Lessons from Rehab

Picture found on the internet

Having acquired the hospital experiences I referred to a couple of posts ago, I am now also a veteran of what happens in a rehab facility--well, one particular rehab facility, anyhow. It's supposed to be that hopeful step between hospital and home, and I arrived with family members in the mindset for that hopeful step. And now, in the spirit of my previous observations, I have a few more musings to add.

• Dumping the patient in a bare room for the first hour after arrival, with or without family, is distressing. In fact, nothing is quite so sure to put a big lump in the family member's throat and bring tears up right behind their eyeballs. It would be so helpful if the rehab staff immediately came in and gave a quick orientation as to what to expect, and found out what the current needs were. And yes, I know this is not a hotel.
• When a patient arrives at a rehab facility straight out of being in bed for many days, it helps if the wheelchair fits onto the wheelchair scales (or the scales is big enough for the wheelchair, if you'd prefer to look at it from that perspective). 
• It's kind of weird when the nurse assistant says, "Oh yeah, the foot rests don't come off the wheelchairs of the penitentiary patients who come here, either."
• One R.N. on duty for an entire wing is NOT sufficient.
• I want to know how rehab facility staff could not discover until morning that the patient's spouse slept in a chair by the bed. A cot was available, and was provided for the remaining nights.
• There's a big difference between the faithful, regular explanations by hospital staff about what they're doing, and the actions of rehab facility personnel who walk in and switch IVs or shove a cup of pills at the patient without explanation. If the patient is a retired physician, it seems even more egregious.
• A family member should not have to ask for Immodium for a family member who has needed it for an entire day, often having to push the call button and wait with soiled diaper and sheets.
• A brand new Physical Therapy Assistant straight out of Loma Linda University can be the most competent, cheerful and motivational professional in an entire rehab facility. Kudos to Kristy. I bow to her.
• It's cool when a rehab facility knows how to serve good vegetarian meals. This one did.
• I'd forgotten how handy bibs could be. Or aprons, if you want to be a little more dignified about it. Very smart.
• A patient in pain following surgery is not going to find two Tylenol every six hours, enough. When the patient asks repeatedly for better pain meds, and can't sleep for pain, rehab facility personnel should not wait three painful days before getting the appropriate medications ordered.
• When the patient's only offspring in attendance asks that she be called when the patient is ready to be discharged to go home, and points out her cell phone number in the chart, it is not okay to leave a message on her home phone and not call her at work. And it adds insult to injury when she shows up in the evening to greet her with, "Oh, did you not know he went home?" 
• It's frustrating to not have enough medical savvy to advocate sooner for the well-being of a family member. In retrospect, I wish I'd agitated much earlier for the Immodium and for the pain medications, and not trusted that they knew what they were doing.

So there you go. My experience with rehab was almost totally negative. I have vowed that if a family member or I am ever again in need of a rehab facility, it will not be that one. I'm glad it's over. The end.

Taking Back "Christian"

Dana Carvey as "Church Lady"; photo found online.
I suspect Church Lady is not Christian.

I think it's time to take back "Christian." I've been ruminating about this for some time, and I'm quite convinced.

What do I mean? Well, I began to notice a few years ago that people were calling themselves "Christ-followers" or "followers of Christ” instead of “Christian.” At first I thought it was a fad thing. You know the phenomenon; for a while different buzzwords came along with their associated traditions, like everything was Maranatha, then Praise, then Celebration, then Relevant. And I have missed a buzzword ...or ten ...in that list.

Let me set the stage. I read a few years ago that the famous author of vampire novels, Anne Rice, had become a Christian. Intriguing. More recently I read that she declared that she is not longer a Christian.

What is this? Conversion whiplash?

Here's what Anne Rice had to say about that:

For those who care, and I understand if you don’t: Today I quit being a Christian. I’m out. I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being “Christian” or to being part of Christianity. It’s simply impossible for me to “belong” to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten years, I’ve tried. I’ve failed. I’m an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.

Well now, that was interesting. Doesn’t nearly every Christian feel like an outsider?

Looking further, I saw more explanation:

In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.

Wait a minute. I can't believe that God loves gays, be feminist, use artificial birth control, be a Democrat, be a "secular humanist" (whatever that is), respect science, be pro-life ... and still be a Christian? What kind of a list is that?

