Foto: Una columna mágica / Photo: A magic column
La foto no le hace justicia a la belleza de este árbol. Tuve que sacrificar gran parte de su esencia en virtud de un mejor encuadre, pues no quería que un entorno semi-urbano dañara lo sublime de esta postal. El constraste de la corteza irisada con tonos cobrizos, amarillos y dorados versus lo celeste del cielo & las incipientes sombras del atardecer en sus ramas es magnífico. Disfruten.
Fernando
D-Day: Lessons from THE GREATEST Project of the XX Century
I recently finished Stephen E. Ambrose´s book “D-Day. The Climatic Battle of World War II”, a historical 600 pages masterpiece presenting the Allied perspective of what has been described as the most important day of the XX century. I also read “D-Day from German´s Eyes”, by Holger Eckhertz, which in turn provides insight from the much less publicized German perspective. After digesting both books and some interesting online documentaries (see some samples below), allow me to share with you, kind reader, some lessons learned from the Project Management perspective. And these are indeed lessons, worth to be stated, extracted from perhaps the most complex & crucial planning effort of modern times. Here we go:
Number 10: make the plan proportionate to the project.
D-Day was massive. No, I really mean it – epic, colossal, humongous, huge by all standards. Let´s check some figures: circa 160.000 Allied troops involved, storming nearly 60km of coast. Almost 7,000 ships and vessels of all type and about 2,400 aircraft; not counting gliders, tanks, trucks, jeeps and other vehicles. It is still the biggest amphibious operation of all times, a behemoth of a project. It has also one of the most bizarre Planning-to-Execution duration ratios, with about two years of Planning efforts vs a couple days of actual Execution. This context demanded a plan according to the situation. And what a plan was created. The level of granularity was astounding: massive hoax operations (“Operation Fortitude”), attack exercises and simulations, logistics to shelter, feed and train hundreds of thousands of individuals, intelligence efforts, en-masse fabrication efforts, weather analysis and forecast, enemy surveillance, attack itineraries planned to the minute and hundreds of other factors all meshed together into a gargantuan plan. Referring to solely the operation plan for his regiment, a colonel is recorded to have said “It was thicker than the biggest telephone book you have seen”. Yes, big & important projects demand big plans. Small projects usually do not demand such exercises, and then small improvements, routine changes, near-task sizes need easy stuff. The plan must raise to the need – that is the point.
Number 9: the plan is useless, still, planning is indispensable
On June 6, 1944 nearly everything that could go wrong for the Allied Forces went wrong. The weather was bad, affecting the actual approximation to the shore. Then, with the noticeable exception of the low-altitude B-26 “Marauders” aircraft, the most powerful air bombing (through B17s and other high altitude aircrafts) was a fiasco. The sky was cloudy, it was still dark and flying at 20,000 feet, pilots had no real idea of their precise location. Thousands of tons of explosives were wasted, destroying nothing but cattle and green fields. Another example? Rockets fired by the assaulting amphibious ships almost never hit the target. Then the gliders, supposed to provision thousands of tons of equipment and men failed miserably: The cause? Normandy´s hedgehogs were much higher and sturdy than English ones, making the landing a suicide. This sole factor almost caused the entire operation to jeopardize. The list goes on. Still, “In preparing for battle, I have always found plans are useless but planning is indispensable”. The author is no other but the Supreme Allied Commander himself, Dwight D. Eisenhower. This statement holds true: despite all these failures, the planning exercise made Operation Overlord a success at the end. Months of preparation created a level of awareness and perspective that allowed the troops to identify new factors and adapt as per the real circumstances. Take for example the mess made with the paratroopers. Very few men, less say regiments, landed were intended. Still, their knowledge of Normandy´s geography and their laser-focus on their goals allowed them to adapt, re-organize and cut Nazi´s supply lines. The plan can fail – but we must be aware of the circumstances.
