TIME Magazine: Emotions And Productivity

An absolutely brilliant article! I agree with every word of it. I know first-hand how difficult it is to concentrate on what you are doing when your emotions dominate. That’s why I would always tell Boris that if we argue during my morning and won’t resolve the issue before his evening, my whole workday is gone. I am incapable of doing any work whatsoever.

There is one thing, however, which I would add: yes, we all should practice controlling our emotions, but also, we all should be mindful of how our behavior at the workplace affects others. Just remember that one rude comment can make a person completely unproductive for an extended period of time.

The full article text is copied below.

Continue reading “TIME Magazine: Emotions And Productivity”

Hidden Brain: Cynicism and Scepticism

This Hidden Brain episode is called “Fighting Despair,” but I became really focused when it came to the second part: the cynicism and the skepticism as an alternative. Before I heard this episode, I never thought about a formal definition of these concepts. Here is how the psychologist Jamil Zaki defines them:

Continue reading “Hidden Brain: Cynicism and Scepticism”

TIME Magazine: How to Stop Checking Your Phone Every 10 Seconds

I do not think I need to say anything about this article. I hope the title is attractive enough:)

Continue reading “TIME Magazine: How to Stop Checking Your Phone Every 10 Seconds”

TIME Magazine: Dining Solo

I always encourage people to go to plays, concerts, or restaurants by themselves if they do not have company but want to go, and I always thought that it was just a personal decision. However, according to this Time Magazine article, the restaurants do not like solo diners. It was interesting to read about why there are more solo diners these days than before, why restaurants often do not like them, and why they should 🙂

I think that in the nineteenth and early twentieth century there were more people dining out on a regular basis and solo, and it was absolutely normal back then. However, back then, these solo diners were male only, so possibly the issues which the article lists concern women more often than men.

Continue reading “TIME Magazine: Dining Solo”

What I Was Saying…

From Chicago Sun-Times:

Mayor Brandon Johnson’s administration spent $814,000 on a giant fence as part of an effort to shut down one of the city’s largest and most visible homeless encampments ahead of the Democratic National Convention, City Hall records show.

The massive barrier was part of an “emergency” effort to permanently lock out unhoused people from the location near the United Center, where the convention was held, the records obtained by the Chicago Sun-Times show.

The Johnson administration had refused to say how much taxpayer money went toward blocking off the green strip of land between the 1100 block of South Desplaines Street and the Dan Ryan Expressway just north of Roosevelt Road, until after the nationally televised gathering was over. The Sun-Times has been asking for those records, which should be public under state law, since July, when that tent city was cleared of its residents, the tents and the items they left behind.

Just A Note…

Time Magazine about the danger of caffeine: the side effect of caffeine is that it’s harder to fall and stay asleep. Isn’t it why we drink caffeinated beverages? Isn’t it an effect, not a side effect???

The article. I still don’t understand why one should quit it!

Continue reading “Just A Note…”

TIME Magazine: Busyness As A Status Symbol

I am asking the same question as this article: why has busyness become a status symbol? Or maybe not? Is it the objective thing these days? I agree with every word they say: in the past, not having to work was a status symbol. What happened with that? See the article below.

Continue reading “TIME Magazine: Busyness As A Status Symbol”

TIME Magazine: Ultra-Processed Food

My two cents about this article:

  • As it states correctly, there is no label and no formal definition of what food should be considered “Ultra -Processed,” so it’s difficult to tell what exactly is criticized when “ultra-processed food” is criticized
  • There are calories, proteins, fats and carbs, and no matter in which form they are coming, you can measure the amount you consume
  • Then people, especially the ones with low income, are told that the only food that is good for them is organic (=expensive, which they can’t afford) it does not help anybody
  • I remember very well the time I was poor, and even when I was not so poor, I would still choose the less expensive options.

The article itself is copied below.

Continue reading “TIME Magazine: Ultra-Processed Food”

“Consider The Opposite”

A few weeks ago, I listened to a very interesting episode of “Hidden Brain.” I listen to them almost every Sunday on WBEZ, and I know that most of their podcast episodes are great and discuss unexpected topics. However, that one was especially interesting. I liked it so much that I listened to it one more time to make sure I captured all the details.

In this episode, Shankar Vedantam talks to the economist Alex Edmans, the author of the book May Contain Lies, How Stories, Statistics and Studies Exploit Our Biases and What We Can Do About It. The episode is titled “When the Truth Lies,” and you can say the topic is confirmation bias, but actually, it’s way more than that. Alex Edmans says that we often think about misinformation as something spread by our enemies; however, quite often, we are our own enemies, and we provide false information to ourselves. He talks about “data mining.” I only knew the technical term, but Alex Edmas defines data mining the following way:

Data mining is that you start with a preferred result that you want to find, and then you mine the data, you run the data in so many different ways until you get a positive result. 

