Common traits for Hungary, Serbia, Hungary and Austria

A lot of nice things happening on the street:
a. People having coffee in cafes;
b. Lot of closed streets, dedicated to walking;
c. Rather large sideways;
d. Lots of benches;
e. Sitting on the grass was allowed;
f. Dogs were everywhere;
g. Stray dogs were close to nowhere (I’ve seen one in Serbia);

Lots of emphasis put on bicycles:
a. There were bicycle red lights;
b. I’ve seen passages dedicated to bicycles;
c. How about special places for parking bicycles?
d. A lot of roads had signs dedicated to bicycles;
e. Due to road taxes, parking, pollution taxes, having a car was rather expensive;
f. Finally, a lot of people had bicycles;
g. There were a lot of people on vehicles other than cars – bicycles, bikes, and other rather uncommon vehicles in Romania;

Little emphasis put on advertising:
a. A lot of advertising was done in dedicated places (something like a round cylinder with rotating ads, or an advertising bus, or a panel with advertising);
b. Most advertising was non-intrusive (it was at a rather reduced level);
c. Stores who advertised their products did this in a rather non-intrusive way (not too much advertising);
d. If there was a multinational company present in a country, the architecture of the store was still the one in the city, and not what you’d expect from a 21st century company (modern, glass, steel); So, if it was, let’s say, a McDonald’s, it would look like a typical building in that city/town, with just minor advertisements;

About the good old looks of some buildings
a. What struck me most in places like Subotica, Budapest, Vienna, was the fact that there were a lot of old buildings; You could go for minutes and minutes via foot and still find old buildings to shoot; I’ve seen places in Bucharest where there are some old buildings, or streets with old buildings; But to see (almost) full cities made of old buildings – well, that’s something!
b. To make an (unwelcoming) comparison, to me, the best looking old buildings in Subotica, Budapest, Vienna, looked better than the ones I’ve seen in Romania;
c. A restored building usually still had an air of an ancient construction;
d. From time to time (mostly in Vienna and in Budapest), I felt that I could be placed in any given spot in that city and still find something beautiful to shoot;
e. Some places had an interesting mix of old and new – and it almost never felt awkward;

About green spaces
a. There were lots of parks and trees, and green areas;
b. Most green areas were nicely taken care of;

About sidewalks
a. Most sidewalks had a pretty small height (unlike those I’ve seen in Romania);
b. Most sidewalks had special facilities to go on them by a wheel vehicle (wheelchairs, roller blades, strollers, bicycles, for example);

About exceptions
a. I’ve seen from time to time either stray dogs, or people living in the street, or graffiti; But, to me it was an exception which made the overall impression even better; If one piece of the whole isn’t as good as the others, then it’s fine;
b. Exceptions also helped me consider the cities as made by humans; From time to time I got the impression of seeing things built by something more than human;

Regarding beggars
a. I’ve seen quite a lot of street people in Budapest, Hungary; There were also some beggars in the rest of the cities I’ve been to; To me it’s quite a paradox: on one hand you see luxuriant living, nice buildings, beautiful people and on the other hand there are people who can barely survive; That’s also part of the capitalist world;
b. In Bratislava I’ve seen one box with indications to put food in that box, rather than throwing it at the garbage; It’s some sort of recycling;
c. The performing artists on Vienna’s street were very good at what they did;

Specific insights & pictures

2010.03.19 a. Romania – places photos – view full screen

2010.03.19 b. Hungary – places photos – view full screen

2010.03.19 – 2010.03.28 a. Serbia – places photos (by Jakub PILCH) – view full screen

2010.03.19 – 2010.03.28 b. Serbia – places photos (by Olivian BREDA) – view full screen

2010.03.19 – 2010.03.28 c. Serbia – places photos (by Agota JAKUS) – view full screen

2010.03.19 – 2010.03.28 d. Serbia – training photos (by Agota JAKUS) – view full screen

2010.03.19 – 2010.03.28 e. Serbia – training photos (by Justyna FRYDRYCH) – view full screen