I started to get the point: Anne Rice was not denying Christ. She was refusing a place in the group of people who called themselves by the same name she did, but who criticized her stance on a number of issues. And Anne believed that Jesus was calling her out of that group. That could be the only reason she would quit "in the name of Christ."

To clarify, here’s one more quote from Anne Rice:

My commitment to Christ remains at the heart and center of my life. Transformation in Him is radical and ongoing. That I feel now that I am called to be an outsider for Him, to step away from the words, "Christian" and "Christianity" is something that my conscience demands of me. I feel that my faith in Him demands this of me. I know of no other way to express how I must remove myself from those things which seek to separate me from Him.

It was a declaration heard around the world. Anne Rice made her point, and she made it on the platform of her notoriety as an author and as a relatively recent, unexpected Christian convert.

Since reading about the disavowal of Christianity by Anne Rice, I've begun noticing others avoiding the name "Christian.” And I have wondered: are they jumping ship from the label for the same reasons Anne Rice did--because people who called themselves "Christian" behaved in such odious ways? Does calling yourself a "follower of Christ" mean anything different? Does it make you better? Purer?

I don't mean to disrespect Anne Rice or to question what she felt called to do, but I feel differently called. I think it's time that people--thinking people, caring people, well-educated people, kindly people, culture-shaping people--people who have committed themselves to Jesus Christ, take back "Christian." Quit changing their names. Quit jumping ship. Stand up and give the name the definition it was intended to have. Be a Christian.

And what does it take to be a Christian? In Acts 16:31, Paul and Silas answered this question with, "Believe on the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved--you and your household." They said nothing about any list. Nothing about being pro-anything or anti-anything. All followers of Jesus in those days were Christians, and I see no reason why all followers of Jesus should not be Christians now.

If anyone should be jumping ship and dropping the name, it should be people who do not behave as Jesus did. Maybe that would be the people who try to divide the good people from the evil people by applying a bunch of rules and judging who does and doesn't meet them. Maybe that would be people who oppress others, socially and economically. Maybe that would be people who pass by others in need, and do not respond with caring.

The rest of the world is watching. They don't discern any difference between a “Christian,” a “Christ-follower,” and a person who loves Jesus. As far as a Muslim, Hindu, spirit-worshiper or Buddhist is concerned, they’re all the same. If the Christians who love like Jesus change their name, who will model for the rest of the world what a Christian is, what Christ is like? If you’re truly committed to Jesus, if you're becoming like Him as much as you can be in context of your human weakness, should you not keep the name, define the name for those around you, defend what that name should stand for?

Others may see it differently. But I, for one, will not be changing my name. There may be huge differences between me and some who share the name—funeral picketers and Koran burners and billboard crusaders among them. I want to help strengthen the definition as something quite different from theirs. I hope and pray to be the kind of person who defines "Christian" in a way that would draw others to know Jesus, who would bring peace rather than discord, who would convey love and not hate, who would be welcoming rather than judgmental, kind rather than cruel. If not me, I hope it would be my Christian brother or sister who models it better than I. It's time to take back "Christian."

Fasting

Entering the administration building at our university during the second week of school following Christmas break, I was confronted by this six-foot-tall blackboard titled "What will you give up?" The corner banners  told me this was an initiative of our student association. At the base of the board was a container of sidewalk chalk.

As you can see, students, faculty and staff were invited to declare what they would give up for a 40-day fast, at the urging of the student spiritual life leaders on our campus. People were writing up the usual suspects: chocolate, TV, Facebook, YouTube, candy, unhealthful food, caffeine and so on. But there were also commitments to give up much more difficult habits: holding grudges, time, feeling like I'm not good enough, procrastination. One wag declared a fast from homework, and a young curmudgeon wrote: "Public lent is vanity." That comment actually caused me think.

This initiative was paired with our "Winter Week of Worship," which means that we attend chapel every day, at which two students give short 10-15 minute talks. This year the student association's spiritual vice president led the planning group in focusing on the question "Dear Jesus...Now What?"

One of our student speakers during her talk

"We chose a theme," he said, "that echoes what we feel is a huge desire on our campus: to live one’s faith - to live a life for Christ in the fullest sense.”  The perspectives on what that means, were as varied as the speakers. And the talks weren't just fluff. As I listened, I heard careful thought, good questions, and inspiring calls to live differently.

