A short remark on love: Everyone has their “Shining Armor”

A Reflection from The Knight in Shining Armor (in Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus by John Gray)  

Source: DeviantArt

Source: Amazon 

“Deep inside every man, there is a hero or a knight in shining armor. More than anything, he wants to succeed in serving and protecting the woman he loves. When he feels trusted, he is able to tap into his noble part of himself. He becomes more caring. When he doesn’t feel trusted, he loses some of his aliveness and energy, and after a while he can stop caring.

Imagine a knight in shining armor traveling through the countryside. Suddenly he hears a woman crying out in distress. He comes alive, races to her castle, where she is trapped by a dragon. The noble knight pulls out his sword and slays the dragon. As a result, he is lovingly received by the princess. As the gates open, he is welcomed and celebrated by the family of the princess and the townspeople. He is invited to live in town and is acknowledged as a hero. He and the princess fall in love.

A month later, the noble knight goes off on another trip. On his way back, he heard his beloved princess crying out for help. Another dragon attacked the castle and so as he arrived, he pulls out his sword to slay the dragon.

Before he swings, the princess cries out from the tower, “Don’t use your sword, use this noose. It will work better.” She throws him the noose and motions to him instructions about how to use it. In the end, the dragon dies and everyone rejoices. At the celebration dinner, the knight feels he didn’t do anything. Somehow, because he used her noose and didn’t use his sword, he doesn’t quite feel worthy of the town’s trust and admiration. After the event, he is slightly depressed and forgets to shine his armor.

A month later he goes on yet another trip. As he leaves with his sword, the princess reminds him to be careful and tells him to take the noose. On his way home, he sees yet another dragon attacking the castle. This time he rushes forward with his sword but hesitates, thinking maybe he should use the noose. In that moment of hesitation, the dragon breathes fire and burns his right arm. In confusion he looks up and sees his princess waving from the castle window.

                “Use the poison,” she yells. “The noose doesn’t work.”

She throws him the poison, which he pours into the dragon’s mouth, and the dragon dies. Everyone rejoices and celebrates, but the knight feels ashamed. A month later, he goes on another trip. As he leaves his sword, the princess reminds him to be careful, and to bring the noose and the poison He is annoyed by her suggestions but brings them just in case.

This time on his journey, he hears another woman in distress. As he rushes to her call, his depression is lifted and he feels confident and alive. But as he draws his sword to slay the dragon, he again hesitates. He wonders, Should I use my sword, the noose, or the poison? What would the princess say?

For a moment, he is confused. But then he remembers how he had felt back in the days when he only carried a sword. With a burse of renewed confidence, he throws off the noose and poison and charges the dragon with his trusted sword. He slays the dragon and the townspeople rejoice.

The knight in the shining armor never returned to his princess. He stayed in this new village and lived happily ever after. He eventually married, but only after making sure his new partner knew nothing about nooses and poisons.” 

This particular piece in the book won my attention to an extent that I decided to observe further. At first, I took the story literally as if all humans in nature should think and react so. As I saw it that way, negativity was the first belief that echoed in my mind. Why would the knight overreact and whisk away just because the princess introduced him to other alternatives? Did he really think he is the best? Who does he think he is? The poison or the noose could have been a better solution to slay the dragon!

In this context, I implied two misconceptions. First, I did not take into account that it was a book on relationships and second, I took the perspective of the princess solely. If this was a book on human potential elevation and ultimate problem-solving then yes, the knight should have considered the princess’ advice since it could have been a better solution. Just like students and humans in general, one should never stop learning and developing.

But let’s say that “sword” represents “strengths” and he is an intelligent knight. In a literal way, intelligence is the sword. His people and family might consider his intelligence as a strength but it might be considered as a threat by his competitors and the princess, who thinks she is much smarter. Well, this reminds us that in life, we cannot and will not please everybody no matter what. No matter how good and noble our actions are, there is always someone out there who thinks it is a turn off.

Then maybe, that is what happens in love, perhaps. The sword itself is proven to be qualified enough to defy the dragon. If the significant other does not even approve one’s sword, underrate and try to mess it around instead, is it really worth sacrificing the sword? In that case, the knight, whose pride lies on his sword, might think that the princess is not worth it and she is just abusing his self-assurance. Especially, another woman out there is proud of his sword (for who he is). We can just keep in mind that chances are still out there that might be another knight who possesses a noose or poison (which poses as a shining armor for him) and suits the princess better.