2010.03.28 – 2010.03.29 Hungary – places photos – view full screen

2010.03.29 a. Austria – places photos – view full screen

2010.03.29 a. Austria – places videos

2010.03.29 b. Slovakia – places photos – view full screen

2010.03.29 b. Slovakia – places videos

2010.03.30 – 2010.03.31 Hungary – places photos – view full screen

2010.03.30 – 2010.03.31 Hungary – places videos

2010.03.31 – 2010.04.01 Romania – places photos – view full screen

What insights did I get by visiting these countries?

a. From time to time things got exciting; I felt a bit as the times when I came to Bucharest and living on my own; Pretty cool;
b. A change on my view about immigration (this decision was mostly made prior to the trip, but it was cleared in the trip; there is no relation between point b. and c. or d., they’re independent decisions);
c. Some thoughts on bullying; (I also had similar thoughts on gossiping – it’s just an act in one uses someone else’s actions to gain power)
d. Regarding my (little-to-none) aggreession.

I enjoyed the trip very much and had some good insights.

Here goes:
1. I’ve done Karate (Shotokan and Kyokushin kaikan styles), I now do some other sports, such as weight lifting and running, and I think I have a pretty good physical condition; Yet, I don’t consider that one should be just a bit of an aggressive with others; Me – I tend to think I have power, but I would prefer not to use it; I like to think of myself as powerful, but non-aggressive;
2. At Karate Shotokan, I had to do some fights (simulated, not real), and one aim of the exercises was to hit the opponent in such a way that the person could only feel a pinch; So you do a real hit, but at the end of the blow you stop just in time not to do real damage; I had problems coordinating my punches, and to solve this, I hit with real power, but not on target, but rather near the target; Thus, instead of hitting the body, I was hitting the air; The same algorithm can be applied to aggression – I find it difficult to control the “right” amount of aggression to use and thus, I avoid aggression altogether;
3. To me, although baptized when I was a little baby, the Orthodox life began mostly when I was about 15; Prior to being a practicing Orthodox, I tend to think of myself as having aggressive behavior; Therefore, I tend to associate aggression with non-Orthodox thinking;
4. I also like father’s Nicolae STEINHARDT thinking in “Happiness Diary“; He says something similar to this: he knows he contradicts 1 Corinthians 6:18-19:

¹⁸ Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. ¹⁹ Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;

(this quote says that fornication is the most compromising, and fully engages the human being). In spite of that, he considers the sin of being upset and angry is much worse; He then gives the example of a person who enters a store, a bus, a tram, an office or sits at a queue, is pissed off and yells, says bad words and steps away from typical behavior; That person, Nicolae STEINHARDT claims, totally breaks the connection with God; The argument is that these bad words are not simple things as being upset, but show a human spirit in total opposition with the world created by God; He then gives the quote from Saint Apostle James (James 3:2):

² We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check.

5. I tend to be aggressive in communication via ideas, not raising voice; So, I tend to say hard truths and sometime offensive opinions; To me, this is too close to being truth to yourself to change it;
6. “Feedback should be focus on the idea, not on the person” – one basic theory states; Opposite to this, aggression is, by its nature, an attack on the person, instead of the idea;
7. What’s the reply to aggression? How to react when being attacked? My favorite writer in this life, Horia-Roman PATAPIEVICI, was interviewed by “Adevarul” and had an algorithm similar to this: in order to disarm aggressiveness, you have to let it pass by you, as difficult as it may be; He also said that you can have a dialog with violence acts only you admit their validity;
8. To me, the aggression (be it verbal or physical) is a sort of stress; What’s the answer to stress? How about the fight-or-flight-or-freeze response? I like this reaction: “Many animals freeze or play dead when touched in the hope that the predator will lose interest.” (Wikipedia)
9. Thus, my reaction to aggression is simple: I do nothing, say nothing; You have to be very close to me to receive a reply on an aggressive note; Other than that, any kind of aggression (physical or verbal, made by yourself or a social group) gets one reply and one only: silence and ignore; Then I have to apply my favorite quote, from Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines movie:

Terminator: “Desire is irrelevant. I am a machine!“

After an aggression, I still have to be a good Christian; This passage (Matthew 5:43-48) applies:

⁴³ “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ ⁴⁴ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, ⁴⁵ that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. ⁴⁶ If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? ⁴⁷ And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? ⁴⁸ Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