Number 8: you need line-of-sight, you can´t control what you don´t measure
A not much-known detail about the attack is that the high command (Eisenhower, Bradley, Montgomery, Smith, etc.) and even medium rank officers were mostly blind on June 6th. The fact that the operation was launched before dawn, the bad weather and mostly the enormous amount of smoke, ashes and flying debris of all sizes & types made the coast line virtually invisible from the vessels. Tons of bombs from the bombers but mainly the ulterior navy attack with massive cannons (eg, 400mm and bigger) plus thousands of rockets launched from the lighter disembark vessels created a virtual curtain. Let me quote Ambrose book yet again: “It was most galling and depressing,” Commander W.J. Marshall of the destroyer Satterlee wrote in his action report, “to lie idly a few hundred yards off the beaches and watch our troops, tanks, landing boats, and motor vehicles being heavily shelled and not be able to fire a shot to help them just because we had no information as to what to shoot at and were unable to detect the source of enemy fire.” Furthermore, most of the primitive communication gear of the time broke up during the landing, allowing no communication from the troops at the beaches to the fleet – with some noticeable exceptions. At the end, the Navy played a primordial role, heavily bombing Nazi positions, but it took hours for decisions to be made, and for the required accuracy to be met. Let´s try by all means not to fire our cannons to invisible targets.
Number 7: don´t put all your eggs in the same basket
When I was reading the books, I came to the (general & raw) conclusion that D-Day success came mainly through a combination of plain brute force (massive numbers of everything) but mainly idiotic errors from the enemy. An idea struck my head: what if the invasion failed? What was “plan B” in case the Atlantic Wall couldn´t be breached? Well, as per historic records, there was no backup landing plan. Thus, the plan was to storm kilometers of coast, intending to make a breach somewhere and then work it from there. But the main backup was surprising: a nuclear bombing to Berlin was under consideration in case all efforts failed. Luckily, there was no need for that ultimate resource.
Number 6: don´t confuse a “how” with a “what”
Hitler, Roemmel and Co. made a supreme mistake when planning for the invasion: they – and particularly Roemmel – envisioned that the sole way to protect “Fortress Europe” (the propaganda name for the conquered Europe by the Nazis) was to construct literally a wall around it, particularly on the Atlantic coast close to the UK islands. This was a major mistake: it was Germany itself the one who proved that wars have changed forever. Fast mobility, logistics, blitzkrieg, aviation – those were the factors that had put Europe in their hands. Still, when taking a defensive position, they went back to WW I or even Middle Ages approaches, envision the Atlantic as a moat with a castle behind. If (and what an if that is) they would have put their energy not in pouring millions of tons of concrete right on the coast but in constructing more Panzers, more bridges, more secret fortifications the D-Day story could have been different. Moreover, the reconstruction of their air force would have been another good call, not to mention to station the bulk of their troops a little farther from the coast, beyond the Navy´s “columbiads”. Perhaps this would not have changed the end result of the war, but it would have altered the outcome of D-Day and provided them with time to improve and massively deploy their futuristic new weapons: V2 rockets and the impressive Messerschmitt Me 262 plus the Arado Ar 234, the first ever jet fighter and bomber. Those would have been true game changers. The lesson learned is evident: they needed to secure Europe, not to build a wall. Its a very different objective: never confuse a “how” with a “what”, with a final goal.
Number 5: there is no perfect timing – you have to take risks
On June 4th, 1944, Commander Eisenhower asked to the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force committee a question. He said: “Do you see any reason for not going Tuesday?”. Montgomery replied: “I would say – Go!”. Eisenhower continued walking, chin to the chest. “The question is… how long can you hang this operation on the end of a limb and let it hang there?”. Some minutes later, after more thought, he said: “I am quite positive that the order must be given”. The fleet was immediately deployed for the assault. He had to confirm again the attack next day as per the bad weather affecting the region. When reading the history, I just cant avoid feeling pity for the Supreme Commander. There was just so much at stake. It was perhaps the single most important decision of the century, and there were nothing but gray clouds around – literally and metaphorically. Will the weather get worse and sink the landing gear? Will the bombardment help enough the troops? How will the Nazis and their Panzer divisions react to the attack? Uncertainty was the word of the day. Still, a call had to be made, and he made the right one. Operation Overlord was too big and important to keep it on hold any longer. The troops were impatient and tired of the delay. Logistics were close to impossible. And each day the attack was delayed was an additional day granted for the Nazis to prepare their defenses. Risks have to be taken – calculated risks indeed, but calls and actions are a must.