Plastic wristbands are a popular way for young adults to remind themselves of commitments, and the students included them in this initiative.  On the wristbands available for anyone who wanted them, was written: "40 Days..  Slow Down: Fast"

I pondered whether I would join the fast, and what I might give up ... keeping in mind, of course, that phrase "Public lent is vanity." I have great respect for the good ideas of our students, and for the value of sharing a spiritual or service-directed experience with them. The number of days didn't matter to me.

So I decided to fast from a simple and seemingly minor activity: reading my Facebook news feed.  The deeper issue is the time I was spending on browsing the online "wall" each morning, to the detriment of my devotional time and readiness to enter my day deliberately. Fasting isn't helpful unless it frees you up for something of great value, and that's what I wanted.

I am about twelve days into my fast, and I'm deeply appreciative of the quality of time that has been freed up. Yes, I do miss crossing paths with interesting happenings in the lives of my friends and former students. But the simplification of life is a powerfully good thing. We have only 24 hours each day, and the best way to live them well is to de-clutter those non-flexible 24 hours.

While I am enjoying participating in this fast with the students, I'm reminded of some verses that talk about a much more important fast, one to which I need to give my long-term attention. Here it is, a breathtakingly beautiful passage. I trust it will give you "cause for pause," as it does for me:

Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen:

to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke,

to set the oppressed free and break every yoke?

Is it not to share your food with the hungry

and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter—

when you see the naked, to clothe them,

and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?

Then your light will break forth like the dawn,

and your healing will quickly appear;

then your righteousness will go before you,

and the glory of the LORD will be your rear guard.

Then you will call, and the LORD will answer;

you will cry for help, and he will say: "Here am I."

Isaiah 58:6-9

Musings Between Hospital and Home

Illustration found on the web

I have spent a notable part of the past week in the hospital with a family member who would not want me to publish his situation on the web. It's been quite a week, running back and forth two or three times a day between busy schedules at work, and the hospital 15 minutes' drive away. It has given me a bit of time to think on my drives, though, and to pray. Praying is always a good thing, more and more important to me as the years pass.

During my drives I have also had time to muse upon the things I have observed through the past week.  Here, in no particular order, and with no attempt at being literary, are some of my observations:

• People with medical training in my family are prone to not realize when it's time for them to seek medical help.
• People with medical training can be really, really grumpy patients.
• Doctors will actually tell you when they don't agree with each other.
• Nurses come in all kinds of flavors. 
• You shouldn't trust your first impression as to the expertise of a medical person.  People who seem a bit "fluffy-headed" can turn out to be quite good.
• Nurses put up with a lot of junk and yuck.
• Speech pathologists teach patients how to swallow and to eat so they won't choke.  I did not know that.
• There's a starch that they put in liquids so they are "nectar thick" and patients won't choke on them. Somebody I know hates that stuff being put in his Sprite.
• It's really dehumanizing for an adult to be in a bed with a diaper on, and to be required to soil it when they can't get out of bed.
• Visitors can be an upper.
• Hospital stays don't necessarily bring peace.
• When a patient declares, while being rolled into surgery, "I suppose there will be a general offering taken up," you may as well just laugh.
• It's really wonderful when a doctor prays for the patient before putting them under anesthesia for surgery.
• Chatty nurses outside a room in the night hours really annoy a patient.
• Medical personnel who are good at explaining--which is all of them that I've met in this past week--are much appreciated by the family.
• When the patient's toilet overflows, for Pete's sake, the janitor ought first to turn off the water valve.
• Patients' beds should be positioned, if at all possible, so they can see out a window and get a sense that they are still connected with the world and its weather.

Backbone: How One Can Make a Difference (Part 3)

The first two posts on this topic were written from two different perspectives. In this post, we turn to yet a different perspective on the usefulness of backbone in an organization.

Sometimes you are part of an organization--work or otherwise--in which others can't seem to get outside the box. You can see a solution, a clear path to problem-solving, and the leadership or your peers can't see one you think will work, or work as well. You have an idea.

Some people, amazingly, don't speak up in such a situation. I'm really not sure why, being the sort of person who shares my opinions whenever asked, and sometimes even when I'm not asked. Whatever the situation or your past experience, I would encourage you to speak up. State your idea clearly, with the path for moving ahead. You might even volunteer what you are willing to do to be part of that solution or strategic action. And be sure you offer up your idea to someone with the power to make it happen.