10. Recently, I’ve had the occasion to see this pattern repeatedly – on one hand non-aggression is seen as a lack of maturity and to get more mature I need to do military service; First, for the non-aggression, seen as a lack of maturity – I think this is a misconception; What’s power? Is it being able to control yourself? Is it being able to do what you like and not do what you don’t like? Is it having physical power? Because I think I have most of these; Or is it, at some people consider, an ability to impose your point of view on others using manipulative tactics? To me, the latter affirmation is false;
11. Now for the part with “to get more mature, one needs to do military service”; What would military don’t do to me? It won’t bring me any more physical force, more structured thinking; What would the military do to me? Learn (in one way or another) how to handle a Code Red (a euphemism for a violent extrajudicial punishment in “A few good men“), how to blindly follow orders (this is so not like me) and finally how to deal with some imposing things onto others (via brute force); Army might also be associated with just a difficult time from which might get some insights; My answer to a Code Red is simple: if I think I’m right, I will do my best not to change my behavior; I don’t agree with following orders and rules just for the reason of following order and rules; I consider manipulation via brute force as a wrong thing; Finally, while the Cabirian model of solving a crisis (smile with optimism in life, no matter how harsh life is), I don’t consider that self-torture in any way can bring very good kind of insights; A crisis may be a good way of learning things, or it may just be a traumatic experience;

These were my thoughts on aggression.

What’s the meaning of word “popular”? Borrowed from the Latin popularis in 1490, originally meant common or “belonging to the people”. The use of the word popular to mean the “fact or condition of being beloved by the people” is seen originally 1601. (Wikipedia)

So you have two options:

• Acting strictly with rules (politeness code/ethics/morale);
• Being lax (to very lax) with rules (less politeness/ethics/morale);

My insight is that the first version leads to a bit of unpopularity / lack of leadership.

Leadership is also associated with taking initiative (a.) and with imposing – with just a tiny bit of aggression – one’s values. I personally have some problems with both of these.

These were my insights on leading on the recent training course.

1. At the “Enjoy the colours of my society” training course there were two defining things on laughter (for my jokes):

• One person is eating breakfast; He makes some complicated calculations on how to eat a sandwich; I tell him just this: “So you need complicated calculations to eat a sandwich?”; He gets an insight and he bursts into unstoppable laughter; Not long afterward, we’re at the training; 20 persons; I say, among others, that “I do Search Engine Optimization”; The person had a similar reaction to this; Everybody was silent (including I), no one was laughing, that person laughed; The person was even criticized (as a joke, but still) for the burst of laughter;
  My analysis – the initial laughter at breakfast created a small bond and kind of reaction (although I talk seriously, I can make a joke and it’s hard to resist not to laugh); Then at the training course, even if I was serious, and I made no joke, that person got an insight, and entered a pattern; The person couldn’t stop; This is just awesome: I say “I do Search Engine Optimization” and one can’t stop laughing; Good level for telling jokes;
• One other person laughed very silently most of the time (with others), and in a bit peculiar and loud way when I told some jokes / made some insights; Although it might have been a bit embarrassing to laugh loudly, that person still did it;

So, what’s the conclusion? I’m in the heaven of jokes: making people laugh even if there are some restrains that would typically prevent them (what would others think when they are laughing); To me, this is the one thing that can get me closer to a person; I became as close as one as I can get as a friend to the two persons above; The first person was the only person who came to me with a bottle of alcohol and I didn’t say no to (and it happened twice), while with the other one I talked (why do you interpret it as laughter?) a lot; Why the friendship with the two? Due to the laughing connection;

2. At the same training course, we had to say if some sentences were true or false; In my group, the third sentence was:
“Cultural diversity can be promoted without intercultural learning”
I was surprised that my answer, agreed by the whole group:
“Cultural diversity CAN be promoted w/o intercultural learning, BUT intercultural learning helps A LOT”
was funny;
Dissection of a joke:
a. The joke has the structure of Radio Yerevan jokes;
b. It’s a bit of a surprise, considering that most other answers were typically yes or no;
c. I made other types of jokes, so perhaps it was just a reinforcement of previous jokes;
Anyhow, I don’t know what of the previous reasons made people laugh and this joke be included in the list of memorable stories in the last day; Thus, I can’t readily repeat the pattern;

3. If you think humor is surprising, let’s talk about serious stuff; We were asked why would Brazilians (just an example) be allowed to participate in European Union programs? And I answered, as a joke, that they had an European soul, which proved to be right (although with different phrasing); Quite surprising;