Number 4: tools & tech help!
Have you heard about a Higgins boat? What about Hobart´s funnies? Well, these and many other were vehicles and gadgets crafted for that climatic day. A Higgins boat (more properly, an LCVP for Landing Craft, Vehicle and Personnel) was exactly that: a light landing vessel designed to ferry an entire platoon to the coast. Hobart´s funnies were tanks and similar powerful vehicles modified in crazy ways. There was the “Crocodile”, a tank with the cannon replaced with a massive flamethrower, the ARK, half tank, half bridge, the Crab, which had an enormous rotating cylinder on front with chains, designed to safely trigger mines. Then DD tanks (floating tanks – believe it or not) and many many other. These vehicles proved to be of true value to the troops, facilitating the excruciating task of seizing the beach. Technology helps indeed, when it is up to the task: right tool for the right job.
Number 3: adapt to survive
Reading the personal stories of the troops, it is utterly evident the level of a mess they were in. It is said that in war, each man fights its own battle, but this was never so true as in June 6th, 1944. Chaos was everywhere: paratroopers were dropped at night and got dispersed over kilometers. Tides sent troops and vehicles randomly. Enemy fire put everyone on cover. Air Force bombardment was a big fail. Still, the job was done, by adaptation means: agility at its best. The troops assembled under new leads (the close ones!), the available weapons were used, routes were changed, the brief available information was used to brilliant extremes. Teams were empowered and had the major goals clear, this allowed them to keep focused and save the day.
Number 2: use the right skills for the right job
A big factor in the success of the Allies was not only the general training of the troops, but the specialization in tasks: the assignment of the correct staff to the correct job. A good example was the exemplary performance of the 2nd Division Rangers to Omaha Beach – the 7th circle of hell during that day. These guys were the best of the best, and they proved their expertise and particularly, their motivation and stamina. These were volunteers, true patriots serving the free world while risking their lives at their own will. And they did the impossible: they climbed an almost vertical cliff under heavy fire and then secured the positions for the rest of the troops. This is in utmost contrast to the performance of the so-called Oost battalions: conscripts from all over Europe, men forced to work for the Axis cause. Most of them preferred to surrender at the first opportunity, and some even rebelled against the Germans. The lesson is clear: right skills for the right job, let´s devote the right time to allocate our resources to the tasks.
Number 1: TRUST – the troops are the ones who do the real job.
At the end, when the final “go” was given, and walking slowly toward his car after seeing the bombers depart, Supreme Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower simply said “Well, it´s on”. The interesting thing to notice is that, from the moment the orders to proceed with the assault were given, he was basically a spectator. He had empowered his Navy, Air Force and Army commanders, all through the line of command – to proceed as per their best criteria. He had led the planning effort, and made the final call. But it was now a matter of trust. Perhaps that is the most important lesson that we must learn: let the troops do their job – we got to trust them. Once the plan is ready, staff is trained, tools and systems are loaded, its on the tsoldiers, the technicians, the engineers, the developers, the staff – at the end, they are the ones doing the job. Tools, procedures, technology are good, but at the end people make things happen, they make the difference. Thus, TRUST.
“In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.”
Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt
To finish, a powerful “extra” lesson – and free of charge 🙂 Good ol´ Teddy Roosevelt, uncle of Franklin D. Roosevelt (coincidently, US President during most of WWII) put it in crystal-clear terms, as follows: “In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.”. In other words, the worst decision is indecision. And that was if not the greatest perhaps the most evident mistake made by the Führer right after the beaches of Normandy were attacked. Believe it or not, after Hitler was debriefed about the situation, and having plenty of the powerful Panzer divisions – terror of the Allied forces all through the war – within hours of the invasion area in Normandy, he never ordered a counterattack. As a matter of fact, he had one of his infamous tantrums and then took a powerful sleep-pill, thus going for a long nap. No attack, no regroup, no location shift, no camouflaging, no preparation… not even a retreat. Nada. Why? Its inexplicable. Possibly he was hijacked by his emotions & temper (another lesson per-se!). What we can say now, nearly 80 years after, is that it he really blew it. Let´s learn from one of the major bloopers in war history: make your call – and make it on a timely basis; a mediocre resolution on due- time is better than a “perfect one” that comes late.
Good luck in your projects, or better-said, “V” for Victory as Churchill waved – cheers!
Fernando
Photo by Museums Victoria on Unsplash
Internet de los Mocos (IoM)
Una perturbadora idea me persigue desde hace meses. Naturalmente, mi atención sobre este desagradable tema nació con esta agotadora pandemia. Que “fregado”, pero lo cierto es que vivimos en medio de una red global de la cual casi no tenemos conciencia: la Internet de los Mocos (IoM, ahora que está de moda ponerle acrónimo hasta a las texturas del aguacate). Así como lo oye: los humanos estamos conectados no solo por lazos genéticos, económicos, y sentimentales, sino que nuestras interacciones físicas implican además un vivo intercambio de babas. Es decir, una interfase “B2B” (baboso to baboso). Es francamente repulsivo, lo sé, pero no por ello deja de ser la más pura y pegajosa verdad. Cada vez que nos colocamos a menos de 2m de distancia, cada vez que no usamos una mascarilla, cada vez que nos tocamos, pues estamos intercambiando algo más que emociones e información:.. ¡ugh!
Diantres, es que en esta “internet de los mocos”, cada uno de nosotros actúa cual un “nodo” o “terminal” y nuestra burbuja social, ese núcleo familiar con el que convivimos funciona cual “clúster” o “racimo” donde estamos todos revueltos en una sola “sopa de babas”. Desde esta perspectiva las aglomeraciones de personas pueden actuar como verdaderos “hubs” de intercambio de gérmenes. Que le vamos a hacer, hay una correlación inversa entre lo “cool” o “encendida” de la fiesta y la higiene del evento. ¿Ejemplos? Fácil: entre más se llena la discoteca y más “prendido” el baile, pues mayor intercambio de sudores. Entre mejor el partido de futbol y más eufóricas las graderías, pues mayor la lluvia de babas: ¡goooool! Ni hablar de un concierto o un espectáculo masivo: nos une no solo la “vibra” y la energía, sino todo un ecosistema de fluidos, mucosidades y gérmenes… ¡Santos conciertos contagiosos, Batman! Desde esta perspectiva aquello de que una canción es “pegajosa” adquiere una connotación muy pero muy literal.. Deberíamos inventar entonces una nueva unidad de medición para este fluido asunto. Atención, Humanidad, escuchad atenta: postulo aquí y ahora un nuevo concepto, los “Mbps” (Mocos bandoleros por segundo); ¿qué tal?
Pensémoslo un momento: la relación de microorganismos vs células humanas en un adulto es de un asombroso 10 a 1: así es, nos llevan una ventaja asombrosa. Estos diminutos polizones tienen en promedio mucho menor volumen y masa que nuestras células, por lo que solo el 3% de nuestro peso corporal es reflejo de nuestros más cercanos acompañantes. Aún así, y para ponerle números al asunto, si Ud. pesa dígase unos 60 kilos (más o menos 132 libras), entonces es usted él o la feliz propietaria de aprox. 2 kilos (6 libras aprox.) de bichitos microscópicos de todo tipo: ¡felicidades! Que no se diga entonces que no contamos con nuestra propia audiencia; se equivoca Alejandro Sanz y toda la pléyade de poetas y cantantes: no existe aquello de “mi soledad y yo”, sino más bien “mi microbioma y yo”. Avisados estamos, afine bien en la ducha. Desde lo más íntimo de nuestro ser, nos acompañan trillones y trillones de cercanísimos amigos. La mayoría son inofensivos y más bien necesarios para el buen desempeño de las funciones corporales, pero los “chicos malos”, cabalgando sus mocosas motos pandilleras, han aprendido que estimulando reflejos como el estornudo, la tos y en general las secreciones de fluidos de nuestros cuerpos obtienen paquetes “todo incluido” para irse de viaje. Los peores de ellos son los recién llegados de otras especies y/o geografías, pues nuestro sistema inmunitario – el equivalente a nuestras fuerzas de defensa – aún no los conoce y no tiene las armas para combatirlos. Estos son los generadores de pandemias. El último de estos inmigrantes que cruzaron sin visa ni pasaporte la frontera de las especies es el virus SARS-CoV-2, causante de la enfermedad Covid-19. Ya ven, estos bichos son los originales “mojados” (nunca mejor usado el término).