Not quite the attitude with which you should present an idea.

The person to whom you speak now has three options, to keep it simple. They can take your idea and put it to work, or they can respond and tell you why it wouldn't work, or they can ignore your idea. If they put your idea to work, Great! You've helped to make the world a better place. Celebrate!

If they disagree with you and tell you why, you could give it up. You could. Sometimes they know of roadblocks you don't know of, or they've tried it before and it didn't work, or they know of a limit on the resources that you weren't aware of. They may or may not explain all of these, but you should keep in mind that if they have the power to put your idea to work, they might have a larger picture. Nevertheless, you can offer a solution to their reasons why your idea wouldn't work. Or you can also go back to the drawing board and come up with a new idea. Most leaders appreciate extra brains working on a solution.

And finally, they could ignore you. That doesn't feel good at all. They might be too busy, or snowed under and secretly overwhelmed. Or they might disagree with you but not take the time to tell you why. Or you may have shown yourself in the past to not be a supportive team player, or to be personally critical of them, so your voice is diminished in their world. If your idea is good, though, it should get a hearing. So take a detour and share it with someone else who can offer it up to the people who can make it happen. Have a backbone. Persist.

Another way in which it is useful to have a backbone in your organization is to help people to "think again." We're all in a rush in our lives, and we see the world through our own glasses. A leader or a small group of people making decisions for the larger group may be on the wrong track. Someone needs to kindly tell them to "Think again!" and explain why they need to do that. That might be you.

In my current work organization we have a notorious governance system. There are half a million groups and committees (only a slight exaggeration, you understand) that work on various aspects of recommendations and decision-making for the organization. We all believe that the system is onerous. And yet, I have never seen an organization that does a better job of making careful decisions and delineating wise processes as this frustrating set of groups. All along the way there is an opportunity for someone to ask questions and to say, "Think again."

Even if you work outside such a committee system, even if your organizational structure is a streamlined one of single people making decisions that are hard-and-fast, people in your system need to have the power and/or backbone to say to each other, "Think again. Why are you doing that? What if your unintended consequence is such-and-such? What if you did it this way instead? What is a better way to accomplish what you're trying to do? Can we do better in ensuring the long-term health of the organization and the well-being of the individuals who are a part of it?"  Be brave and ask questions for the good of yourself, others around you, and the group as a whole.

It should go without saying, but I'll say it anyway: asking these questions in a helpful way with expressions of goodwill rather than with accusation, bitterness or put-downs makes it more likely that the message will be heard and make a difference for good.

Backbone. Every person who puts it to work can make the world a better place for us all.

Now We are Six

On January 9, 2005, six years ago, I started a blog called Joyful Woman. My writing coach had suggested blogging as a way of keeping my writing skills limber, and after reading a bit of her blog, I launched forth. It has been an enriching experience, one that has acquainted me with many friends. Some of those friends have eventually ambled off into the vapors of the internet, and others who have stayed. As I ponder those who have stayed, especially those like Jayne and AC and Ruth and Ansku and Becky and KGmom who often comment (comments being the food of my blogging, as I've mentioned before), I am grateful for the joy of regular readers. Nobody pays you to come by, and I appreciate the interest and friendship. We come to know one another quite well over time.

I also have regular readers who don't comment, and I have to say that I'm very, very curious about you. I go look at my StatCounter tracking, and there you are: Aberdeen, South Dakota; Plains, Montana; Walsall and Wolverhampton and Dudley, U.K.; and Woodbridge, Virginia. I wonder who you are and what brings you here.  Whether you say hello or not, you're welcome.

Today, as I celebrate six years of blogging, I'll repost my very first blog post in honor of my sixth birthday. I'm amused that I chose to break blogging ground by writing about hair. It's symptomatic of my writing style; I write about whatever is new or interesting in my thoughts at the moment, and at that moment I had just gotten a spikier haircut. So here you go, with a few photos added of hairstyles mentioned:

The look that sparked that first post

There ought to be a law requiring the reading of "Miranda Rights for Hair" by anyone touching your hair either at home or at the salon. 

I considered myself a rather conservative woman until I began thinking today about the parade of hairstyles and colors across my life. I've now decided that I'm a rather daring and adventuresome soul, perhaps could even be described as a bit intriguing and somewhat dangerous! 

