Natty Chatter

In this climate of economic downturn, it's very likely that many folks may find themselves applying for new positions for various reasons. Whether its within their own companies or to external organizations in the professional fields or even in social groupings, it is inevitable that rejection occurs.

Now in nearly all cases, rejection is painful because at the bottom line in a rejection is that you don't fit the position (whether professional or social) based on the qualification criteria that was used to determine your compatibility. Moreover, there are wounds that a rejection can cause on your psyche as you mull over the events leading up to rejection and the rejection itself.

At some point, there are a numerous set of clearly defined responses that we reach for immediately. For some it's anger at either oneself for not doing more or perhaps anger directed at the interviewer for not recognizing your compatibility. For others, it may be confusion as why they were found lacking in relation to the position being sought. And yet others will try to brush off the rejection by not responding back at all, thinking that a "tough cold shoulder" approach is best.

However, these approaches seem to "burn bridges" as it were to the position you were rejected for. Now granted, it might be sweet vengeance to get back at the people who hurt you by their rejection, but it also would probably seal their future consideration of you in the future. After all, if you are as qualified as you claim to be, then these people may wish to reconsider their choice after sometime spent with their initial choice.

Thus, a gracious response, a response thanking these interviewers for their time and consideration of you for that position would leave a positive impact in the event that their choice fails to achieve their expectations.

In the professional world, it is common to see companies select one candidate or vendor over another only to switch later down the road as their original selection was a poor choice. And typically the problem lies in the selection criteria that the company used in the first place. For instance, saving money by the selection of a cheaper vendor may turn out to be a poor choice if said vendor suffers from horrible quality or delivery commitments.

Conversely, in social circles, a rejection from a lady or a man could be a horrible mistake as their selection criteria may be the wrong set of qualities that they were attempting to fill. Or alternatively, they could have overlooked certain qualities of you (the rejected person) which are only illuminated by the person they originally selected. Therefore, by taking a gracious exit, that positive uplifting response may very well lead to a return call once their candidate fails to impress.

-C

A disturbing trend has emerged in our modern society and that trend is the far reaching extent of our ability to intercommunicate with each other. From e-mails to txt msgs to twitters to myspace to facebook to blackberrys crackberrys, we are now more connected to each other yet we are still so far apart.

Now I'll be the first one to admit to using these forms of communication because they are convenient and easier for the less confrontational meek, but the problem is that these forms lack the personality humanity of a good face to face or even a decent phone call. Why the lack of humanity in these technological gadgetry?

My answer is that as a species, humanity was designed to be a social creature. We have thrived as a civilization through our interactions with each other and the achievements/disasters we've made because of those interactions. Would Trojan War have happened if it wasn't for Helen? Or the inspiration of the divine for Michelangelo's rendering of the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel? Could generations of men swept women off their feet without the help of romantic language comparing their love ones to the beauty of a rose or of a perfect sunset?

According to certain research, 55% of all human communication is based on body language, 38% is based on your tone of voice and that only 7% is based on what you have to say. Granted this particular set of statistics only apply to experiments dealing in the communication of feelings and attitudes. Thus, expression of human emotion or feelings by modern technological methods means that 93% gets displaced or lost in its translation. Now one might say that it's hard to misunderstand the three simple words that "all significant others" want to hear every now and then, but even that phrase can mean different things by its presentation.

Take a second and consider that simple phrase and deliver it with passion, then again with sarcasm, or how about with anger, or with boundless joy, or utter depression. Then try delivering that line while fighting the toilet with a plunger, or shaking your head in a no (side to side) manner, or throwing that long pass in football. Granted, you probably stopped at the second or third version, but surely anyone can agree that the what, when and how the words are presented can make a profound difference.

And the problem is that technology strips that away. The subtleties of the our language are stripped away to the lowest common denominator which is the mere words. Thus, resolve today at this very moment to stop and instead of e-mail, texting, facebooking, or myspacing someone, go find them and say what you have to say. Above all remember that your nonverbal language will be say so much more than your words could ever say by themselves.

-C

In these times, the world wants to convince us that perception is better than reality. It is better to be perceived as cool, hip, trendy, and wealthy than set out to achieve those attributes because it is easier and faster. In fact, the world even goes as far to eliminate the real for reality is based perception. A quick browse through the media shows all these "shortcuts" to the dreams and goals we have.

However, the problem lies in the fact that perception only holds on for the short term. For instance, getting that brand new luxury car or Armani suit gives the perception of wealth and perhaps status but only for a while unless one continues the trend. That is to say once it becomes perceived that the luxury car or suit becomes your sole possession then reality is revealed.

Another more practical model is the way we present ourselves to and act towards others in both professional and social settings. In professional settings, giving the perception of leadership maybe inspiring but it is lacking to an actual leader. Or in the instance of having the actual skill set is preferable to being perceived to have that same skill set. After all, the perception of a skill can not accomplish the objective if one does not have the skill. For instance, having the perception of being a good negotiator does not help if one can not actually negotiate deals. If anything the result of a false perception is more likely to bring misfortune and stress.

Meanwhile in social settings for men, the perception of being charming and gentlemanly is lacking in comparison to being truly charming and gentlemanly. Sure it is easier to act and give the perception of these qualities but eventually one's true nature, that is reality, sets in and conflict arises. Similarly, darker colors may give the perception of being slimmer but lacks in comparison with being slim.

Given that perception is fleeting and reality always around the corner, the world responds with that you should continually monitor and maintain the momentum of the perception that you have created. Essentially, perpetuating a falsehood continually which only increases in difficulty compared to setting out to achieve the reality in the first place.

Going back to the perception of being wealthy, the cost of maintaining the image requires considerable resources which will inevitably cause strife, misery, and ultimately shame for the non-wealthy. Equally, the perception of being charming requires constant acting which becomes a burden of itself compared to one being really charming.

Therefore, what we should advocate for is the reality of ourselves and others. Now I realize that reality is quite an eye opener compared to the fairy tale perception we enjoy. But considering the liberating freedom of reality, it would be wiser to err on the side of being real in interactions than acting.

In closing, let me do say this, being real may be the ultimate goal but there is a time and place for the reality to be expressed. The when, where, and how much reality is presented is just as important as the reality itself. The proportioning of reality is also of paramount but that is a topic for another day.