Este intercambio de mocos y gérmenes, como apuntó el genial Orson Welles en “Guerra de los Mundos”, ha estado con nosotros, o por mejor decir, con la vida animal sobre la Tierra, por eones. Me pregunto entonces si nuestros pensamientos, ideas y sentimientos son íntegramente los nuestros y no el reflejo de la sutil insinuación de lo que los ejércitos que nos acompañan nos susurra quietamente. ¿Nos habrán “hackeado” ya hace tiempo? Tal vez lo que le vemos de atractivo al chico o chica en cuestión va más allá de figuras y feromonas. De pronto y tenemos un coro de “firmicutas“, “actinobacterias“, “ciadosporiums“, “lactobacilus” y otros miles de románticos secuestradores diciéndonos al oído “Mira pues, que guapa está, no? Mira que clase de microbiomas tiene!” “Que tipo más atractivo, que clase de triponema tendrá…” “Anímate pues, lactobacilo mata galán”…. No en vano una buena salud va de la mano de que los “chicos buenos” estén también contentos: pregúntele a cualquiera que se le haya pasado la mano con los antibióticos, por no mencionar los estragos que puede ocasionar una fuerte diarrea a la tan elegantemente etiquetada “flora intestinal”: considerando el aroma del jardín en cuestión, lo de licencia poética se queda muy pero muy corta.
Ahora bien, el fatídico 2020 nos enseñó que necesitamos establecer un sistema de “firewalls” (“cortafuegos” o “diques”) que nos permitan controlar y de alguna manera, detener o al menos ralentizar el intercambio de babas en tiempos de pandemia (bajar el “Mbps”, según nuestra nueva y húmeda definición). Concluyo además que convertise en un germofóbico no es la solución. Cortar de raíz nuestra conexión con la “internet de los mocos” no es una buena idea. Vivimos en simbiosis con estos canallas, nos necesitamos los unos a los otros y nuestro sistema inmunitario seguramente nos daría un “golpe de Estado” a falta de enemigos externos donde quemar pólvora y ansias . Sin embargo, una versión moderada de estas medidas de protección en donde priven los protocolos de lavado de mano, la desinfección de algunas superficies y similares deberían convertirse en un nuevo estándar, una nueva normalidad. En un mundo con cerca de 8.000 millones de babosos hiperconectado por vuelos transatlánticos, zumbando con autopistas y trenes de alta velocidad, bailando en cerrados cruceros, gritando con delirantes eventos masivos sumado a la invasión y destrucción de nichos ecológicos y un larguísimo etcétera de otras lindezas; pues tenemos que mitigar de alguna manera el aumento del riesgo que todo este jaleo implica.
¡Vamos, que hemos sido unos grandes cochinos: sigamos lavándonos las manos mis amigos!