He talks about the link between diversity in the company workforce and inability to find a direct link, even though he personally supports diversity:

Absolutely, and this is irrespective of your personal views on the topic. So personally, I believe that diversity is important. It’s an important thing. As an ethnic minority, it’s something which is dear to me. But I believe that as a scientist, you should be like an expert witness in a criminal trial. Your role as a scientist is to state the evidence, just like your role as a witness is to state the evidence clearly irrespective of your views of the issue.

Alex Edmans challenges several statements that the majority of us consider solidly -proven, like the 10,000 hours rule or the importance of breastfeeding for the child’s brain development (you can read all the details following the link above). But then the question comes, how we can combat these confirmation biases. Erdmans suggests using “consider the opposite” rule. Here is how he explains it:

So the consider the opposite idea is to try to get around this problem of confirmation bias. So again, what is confirmation bias? We latch on to something uncritically if it confirms what we want to be true, and we reject something out of hand if we don’t want it to be true. So why is this interesting? Because what it means is that we are able to show discernment. If there’s a study that we don’t like, we can come up with a whole host of reasons for why it’s unreliable. And so what I’m doing with the Consider the Opposite Rule is to try to activate the discernment that we already have and we use selectively for studies that we don’t like, but now apply it to studies that we do like. So maybe just by giving an example, this will come to life. So let’s say I want an excuse after finishing this podcast to drink loads of red wine. So I might look up on Google why red wine is good for your health, and I find studies that people who drink red wine live longer. But consider the opposite. We’ll ask, what if I found the opposite result? People who drink red wine live shorter. How would I try to attack that result? I might say, well, maybe people who drink red wine are poor. They can’t afford champagne. They have to drink red wine instead. And it’s that poverty which leads to a shorter life, not the red wine. Well, but now I’ve alerted myself to the alternative explanation of income being the driver. Then I should ask, is this the driver of the result that I do want? Again, red wine is correlated with longer life. Is it the case that the people who can afford red wine are richer and it’s their wealth that leads to the longer life? So the idea of considering the opposite is to trigger the discernment that we exercise selectively and make sure it’s now universal.

Another technique is exercising your curiosity:

So this is also interesting because often we think that just general knowledge is perhaps a way to avoid misinformation because the smarter we are, the more able we are to separate the weak from the chaff. But unfortunately, this is not the case. There are some studies which actually suggest that knowledge makes things worse because the more sophisticated we are, the more intelligent we are, the easier it is for us to slam evidence we don’t like, and to come up with reasons for why we don’t want to believe it. But again, we deploy this only selectively. We don’t deploy this to the evidence that we do like. So even if knowledge doesn’t work, well, actually curiosity does. So there was a study which looked at the effect of knowledge, found it had no effect, but curiosity did have an effect. So these researchers found that the more curious you were, the more balanced you were on issues such as climate change. In particular, your views in climate change were less linked to your political affiliation. So you were going based on the evidence, not based on your identity.

And now I want to read this book!

TIME Magazine: A Breathing Break

I know that, and I have known about it since the time I realized how regular yoga classes helped me to become a different person and to control my mood much better (not like I always use this technique, but still! However, that’s the first time I read about using it in the work environment, and not to alleviate an individual person’s mood, but to globally improve the workplace.

Link to the article.

When we talk about effective business strategies, breathing is probably not a concept that crosses our minds. These conversations more often than not gravitate toward the conventional markers of success—market share, competitive advantage, profit margins, and growth trajectories. We picture meticulously crafted plans that map out the path to achieving corporate goals, driven by data analytics, market research, and financial projections.

But what if we took a radically different approach, one where we measured our success on prioritizing our employees well-being, rather than solely focusing on the company’s output? What if we prioritized one simple thing that we all have access to and can deploy at any time: the power of our breath.

It may seem “airy-fairy” or far leaning into the new age movement, but incorporating well-being and mental health into business strategies is starting to gain ground as a transformative trend. It turns out that a happy and healthy workforce is not just a moral imperative—it is a competitive advantage.

In an age where the business landscape is quickly evolving, the modern market demands more than just traditional tactics; it calls for a holistic approach that integrates the human element at its core, especially with the rise of AI. We’ve seen that the next generation of talent is demanding more from their employee experience, one where how they feel at work matters just as much as how they are compensated. And the truth is that companies that actively support their employees’ mental and emotional health are also seeing improvements in productivity, morale, and retention.