4. To me joking about anything proves that a rule exists; So, if I joke about Snow White, this means that Snow White is something that should generally be taken seriously – Exception that proves the rule; You can apply the same logic to any other entity – countries, nations, genders, religions, political views, habits, etc.; If I joke about it, it means that on a primary level I think it’s something to be taken seriously;

5. There’s an expression I like: “I don’t discriminate, I hate everyone equally“; To me, joking about everything is a good way of non-discrimination; As a matter of fact, I tend to joke more about things I like best (see below);

6. Humor about God; I like this quote from Ellen DeGENERES a lot:

In the beginning there was nothing. God said, ‘Let there be light!’ And there was light. There was still nothing, but you could see it a whole lot better.

Actually, this is my favorite quote ever; It is an insight, nothing attacking or discriminating about it (so I think); Yet other jokes about Jesus, God, and other celestial creatures are funny to me; To put it plainly, a joke about God is more likely to be funny to me than a typical one; The Orthodox church is not really at ease with this kind of jokes; To me, talking in funny ways about the things you love most, you want most in this life and work most to get is just a way of disconnecting; It’s helpful to me to have an opposite opinion, feeling and thinking to the typical one; I like to read critical thinking writings, I enjoy atheist writings, I want to counterbalance the one view of Orthodox church with something else; If this is humor, then so be it; I agree, telling a joke which starts with Jesus on the cross can be highly offensive to others, so I must be careful when telling it; But other than that, religion jokes are fine with me.

So this message ends like this: Do you know what Pavlov did when his dog died? He kept on feeding him.

I’ll start with the following example: We have a chess match between A (a grandmaster) and B (a weaker player, but still a professional player). At some point there is this sequence of moves:
- A does a rather poor move, but a very creative and atypical on (everyone’s surprised);
- B doesn’t speculate the wrong move, and moves even poorer (but in a straightforward way; he doesn’t get creative);
- A goes on to win the match, even if he moved poorly at one time.
Now chess commentators come and see the sequence of moves. “Oh, what a great move by A player! So intriguingly well played. I didn’t see that coming. Such a lovely idea! Beautiful execution. I love it”. No commentator would dare to say “Even though we must admit that A won the match, he done a poor move at that moment. B should have speculated the mistake, because this is what the move was: a mistake.” So, I’d say that one chess player can win a game, and all his surprising moves (even though some might be actually wrong), will be glorified. Whoops, not-so-great thinking.

Now let’s go to another sport: football. Let’s have these situations:
- Player A is an forward; He scores 3 goals (he does a hat-trick);
- Player B makes 6 great passes to A, another 5 passes to other players, which directly result in 5 goals (his passes are transformed into goals);
- Player C is the goal keeper and catches 3 close-to-being a goal.

Now it’s the end of the match. Commentators praise A for scoring, C for keeping others from scoring, while B gets just a grade – 9 out of 10 (good grade, but still he gets no comments, no appraisal). Everyone else in the team gets one grade, B is one out of many. But no commentator would say “Hmmm, that was a good sequence of passes from B.”

Why is that? (now we’re getting somewhere) The goals given by the forward can be evaluated. The goals received (or not) by the goal-keeper can, with a small margin of error, still be evaluated. But the pass itself is mostly evaluated by the outcome. If I put a good pass, and no goal follows, then – “Hmmm, not that good play for B”. If I put a good pass, and a goal follows, then the result is “Hmmm, that was a good pass, but have you seen the goal of A? A was extraordinary!” You can’t easily say – “It was a good pass, no matter what the outcome was. Great passing by itself!”

What can you take home?
a. People in general (not only critics) tend to evaluate based on end result; While seeing a patient die shouldn’t make a surgical operation successful, you should take into account that the operation itself can be independent from the end-result (you can have a great surgical procedure, even if the end result is not great);
b. Sometimes, the most glamorous character in an event is not the star in the spotlight, it may well be a rather obscure character;
c. If football is a game played in teams, football evaluation usually takes place in the easy-to-spot results of individuals (goals given by the forwards or balls caught by the goal-keeper);
d. Most results are from a play of team, not the final executor.

I hope I did provide you with some insights too.