Un higiénico saludo,
Fernando
Fuentes: NIH Human Microbiome Project defines normal bacterial makeup of the body
WHO: Naming the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and the virus that causes it
Photo by Anastasiia Chepinska on Unsplash
Foto: Remando al Atardecer / Photo: Row, row, row your Boat
VERSION EN ESPAÑOL / ENGLISH VERSION BELOW
Si fuera un concurso de fotografía estaríamos en problemas, pues en estos eventos, si bien se permite mejorar digitalmente la foto, no se “vale” agregar elementos que no estaban presentes a la hora del “flash”. Pero… como la vida no es un concurso sino un viaje, por no decir con Calderón de la Barca que es más bien un sueño, nos permitiremos entonces jugar y rotar la imagen. Le añadiremos una barca (¡que casualidad!), con un remero que boga ahora entre nubes, a través de un mar de algodón y fuego. Cuestión de puntos de vista. Cuestión de dejarnos soñar…
Fernando
ENGLISH VERSION / VERSION EN ESPAÑOL ARRIBA
Would the shot be intended for a photo contest, we would be in trouble: even though digital enhancement is valid, no additional elements insertion is permitted in these kind of events. But it is not, thus, let us dream. The photo was rotated 180 degrees, and the bpat digitally added. What else to say? I guess we could just add the simple & beautiful wisdom of a song that, to unaware ears, seems to be just a lullaby. It is about 200 years old. And it goes like this: “Row, row, row your boat / Gently Down the stream / Merrily, merrily, merrily. / Life is but a dream…”
Fernando
Foto: Rabo de Nube
¡Hola! Estaba pensando cuál debería ser el texto que acompañase a esta a un tiempo humilde e inspiradora fotografía, y vino a mi mente la canción “Rabo de Nube”, por Silvio Rodríguez. Nada más que decir: que sea el arte del cantautor (video y letra más abajo) nuestros compañeros al disfrutar de esta poética escena, la cual capté hace poco desde el mismísimo frente de mi casa.
Ánimo,
Fernando
Rabo de Nube (Silvio Rodríguez)
Si me dijeran: pide un deseo
Preferiria un rabo de nube
Un torbellino en el suelo
Y una gran ira que sube
Un barredor de tristezas
Un aguacero en venganza
Que cuando escampe
Parezca nuestra esperanza
Un barredor de tristezas
Un aguacero en venganza
Que cuando escampe
Parezca nuestra esperanza
Si me dijeran: pide un deseo
Preferiria un rabo de nube
Que se llevara lo feo
Y nos dejara el querube
Un barredor…
Escapando de la cárcel del Egoísmo
Introducción
He tenido una idea. Vaya, vaya, me dirán, ya era hora. Supongo que no será muy novedosa pero en lo que me permiten captar mis limitadas entendederas, su directa y clara exposición sí aporta valor. Al menos facilita un nuevo punto de vista y eso ya es algo, especialmente ahora que estamos iniciando un nuevo y ya probadamente agreste año (la toma del Capitolio estadounidense es solo una muestra de lo que se avecina). Sin más dilaciones, mi idea es que la Historia – sí, con mayúscula, pues me refiero a la Historia de Todos, la Historia de la Humanidad – no es sino un Escape. Así es, un escape de una cárcel muy particular, pues en esa cárcel somos simultáneamente prisioneros y carceleros. Es la Cárcel del Egoísmo, antigua como la Humanidad misma, la más severa de las prisiones.
Ying y Yang
Comienzo por decir que la lucha individual y personal contra el egoísmo está suficientemente diseccionada – un excelente ejemplo es el libro “Ego is the Enemy”, por Ryan Holiday (lo recomiendo encarecidamente, así como las otras obras del mencionado autor). Más mi perspectiva en este pequeño ensayo es que la Historia de Todos puede ser también comprendida como un esfuerzo grupal para escapar del Egoísmo. Es una odisea conjunta a través del tiempo y el espacio, a través de geografías y generaciones. Es un viaje construido a traves del agregado de nuestras decisiones individuales – las elecciones políticas son el ejemplo más obvio y quizás el más importante. Y es que nuestras decisiones gravitan siempre entre dos polos diametralmente opuestos. A saber, el primero apuntando únicamente a acaparar, monopolizar, acumular. Es la fuerza del “Yo”, ciega al exterior y al Prójimo, en toda la magnitud de esta palabra. En diametral oposición, nos hala la fuerza del “Nosotros”. Es lo que nos impele a buscar puntos en comun, a la tolerancia y la empatía. Es ese magnetismo que nos atrae hacia los demás, hacia afuera, a ponernos en los zapatos ajenos. Y así gravitan nuestras vidas, danzando atraída por estas dos fuerzas, Ying y Yang del Espiritu Humano.
