I've got that kind of mind that can drift off while reading. By the time I had regained my focus, the article had descended into this:
"If you’re doing work in a less than star environment,
you owe less than star effort. Quid pro quo. By all
means, do yours to affect and change the environment.
Nudge it towards the stars. But also, accept the
limitations of your power. You can drag a horse to the
water, but you can’t make it drink.
So ration your will and determination. Invest what’s
left over, after meeting the bar of your work
environment, in your own projects, skills, and future.
The dividends is what’s going to lead you to the next,
better thing.
Everyone deserves to work at a place that inspires them
to give their very best. Don’t stop reaching until you
have that."
Thank goodness I was worried I was going to run out of platitudes today.
Once you earn the spot of a visionary with an audience, you have to continue to espouse ideas. Movements require that ideas be constantly re-framed to draw more and more people into the fold. Also, you must reinforce the same ideas for the existing audience.
If you're beyond the need to receive the "milk of the gospel" and are ready for the meat, then its probably time for you to be a producer and not merely a consumer. But, don't blame the minister for continuing to feed the babes.
Personally I was hoping for something a little more mathematical, since I was re-reading Melvin Conway's: How Committee's Invent yesterday and came to expect a heuristic for efficiency versus organizational style.
