couldn't be right and to rework the analysis. (And maybe they're right, and caught an error. And maybe they're wrong, and made the data fit their biases.)

It's interesting how a staff manages their boss. You can tell they're trying to do so when you hear stories about them fighting to make sure the boss seems (or doesn't see) a particular report or story. 

I suppose that's one way gatekeeping happens, but... it's not as simple as saying 'gatekeeping is bad'. After all, you're dealing with people who don't have near enough time in the day for a thorough analysis of all the issues. They need people to help filter out the critical bits. (The real complaint ought to be 'bad gatekeeping', rather than gatekeeping at all.)

I kind of had some other thoughts, but this is good enough for today.