La Historia como un Agregado
Ahora bien, el balance neto de nuestros actos como Humanidad es lo que construye la gran línea de tiempo que caracteriza nuestro andar como especie. Postulo que la Historia puede interpretarse como la lucha colectiva por alcanzar una masa crítica de consciencia (o quizás de inconsciencia) global que nos permita comprender lo anteriormente expuesto: nuestro futuro es uno y uno solo: al final, no existen los “demás”. Lamentablemente, la travesía no es lineal ni mucho menos y avanzamos con pasos temblorosos las veces, reculando en ocasiones, cayendo en largas pausas en otras. Esa es la Historia, una amalgama de Guerra y Acuerdo, de Nacionalismo y Apertura, de Enfrentamiento y Cooperación, de Conflicto y Abrazo. Sin embargo, tengo la convicción de que con todo y todo, la tendencia general es positiva y algún día esa masa crítica de empatía global se alcanzará. Esta masa crítica de consciencia como Humanidad sería entonces el equivalente humanista, léase no teológico ni cosmológico, al Punto Omega que expusiera Teilhard de Chardin en su ambiciosa obra. Sobrevendrá entonces una etapa de prosperidad y paz, no solo para nosotros, sino para el planeta.
Conclusión(es)
No me cabe duda, amigo lector: la Nuestra es una ardua odisea que nos aleja tortuosamente de la prisión del Egoísmo. Al elevarnos al nivel de “ojo de pájaro”, los “Mejores Ángeles de Nuestra Naturaleza” que acuñaba Steven Pinker van ganando la batalla. Es nuestro deber ayudarles: todo aquello que “huela” a imponer el “Yo” y lo que este crea, supone o representa – llámese Nacionalismo, Fascismo, Racismo, Xenofobia debe ser rechazado. Patriarcado, Misoginia, Etnocentrismo, Chauvinismo, Discriminación. Antropocentrismo, Prejuicio, Estereotipado, Plutocracia, Nepotismo, Clasismo. Clientelismo, Dogmatismo, Feudalismo, Corrupción, Homofobia. Todo eso debe ser repelido individual y socialmente. Todas esas ideologías y aberraciones abrevan de una mismo cenagal llamado Egoísmo. No son sino manifestaciones sociales de la misma reconcentración en el “Yo”. ¿Qué es el Nacionalismo sino un coro de “YO soy de este lugar y usted no”? ¿Qué es el Racismo sino un coro de “YO soy de este color y usted no”? ¿Qué es es la Homobia sino un coro de “YO tengo este gusto sexual y usted no”? ¿Qué es el Clasismo sino un coro de “YO tengo tanto capital y usted no”?
No quiero dejar de destacar de entre la lista de los mencionados descarríos al Antropocentrismo, por su naturaleza sutil y eterea. Porque esta absurda creencia, esta ingenua idea de que por alguna feliz coincidencia (para nosotros los humanos, por supuesto) somos los únicos dignos de atención moral y la medida de todas las cosas, dueños y señores de la creación es simplemente nefasta. Podemos repetir la fórmula anterior para evidenciar la farsa: ¿Qué es el Antropocentrismo sino un corto de “YO soy humano y ustedes no”? Supuestamente, somos dignos de hacer y deshacer a nuestro placer: una de las más calamitosas manifestaciones de ese Egoísmo: el Cambio Climático y el Maltrato Animal son solo dos ejemplos de sus consecuencias. El empoderamiento que esta idea recibe a través de diferentes corrientes religiosas – el judeocristianismo en particular – la hace aún más peligrosa: es casi un supuesto, un “hecho juzgado”, un cimiento de arenas movedizas donde hemos construido toda una catedral de ulteriores sandeces.