On another note, I still believe that as humans, potentials and opportunities are worth exploring. Moreover, if you are truly fond of someone, then you might want the best for him/her and improve yourself. This makes me think that maybe the knight, after living with the other woman, starts to explore more on nooses and poisons just in case something worse is yet to come. However, there are things that you cannot neglect such as your shining armor. No matter what or who you love, your strengths deserve to be acknowledged by people (especially by the people that matters to you) instead of letting them make you think that you are worthless.

I believe that I learned an important lesson here. In the context of love and relationships, it is probably hard to change someone. Love and experience may be the things that shape who we are today (example: The experience of being taught by a teacher, the experience of failing, the experience when you feel inspired, etc). Thus, we should accept and love people for who they are. If there is a saying “accept them for who they are,” then I am starting to believe that it is kinda true. If someone really loves you and is willing to change for the better, then it is good news. But when it is not a happy ending, then there is not much that you can do but there is always a spark of hope that in another timeline, it will be a happy ending. At the end of the day, everyone has their own strengths and weaknesses right?

 

p.s. You might wanna check out John Gray’s Ted Talk “Mars brain, Venus brain..” (link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuM7ZS7nodk)  

Problem Solving: The Not-so-Random "Televator"

Source: RNIB

With 2 mandatory essays (Management and Indonesian Language and Culture (ILC)) to be submitted weekly, I don’t consider myself amounting the same effort for each essay. The essays for Management were supposed to consist of 2 pages, a summary on the first and an opinion on the second. However, ever since the lecturer rephrased somewhere in the 3^rd week that the 2-page essay is “Up to you (the content), as long as it’s no more than 2 page,” I decided not to invest too much time stressing out. 

First of all, I don’t like typing summaries (personal preference) and prefer to jot them down. Second, it's hard for me to express an “opinion” for something I just learned. Thus, this encouraged the idea of doing study cases for the sake of saving time and improving the content quality. Moreover, it made 2-page essays seem less of a tough job.

Since I haven’t written anything for the past 2 weeks due to mid-term exams, I can now capture a quick celebration before it morphs into a slight fear that the lecture materials learned in the past few months will permeate. In retrospect, I opted to open some folders that comprised the essays I wrote so far in this semester.  Among the weekly topics, week four was not meant to be a typical week as it embedded in our daily human experience: decision making.

Various sources show that the average adult make 35,000 decisions each day (yep, Google). In fact, the figures make sense when we compare it with other studies. For instance, Brian Wansink, the John S. Dyson Professor of Marketing and of Applied Economics at Cornell, observed that we tend to make more than 200 food-related decisions. Surprisingly, his respondents thought they only made 15 decisions when it was proven that they account to many more decisions, even when they’re unaware of it.

Decision making attributes to the success of individuals, companies, and even our society, especially when being faced with a situation or a problem. Who we are accumulates our decision making as well: The higher role/status a person holds, the higher degree of responsibility one takes, the more decision one makes. As an example, a businessman decides for his company’s behalf and his family, whereas his son tends to focus on himself. As a result, sometimes it’s more about the quality than just the quantity in order to take precise courses of actions. Thus, it is fair to associate decision making and problem solving.

In the first 2017 edition of Harvard Business Review magazine, there was a fascinating featured article regarding problem solving. Thomas Wedell, who is a consultant and a speaker, wrote about how effective a company is at problem solving. Based on the in-depth research conducted by him and his colleague, Paddy Miller, 85 percent of the surveyed C-suite executives admitted that their companies struggle with problem diagnosis, resulting in a significant higher cost.

Supporting the statement, they provided the case of “the slow elevator.” The issue centered on tenants and people who complain, resulting in an initial assumption of proposing a solution to “make the elevator faster.” With this approach, they can either install new lifts or upgrade the motors although it would be costly and time consuming. Moving on, when managers reframed the problem, they decided that it was not the elevator that needs fixing, it’s how they define the problem itself.

Many times when we fail to put everything in perspective, we find it hard to open to new options. Just like what happened with “the slow elevator,” the objective shifted as they broadened their understanding of the problem. Instead of insisting that the problem lies on the elevator, the new orientation was solving the problem of “waiting too long.” Feasible solutions were then brought to the table such as putting mirrors, hand sanitizers, without having to “make the elevator faster.”

Speaking of elevators, I still remember back in Jakarta, I couldn’t help noticing the televisions inside the elevator or above elevator buttons outside. Skepticism evoked me with WHY entertaining people who are waiting for an elevator matters. You can’t even watch a single Phineas and Ferb episode, such a waste to put TVs in/before an elevator. Having amplified that it’s actually a “cheaper” solution compared to installing new elevators, the what-so-called random phenomenon of “Televator” turned out to be purposeful after all.