I was born a redhead. The red hair fell out and, after a period of baby baldness, it came in platinum blond. It gradually darkened over the years, reached "dirty blond" in young adulthood, then turned a surprising mix of grey-peppered dark brown beneath years of blond weaves and streaking. 

And that's just the saga of the color. 

My first style was "koonky-koonk." No one else equaled my creative name for the fountain-like ponytail on top of my little blond head. Then came the China Chop, the Long-and-Stringy, the Curly Bushy, the time I had it straightened in 8th grade (lasting one day in the tropical humidity), the time I permed it into a Formidable 'Fro at the age of seventeen, the Upside-down-pear through young adulthood, the Grow-it-long-&-french-braid-it experiment of my thirties, and then back to the conservative Pear. 

Now we're in the Spikey Era, thanks to Maile at the Beehive salon and spa. 

Considering my saga, I should be viewed as admirably even-tempered about dealing with change. Especially even-tempered if you compare me with my friend Julie, who used to single-handedly support Kleenex corporation by bursting into tears after each haircut. 

If we had a Miranda Rights for Hair, it might go something like this: "You have the right to remain the same color and style. Anything you allow to be done to your hair can and will be used against you sometime in the future by your kids, your siblings, your spouse, your friends and likely even by you yourself. So there." 

And with that, Maile would brandish her expert scissors, and we'd be off at a brisk clip into the delightful unknown. 

Backbone: When an Organization Has It (Part 2)

Organisms and organizations both fascinate me. Many parts must work together for both the organism and the organization to be healthy. If one of those parts goes out of whack, there's a displacement effect, reducing the health and effectiveness of the entire organism. The same goes for the organization. When something gets out of whack in an organization, not only the localized part of that organization goes into an "ill" state, but it affects the entire organization.

Edwin H. Friedman, a psychologist who pioneered the application of family theory to organizations, noted that  the organism, the family and the organization all share similar dynamics. As David W. Cox writes,

A fundamental premise is that each person in a family plays a role in the functioning of the other persons in the family, the system. Likewise in an organization, the functioning of any member, including the leader, plays a significant role in the functioning of the other members of the organization.

Friedman, in his book A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix, describes how a living system resists change. When the brain of an organism or the leader of an organization tries to change it, resistance to change immediately crops up. For example, if you are a trying to start exercising your body, you will meet internal resistance. Your bones and muscles don't want to start an exercise program, especially if they feel it creates some pain. If you try to change the processes or habits of an organization, you will meet internal resistance. The people in your organization become uncomfortable and will react with all kinds of resistance to change, particularly if they see it as painful to them personally.

And yet as the body needs to exercise, the organization needs to change in order to be healthy.

Friedman suggests that in this situation the leader must stay calm and non-anxious, be non-reactive, and persist in the face of sabotage from within. Friedman draws analogies between pathogens in the body, and the "pathogens" in an organization. Just as cancer can threaten the life of an entire organism, spreading in the body and poisoning the system, there are people in an organization who create toxicity. They operate on the same principles that pathogens do, being invasive by nature, lacking self-regulation, not learning from experience, and yet showing a great deal of stamina in their ability to continue destroying or interrupting healthy processes.

What does this look like? These are the people, Friedman says, who yell the loudest, whine the most, and are "organizational terrorists." They also can manifest by being constantly angry, sullen or negative. They also can be the people who gripe the loudest about things like lack of trust, consensus, or empathy. Their intended effect is to get the world revolving around them, catering to their personal goals or needs.

As I read Friedman's book, I could assign familiar names to the people he describes, both those who are well-differentiated and those who are not. I know leaders who are calm, non-reactive and take care of the organization's best good while refusing to be triangled into the dramas of the "pathogens" of the organization. And I know some of those pathogens, who despite being worthwhile people in their own right, act on the organization like viruses, slowing down the organizational wheels of progress and growth.

Sometimes, I think, you need to allow people such as these to marinate in their own pain and misery, let them mature through their own difficulties until they learn to relate to their organization in more differentiated ways, ways in which they cease sending out ripples of their own dysfunctions. However, some people don't see the big picture of the organization in which they function. If something in their organization causes them pain, even if it's putting the organization in a healthier place for long-term survival, these people will set up a mighty howl, wear a dastardly pout, spin off constant sniping comments, or carry a thick cloud of grudge. They never understand. And perhaps they should start again elsewhere.