Pero bueno, para cerrar con una nota más positiva, reitero lo ya afirmado: el balance neto, la tendencia generación a generación, es positiva. Este es un nuevo año y la pandemia que asola al mundo cederá pronto. Ayudemos con lo que está dentro de nuestro limitado círculo de influencia para que triunfe la empatía, la solidaridad y la fraternidad. Amigos, aceleremos la huida de la prisión del egoísmo.
Un abrazo,
Fernando
Photo by Matt Collamer on Unsplash
No, a year is not equivalent to 365 days (that is, project-wise).
I hope that through the title I already have your attention: it´s a bold statement, I know. Still, my point is not driven from a post holidays´ bad hangover or an astronomical delusion. Because yes, the 2021 gregorian calendar has 360 days to go (five gone by now), but this is more sort of a reminder, a call for awareness for decision makers, namely C-Suite, Executives, Managers, PMs etc. now that we are opening the 2021 cycle. In the following paragraphs I´ll explain myself, so bear with me.
For starters, unless your projects run in the same way as your operations (24×7), we are tricking ourselves from the very beginning of our planning exercise: most of us have a deep, almost subconscious assumption (sort of a collective verbal agreement) that concurs that the project has 365 days per year to exploit. Well, that is normally not the case. Let´s start with the ends, I mean the weekends. I have done some research (my data sources are Wikipedia and ourworldindata.org) and assuming Saturdays and Sundays are off and 52 weeks per year in average, then we got 104 days less. After adding the average number of paid holidays (11 is a rounded average worldwide, 13 is the mode), the result is that we loose about 34% of the year calendar days due to weekends and holidays. That leaves us with approx. 240 days to go. Still, if we examine this count from a realistic perspective, we must consider that the last weeks of the year are quite low productive, as the first one usually is. So I dare to say that the real result of this initial filtering exercise leaves us with about 230 or 225 days to produce whatever deliverables are expected. But wait, there is more…
The aforementioned 225 available days need to have paid vacations deducted as well. Now, leave-time varies a lot across countries & legislations. Let´s again use statistics as our allies: world average paid-day vacations based on a five-days work week is 16, and the mode is 20 (source: Wikipedia, these final aggregated numbers were calculated by Fernando). So now we are down to about 205 days to work. Is this the magic number? No, there is always a catch
The 205 days are also a mirage: this number is not accounting for sick, grief and other type of leaves, not to mention travelling days if your endeavor implies such needs. So at the end, I believe we have circa 200 days to go per individual, per calendar year. For the sake of keeping it short & sweet, I am not going in detail about historical trends on leave days. Let´s just mention that diminishing working hours is a historical fact and that 4 days work week is one of the big topics of our time: “experiments” on this idea are happening as we speak. All that being said, and for the peace of your minds, the translation of the work days into work hours provides some relief, especially now that work-from-home is ubiquitous and extended working hours are a new normality: to what extent this simultaneous trend counters/balances the day availability reduction is yet to be assessed as the post-COVID era matures.
As a conclusion, I want to leave you with three ideas in mind: first, if your projects run on a 5 work days week basis, you have in fact about 200 work days per year to go (in other words, you loose 45% upfront!). Secondly, if time is of the essence (and according to my experience, it always is) we should consider for budget to work during Saturdays and/or double or triple shifts and/or a follow-the-sun tactic. A buffer for delays should be embedded into the plan as well. And then last but not least: at the end, our results depend not so much on calendars but on productivity. The point is simple: one truly devoted, focused hour – not to mention a day of undivided attention – produces more relevant outcomes than hours of “multitasking” and mediocre efforts. So let´s strive to be human and deal with one thing at a time – the correct one, the current priority – with all our capabilities and skill in this brand new 2021.
My sincere best wishes to you and your kin, may this new cycle around our star be more productive, focused, happy and healthy for all Humankind.
Fernando
Photo by Debby Hudson on Unsplash