I’ll mention below the workshops I took part to each day and what insights did I have at each and every one of them.

Day 1 – October 7:

Master in leadership (Rares MANOLESCU – Human Invest)

Be a player: pro-active, agile, and persuasive! (Vasile PAUN – Intell Competitiv)
- avoid playing the game of life in order to avoid losing it; play it to win it!

How do we implement an efficient leadership program: from analysis to solutions (Diana ROSETKA – Achieve Global, Anamaria FORNADE – Orange)

The motivating leader (Marius BALASOIU – For People)
- learning is like fire; to exist, it needs:
a. A spark (training itself);
b. Oxygen (organizational environment);
c. fuel (the boss);
If one of the above isn’t there, the fire does not exist;
- do you know how to drive at a drivers’ license examination? You won’t know things after a training either;
- Physics law: a participant to a training pushed by a HR manager is fighting back against the training with an equal force;
- three types of participants at trainings (Romanian acronym T.V.R.: T – tocilar / nerd; V – visator / dreamer; R – recalcitrant / recalcitrant):
a. The nerd – the say things; very active;
b. The dreamer – they get lost in their minds; they are the biggest challenge to a trainer;
c. The recalcitrant – they are angry; they have been pushed too much to participate to the training; they want the trainer’s blood;
- you shouldn’t train people; you shouldn’t make people laugh; you should make people go: Aha! (they should discover things at trainings);

Case study: Training and Coaching in Performance Management (Raluca MOHANU – Wrigley Romania, Mihai POPA-RADU – Seeds4success)
- the role of the performance management? to stimulate and help employees in attaining their own objectives and those of the organization while smiling;

Expanding Innovation & Creativity (Sid JACOBSON, South Central Institute of Neuro Linguistic Programming, SUA)
- stories give creativity (to the speaker and to the audience);
- at 12 years old, people are very creative;
- small children filter very few of the things they say;
- there is little to none of an information transfer without a transfer of the state of minds;
- Walt DISNEY made his employees go into these three specific states:
a. Creative; Encouraged ideas; Everything was Ok to say; Great ideas in here;
b. Critical; Nothing is good; People had issues for saying such things; Everything is bad; A lot of cutting of ideas;
c. Realistic; Combining a. and b., people should select the top ideas from a., that weren’t that badly criticized on b.; And they would act on those ideas;
Those are also the three steps into creativity;
- Albert EINSTEIN: “The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.”

Day 2- October 8:

HRM Strategic Fit (Decebal Leonard MARIN – Corporate Dynamics)

New innovative ways for learning (Catrinel POSTEMA – Interact)
- there are four ways to learn things:
a. Instruction / Training;
b. E-learning;
c. Blended learning (a mix of a. and b.);
d. Coaching;

I accept any feedback I receive during a training program! But I only agree to some! (Romeo CRETU – HRD)

Emotional intelligence in human resources management (Sabina IRIMIE – Caro Trainer)

Smart Emotions^® personal development trough emotional intelligence (Daniel BICHIS – Competent Consulting)

Day 3 – October 9:

How much do leadership abilities matter in the process of performance management? (Viorel PANAITE – Human Invest)

Business NLP – beyond persuasion and manipulation (Daniel BICHIS – Competent Consulting)
- the potential within ourselves manifests in what we are, do and have;
- the emotions should be an integral part of our cognition, not subordinated to them;
- anatomically, the brain has three parts: rational, emotional, and instinctual;
- there are four basic emotions: fury, fear, sadness, happiness;
- we are built do have negative states to stay out of, rather than have positive states to which to be attracted;

Solution-focused leadership (Petra MUELLER-DEMARY – MDI)
- focus on different things: small steps, desired outcome, solution, resources; but not at all time;

Effective training using classical psychodrama techniques? How? (Irina STEFANESCU – Flux Training)
- life instructions:
a. Have fun;
b. Do not hurt people;
c. Do not humiliate people;
d. Strive to learn;
- any experience is beneficial to learning;
- rules for role-playing:
a. Specific context;
b. Clear and well understood objectives;
c. Clear and well understood instructions;
d. Specific, relevant, realistic, immediate feed-back;

Workshop (Bruno MEDICINA)

_________
Bottom line: I’ve learned quite a few things at the training event.

Some pictures at the event:

What insights did this event brought me?
1. God defines Himself: “I am who I am”; You can learn something out of this and say a similar thing: “I behave in the way in which I choose to behave”;
2. Life deserves to be lived;
3. A way in which to discover things about meanings of life:
a. Ask yourself “What would be the greatest choice right now?”
b. Ask “Do I follow my own path in life?”
c. Pose yourself this question: “Do I know what helps me?” (in this area there are multiple answers on three levels – to exist, to do, to have);
d. Ask “Do I recognize the signs of my path?”;
4. Out of any thing that goes into your life you can learn something, and that thing brings up new opportunities;
5. There are four levels in which you can perceive the world:
a. You; (blame others)
b. I; (it’s all me)
c. We; (it’s all us)
d. ”I am who I am” (spiritual level);
The farther away from “You”, the better;
6. Meditation on your workplace? Think about it!

What did you learn out of this?

This blog post’s content:
1. Why am I biased in this evaluation?
2. What’s the personal history of knowing him?
3. What have I already written about him on this blog?
4. What impressed me most about him?
5. How can you see him?
6. What’s next?

Note: I have doubts if the title of this message wouldn’t be better as “Eric KISH – a paradox of thought in hard truth vs. creative doubt”, but I’ll keep it more professional.

Executive summary: If Bruno MEDICINA is all about saying things which create my own thoughts and, following that, I get insights (from my thinking), Eric KISH has a different training-via-coaching method. He says something and that very thing he says create an insight, not my own thoughts. So, he’s speaking method involves creating insights via his words. At least this is what happens to me. How is this done? Find out below.

Regarding the length of this message: this should quite easily be the biggest message I’ve written on a person on this blog. Why is that? Because most of the evaluation is based on the facts that he says. It’s not really how Eric KISH speaks, it’s not really on what emotions he brings me, it’s mostly on:
a. the facts that he says;
b. the way he chooses to say those facts;
c. the way I think about those facts.
Sure, there are emotions, it’s more than a boring presentation, but all-in-all the things he says and the method of speaking is most important. I give you bellow my thoughts on that. I can’t do any cut-offs, it’s better I keep things fully open. You will know exactly why I like his speeches. All the ideas are in there.

First of all, who is Eric KISH? See his LinkedIn profile, and a page on him on Business Summer School web site. If you’re Romanian, you may Google his name.

1. Why am I biased in this evaluation?
First of all, I probably have relatives for which I am not as biased in an analysis as I am with Eric KISH. Why is that?
A. I’ve worked in a project which was ultimately led by him in 2001 for two weeks (I worked at Rompetrol Refining, Navodari – I’ll call it Petromidia from now on, this is how it’s known in the area);
B. Eric KISH ran for quite a while an enterprise which is a major for which Navodari is today a town, rather than a village; By 1930s Navodari was still a village; After Petromidia was brought to life, in 1975, the population of Navodari rose to 26,000 inhabitants (today there are more than 32,000); How am I connected to Petromidia? If I randomly analyze four houses in Navodari with people I know, at least one inhabitant of that house works for Petromidia or for a company directly employed by Petromidia; I lived for about 16 years in a block of flats built for Petromidia workers (my family was the first to live in that flat); Quite a few of my secondary school and high-school (Lazar Edeleanu high-school, the only high-school in Navodari) colleagues work directly or indirectly for Petromidia; The high-school I graduated has a profile dedicated to creating employees at an chemical industrial company (I let you solve the puzzle – which one?); Petromidia is not an abstract thought, somewhere in the ideas circle; Petromidia is the toys brought to school be my colleagues and me after a Christmas offering by the company; It’s the company that made me and my colleagues go “Wow!” when we found out that they are paying in the equivalent of United States dollars, so there are low problems with the inflation; It’s the company that does advertisements on TV in which I see people that when I was in kindergarten came to my house and brought me chocolate (and now they’re on TV);
C. Finally, I might work for Eric KISH in the future in a project; (this was decided after I publicly took the decision to write this blog post, not prior to this decision; also, I think that the following approximate logic, first heard on Isaac Asimov – I think -, applies: “If I don’t write this blog post, I win or lose nothing; If I do write this blog post, I don’t win anything, but I might lose the current relation”; so, to me, writing this it’s a risk with no perceived value)

How can I solve these biased issues? I’ll try to present more facts and the way in which I respond to those facts, rather than jump to conclusions. In this way, you can better evaluate for yourself. Hence, the lengthiness of the message.