As a reflection, reading this article provided me not only with new insights on the implementation of management, but most importantly the stories behind the (it-seems-random) events we encountered in our daily lives. I have come to a realization that misunderstanding and underestimating things shouldn’t be cultivated. To my joy, the article proved a profound point to never stop finding answers and solutions even when it seemed like the end of the tunnel. Just like in business, a lesson can always be ingrained and flourishing is always a possibility, despite the inherently competitive nature.

References:

Lang, Susan S. (2006, December 22). ‘Mindless autopilot’ drives people to dramatically underestimate how many daily food decisions they make, Cornell Study finds. Retrieved from http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2006/12/mindless-autopilot-drives-people-underestimate-food-decisions

Wedell, Thomas. (2017, January). How good is your company at problem solving. Harvard Business Review, 79

Study Plan Card (KRS): The Businessperson and the Economist

We don’t get to pick our boss. But hey, we’re aspiring economists and businesspeople.

Source: Chessdailynews

Yesterday was my first time experiencing the struggle of filling my study plan card (we call this Kartu Rencana Studi or the “KRS” system in Indonesia). Basically, there’s a three-day period every semester when everyone gets to fill their KRS through the internet. This enables us to pick our own courses, lecturers and manage our own schedule within the limited time. Not to mention, it adopts the quota system which emerges a fierce battle among people to enter the overcrowded server and make sure they secure a spot in the classes they fancy.

As a first-timer, I can say that it was quite nerve-wracking, challenging yet interesting. I learned a glimpse of art to get strategies and alternatives prepared: Play the cards well and be swift. In fact, people were aware of reviews, recommendations and tips in the hope of getting on track throughout the semester. Most people, myself included, took them into serious consideration and it effected most of my decisions when I filled the KRS.

I realize that this doesn’t resemble a real life situation, probably no firm out there provides a system that gives the subordinates access to pick their superiors, etc. Yes, you get to choose in which company you want to work but not the consequences that follow. You can probably imagine an unlikely situation that allows the employees to pick in which project/task they want to be involved. However, no one guarantees that you’re going to get a pleasant superior. In some cases, you’ll have to deal with a superior who grants unfair promotions, unfair job divisions or even a superior who’s just being unclear and ambiguous throughout the task.

Tracing back to the present situation, let’s say that the lecturer is the boss. One might think that “It’s different, we get paid in firms but in this case, we’re the ones who pay the tuition fee.” Unfortunately, I believe that my parents pay the tuition fee, not me. I’m just a student who’s eager to earn decent grades and settle in a dream job in the future.

This brings out the economist and businessperson in me. The system may not perfectly resemble the ultimate professional world. However, speaking from the rational side of humans, we don’t really take that into account. I mean, there’s plenty of time to learn that later. Meanwhile, we still need those grades and knowledge right?

(Before continuing, they’re just a few points that I believed I’ve learned, so don’t hesitate to correct me if I’m wrong hahaha)

From a business perspective, this system reminds me about values and motivation. In business, value creation is one of the primary keys: You want to increase your worth. The interesting part is that people have different values and in this case, we get to develop those values within ourselves. What do you value the most? Knowledge? Grades? Interactive learning? Insightful lectures? Gabut? (lol, it means doing literally nothing) But again the choices are on the table and the KRS system allows you to choose classes and lecturers that are in line with your values.

Another point is one of the basic traits of a businessperson: An opportunity seeker with determination and persistence. You are probably that persistent and determined in keeping your values that if they run out of quota for the classes you are about to choose, there’s still another opportunity to obtain them. In the KRS system, there are always possibilities for a barter market where people are willing to trade a class we want with a class they want (since there’s a limited quota for each class).

On another note, the economist in me unleashes another story to tell as well. Think about a few of Mankiw’s 10 principles of economics that can be applicable to this system. For instance, the first principle itself: “People face tradeoffs.” Some of the courses overlap with other courses we are required to take and overlapping might also occur among lecturers we want. This means that we should choose one of them and let the other go. Some are favorable tradeoffs and some are the ones we wish we hadn’t had to make.

Second is the opportunity cost of taking that class. The activities that could've been done with time sacrificed for attending those lectures and the lectures you gave up during the KRS period is a part of the opportunity cost. And last, I’m focusing on the straightforward principle that says “trade can make everyone better off.” Mentioned earlier, this correlates with the trading that might occur during the KRS period.

In conclusion, there’s more to this KRS experience and feel free to think or disagree. Nevertheless, there’s an economist and a businessperson in us and as a result, we have those traits. Now, I’m left with a handful of expectations that the choices I made will turn out okay. Likewise, I’m wishing yours is fine as well. All the best of luck and keep fighting!