In reports from Gallup’s December 2023 poll, nearly half of U.S. adults, upwards of 45%, reported frequently feeling stress, and this is undoubtedly magnified in the workplace. Many organizations think they have a people problem when, in fact, they have a leadership opportunity. A critical component of effective leadership is identifying whether you are operating from a state of fear, or a state of love. When we are stressed our decisions and behaviors are driven from an unconscious emotional operating system and we contribute to a culture of fear-based incentivizing.

The science of stress can be broken down like this: when someone faces a stressful situation, the amygdala—a part of the brain involved in processing emotions—sends a distress signal to the hypothalamus. Upon receiving the distress signal, the hypothalamus activates the sympathetic nervous system by sending signals through autonomic nerves to the adrenal glands. These glands then release the hormone epinephrine (adrenaline) into the bloodstream. As epinephrine spreads throughout the body, several physiological changes occur. The heart starts beating faster, increasing blood flow to the muscles, heart, and other vital organs, while restricting the blood cells in our forebrain. Pulse rate and blood pressure rise, and breathing becomes quicker.

With our blood now flowing to our limbs in order to help us, quite literally, flee the situation, our cognitive processing, things like rational and logical decision-making, is impaired. We are now operating from a conditioned state of survival, but the challenge is that in the modern-day world, we’re not very good at distinguishing threats from non-threats. And if our limbic system (whose function is to process and regulate our emotions, memories, instincts, and moods) isn’t attuned to know the difference in what we perceive as threats, our decision-making abilities can quickly become compromised. For example, when receiving a distressing e-mail, your body will activate the same stress response that it would if you were evading a saber-toothed tiger back in primitive times. So the experience of dealing with the e-mail includes restricted blood flow to the conscious mind and a reduced conscious awareness of the correlating physiological responses. In essence: you forget to breathe. And this greatly reduces anyone’s capacity to make an intelligent decision or regulate their behavioral or emotional responses in a productive way.

Studies have demonstrated that various emotions correlate with distinct breathing patterns, and by altering our breath, we can influence our emotional state. For instance, when experiencing joy, our breathing tends to be steady, deep, and slow. Conversely, feelings of anxiety or anger often lead to irregular, rapid, and shallow breaths. By consciously adopting the breathing rhythms linked to specific emotions, we can effectively induce and experience those emotions ourselves.

In other words, if the order is reversed and the physiological state is consciously changed, it can have an immediate effect on the psychological state. The quickest way to do this is by employing conscious breathing. One can use the breath to reset their own system, and it can also be employed with a team to release stress and get everyone energetically connected. This can be especially helpful before a team strategy meeting, creative planning, or even at the start of each day since everyone comes in with their own stressors from their individual lives.

One such breath is an “Emotional Clearing Breath,” which can be used to change your energy and calm the nervous system down. First, a negative feeling that needs clearing should be identified. Focus on a recent event or encounter that resulted in a negative reaction. Try to get to the root of what triggered the reaction—not the act itself but what the event activated within. This will be a core emotion like feeling unworthy, unseen, unlovable, unvalued, inadequate, insignificant, helpless, or rejected.

Next, engage in diaphragmatic breathing. Use the inhale breath to fill the belly like a balloon, deepening the breath into the lungs, then empty the lungs and slightly contract the belly to release the air on the exhale. Continue to take big, deep breaths in through the nose while restricting the throat, resulting in an oceanic-sounding breath. Then exhale the air out of the mouth, keeping the restriction of the throat and maintaining the oceanic sound—as if fogging up a mirror with the breath. Once in a rhythm, repeat this inhale-exhale cycle of breath for four rounds and then take a few moments to come back to a natural pattern of breathing. Anchor into the present moment and notice the peacefulness that occurs.

What often stands in the way of our growth is our attachment to outcomes, rather than our attention to our feelings. Breath is the simplest and most effective tool that allows us to respond rather than react and override negative feelings and beliefs. Strategies that emphasize human connection, a collective purpose, and emotional intelligence are proving to be just as crucial as those centered on fiscal prudence. When we include these softer dimensions, we are not abandoning rigor or profitability. Instead, we are enhancing our capacity to connect with customers, inspire employees, and build resilient organizations that thrive in the long term.

Let’s get back to the basics and reconnect with our breath as we recognize that the most successful strategies are those that balance the head with the heart, numbers with narratives, and profits with principles. These multidimensional strategies are not just a response to a changing world—they are the blueprint for building businesses that are resilient, sustainable, and truly impactful. In doing so, we will pave the way for a more inclusive, innovative, and humane approach to business that meets the needs of our time.