2. What’s the personal history of knowing him?
In the spring of 2001 I was in the final year of high-school. In Romania we have a final graduation examination, and another examination at University-level if you wish to enter a good faculty. So I had two big exams in my life for that summer, the time was scarce.

And we are announced sometime that we are invited to go to Petromidia for a company presentation. The details were little-to-none, me and my colleagues didn’t know what to expect. It was in the final period of the school year, most of the colleagues were concerned on what to do next in life.

I can remember a large room, nice architecture and lights, good chairs and, surprise!, lots of speakers at a long desk. There was Eric KISH, CEO of Petromidia, there was the principal of the high-school, there was the director of human resources of Rompetrol (I think that was the position she held), there were teachers from Ovidius University and Lazar Edeleanu, there was a school inspector for physics in Constanta county and possibly other persons. Most of them held a speech.

What I remember from Eric KISH’s speech? He said things like (I hope you can forgive my forget-after-8-years’-time memory situation):
A. We will offer you a decent work place, with legal contracts (this is quite rarely met in a lot of jobs in Romania, even nowadays, and a lot jobs are only half-legal); That didn’t leave a mark on me; What was I to know about the workplace back then? Looking backwards, it was quite a tempting idea; Perhaps insisting on what the reality is, with some statistics on how other companies do this, would have helped solved the mystery;
B. We will create an IT laboratory at the local high-school; (We were graduating; Why would we care about that? But for the we’re-such-a-great-company image it was a good thing)
C. We will give you scholarships for your studies, if you decide to come back and work for Petromidia after graduation; (this really spotted my attention back then; Right now I think there’s no such thing as a free lunch, and I would politely refuse the offer)
D. You can work for us even if you go to University; (the condition was not to have full-time studies, which was very bad for me)
E. (at the end of the session) You have to go online and apply for a job at us (creating a CV and applying to a job); (Besides checking the IT abilities and will power of the candidates, I think this was an uninspired idea, but I was amazed to see just how many people actually did this)
F. Eric KISH said the very first thing he did when he came to Navodari (after managing some oil business) was going to the high-school and contacting the principal; He wanted to get a confirmation from the principal, which he did;
G. He also said that at some point he wants to teach at a University.

At some point, after the speech, he said he wants to see who out of the audience has courage. He provoked us to speak. And while my cheeks turned red and I started thinking of the-perfect-question-to-put-in-such-occasion, others spoke with him. Microphones were flying, people were laughing, I was all red, thinking what I can say.

How did other people react to what Eric KISH said as reply to such things?
A. I remember a thing the physics inspector for Constanta county said: Petromidia tries to be like the Western companies, that employ good policies for the community; (he was referring to CSR practices) I was amazed – this is a typical situation in the West?
B. The Ovidius University teacher invited Eric KISH to come not only to the high-school, but to the University also; (at this point Eric KISH laughed)
C. When one girl said she wants to candidate for a Marine life, Eric KISH said a thing similar to “A girl wants to join the Marines. I think she deserves applause”; And the whole room, including I, applauded her; I didn’t even notice that thing, not to mention consider it applause was called-for; I was intrigued;
D. At some time he said (I think) something about sports; He asked “What age would you think I am?”; There were three replies, all of which were lower than his actual age, revealed by him; There was some rumor in the room; Quite a living audience in Navodari;
E. One girl asked him “How much to you earn?” At this point Eric KISH laughed and said that his salary is proportionate with his responsibilities (I think this is pretty much the very first PR answered I’ve heard and remembered in my life; so corporate, so telling-me-nothing-and-avoiding-the-answer-in-a-not-so-upsetting-way); But more interesting than Eric KISH’s reaction was the reaction of an important person in the high-school; That person looked down, tilted its head, and clapped its hand on the forehead; (“Is this girl representing our high-school?”) Quite amusing, I must say.