My description here may be somewhat simplistic, but the "organism" paradigm outlined by Friedman makes sense to me. It also makes me stop and think about what function I fulfill in my work. Do I function primarily as a pathogen--negative or critical or behaving like an "organizational terrorist" in some way? If so, it's time to go.  If not, I may be a crucial working "part" of a body that needs me, and I should continue to stay and contribute to the organization's work to reach its goals.

This post has taken an organizational view.  But I've only told half of that story.  In my next post I want to argue the other side of the story, the one that says the "stay or leave" rationale isn't quite as cut-and-dried as I've laid it out to be.  Stay tuned.

Backbone: When to Stay, When to Leave (Part 1)

I have been thinking lately about the importance of backbone to a person, and to an organization. I'm not talking about literal backbone, but the backbone of wisdom and principle in terms of being congruent with yourself and others.

I might add before starting that I may sound pretty harsh on some of this. It's not because I feel harsh; I think it's worth the risk of being judged harsh in pursuing the freedom to be direct on this topic. I have known enough people and seen enough situations in my own various workplaces over the years to be quite sure of these thoughts...for most situations. If it doesn't fit you, then fine. Chuck it. But if it sounds familiar, perhaps it would be good for you to consider the following ideas to see if there's something to be gleaned here.

First, let me address having a backbone for your own sake. I have been fortunate in that almost all the organizations in which I have had a part--schools, workplaces, churches, musical groups, drama productions, et cetera--are organizations with which I have been in congruence. I could buy into the mission, I could appreciate the values, I could support the leadership, and I could see more positive than negative in my experience with that organization. It has made for a happy life.

On rare occasion, though, I have not been in congruence with an organization. In one such case, for example, I attended a church where the pastor was negative and punishing to the congregation. The church service was his show, the people on the platform his cronies, and the sermon used to "guilt" the members into his way of seeing the world. I found myself leaving church each week angry. I loved the people at the church, but they could not balance out the man at the front, who I perceived in so many ways to present a warped picture of God, mission and service. The question was, should I stay with that church, or have the backbone to go elsewhere? I had the backbone to leave. In that particular case, it was a healthy thing to do.

On another occasion I was in a musical group with wonderful people, but the leadership again was "guilting" and treating the group members badly, including me. I stayed for some time, thinking that perhaps the people made up for it, but finally I left. And then I wondered why I hadn't left sooner, as I felt the burden lift. I realized I had been waiting for the leader to ask me to leave, rather than having the backbone to simply pack up shop and depart. If you can't support a leader, and you feel you're being treated badly by the leadership, I learned, you have the freedom to go. And you should go. Don't wait for someone to give you the heave-ho and "fire" you, either figuratively or literally. It's not worth it to stay in an organization with dysfunctional relationships.

On several occasions I have been in a work situation in which I have been unhappy. The stakes are higher there. It's my income, my sustenance. Several times in my work life I have taken steps to ascertain whether the position was really a fit for me, either in terms of my capabilities or in terms of getting along with my colleagues. At each of those times I faced the boogey-man of whether I would have the backbone to quit if things didn't work out, and I'm relieved to say that I found I did have the backbone. As my father used to tell me, "Always make sure you can afford the luxury of integrity."  While I haven't actually had to quit my job at any time because of a lack of fit or inability to come to agreement between me and my colleagues or boss, I have been grateful to find that I was willing and prepared to do so. It has made me happier with myself.

Some readers might question my inflexible statements on this topic. "I need the paycheck," you might think, with some level of panic. "I don't have other opportunities, so I'm going to stick it out." Hear me now: Your life is too short. Your paycheck is not worth the grudges you harbor in your heart. You will die a bitter old person who has created a story in which you were mistreated or not a match for your organization or workplace, and deep in your heart you will know that it's all your own fault for staying. You allowed it to happen, and you didn't have the backbone to find a better place. Start looking now for something else (while you stay a bit longer in your current one, of course). Even if the new place you find has a lower income, make the budget cuts in your personal life to accommodate a healthier situation for yourself. You will respect yourself more for having the backbone to move to a happier place.

In the next part, I expect to talk about the effect of an individual's backbone on an organization.