How did I felt about Eric KISH’s presentation techniques? Much later, Bruno MEDICINA asked the persons in a room – “Who has the most guts/indolence/lack of sensitivity out of you?”. And he would give great assignments to those persons. I think that was the emotion that came to me most at the beginning about Eric KISH – I saw a person that just said tough things. (which was quite annoying and provoking to me; and I really didn’t like it all that much, but it was very intriguing)

Also, I was very impressed by the fact that Eric KISH managed to invite so many important people at the same desk. When, that very year, at the inauguration speech at my Faculty, there was a similar desk with lots of people, I found out that this was a method rather than an one-time-idea. I loved the procedure, it really struck me – “If you wish to impress a group of people, put in them a number of persons with good functions”.

What happened right after that presentation? I found out from a colleague that Eric KISH is the “Executive director” of Petromidia. “He’s what?” “Executive director” “What does this mean?” (he laughs) “He can fire you anytime” “That young guy is the chief of Petromidia?” “Yep”. I left confused.

I also had lots of hopes following the presentation of that day.

So I put my CV online at an Internet cafe, and find out with surprise at the end that I have apply to the job after I put my CV online. I warn my colleagues at the high-school about that, most of them listen.

I take my final graduation exam at school, I apply for three universities in three different regions of Romania (and the same faculty at all three), and luck shines on me. I pick Bucharest, and my future is then set.

I come back from Bucharest and find out, via email (most colleagues also got a phone call), that I’ve been selected to the “Our home is like a flower” program (I won’t comment anything on the name, which is quite hard for me; just think of “home” as an “industrial complex with specific smells, specific colors and specific looks”; now associate this with a “flower”; to the defense of this name, I do get lots of insights when thinking about it).

Now, imagine high-school time as the time in which I belonged to the most important community in my life. Sure, the later years in some hostels in Bucharest, sharing a room with three people for an year (you only had two options with the colleagues: love or hate), were nice also. Sure, the secondary school years were lovely themselves. Sure, I’ve had some great time in the very first years of life, somewhere in Bacau county, at an aunt. But high-school was the best period of my life, concerning social interactions.

This high-school period ended in two different times: after the last exam we had as whole class at the final examination (Informatics), we were all walking by a road. The whole class. I remember that road pretty well, it lead me apart from high-school and it’s quite painful (I had yet another examination to complete that exam). Then there is a moment when about half of our class was gathered in front of the high-school, waiting for the Rompetrol bus to get us to work (after the Universities exams period ended). There was a list of admitted students, some pupils tried to get in but after filling out their CVs online they didn’t apply to jobs, so they were not accepted in the bus. And while the bus left, some memories of mine remained there with a few colleagues of mine, as the last memory of high-school time. At Rompetrol I had a few colleagues, we laughed and enjoyed ourselves, but it was different. We were on groups, we actually worked for a change, we were just a few. We even went to the beach at the end, but it was just not the same. Not in my mind, at least. High-school time was already over.

Now we got to Petromidia. There were just a few people speaking at a desk (not-as-advertised-at-the-presentation), the speech was short and we were not provoked. I also noticed a reply by Eric KISH to a question. “What’s the salary? It’s the minimum wage per economy, as said.” I can’t remember why I was so upset by this reply. Oh yes, it might have been because I didn’t remembered the sentence having been said before (“as said”).

So, from now on we did another thing for a change: we started working.

The time passed. I would have loved a questionnaire at the end of the project to be able to associate the project with something, based on emotions, and see how many of the participants would pick a “Lovely flower” as a common association, but I had no such opportunity. We learned some things on project management (theoretical aspects), we had a good meal each day, and I personally even managed to to keep about 10 percent out of the salary given, as it was deduced by a fine I paid two years later for not submitting my revenues information to some Fiscal authority in Navodari.

At the end of this work time, there was another meet with Eric KISH. He gave T-shirts to all of us (quite a good model, although branded it felt good) and a diploma, and he has personally shaken hands with all of us. He even put a T-shirt over his costume which left me with a very weird feeling. (“Eeew!”) Looking backwards, it was not all that bad.

But before we get to good-bye time, there was another event. Eric KISH said something about some scholarships by Rompetrol given to students to return later to work for them. I had this situation prior to speaking:
a. At a previous meeting, I didn’t spoke and felt bad about this;
b. When announcing the minimum salary, I felt I poorly understood the situation;
c. At that very moment I had a very good question to pose, a real question, and an opportunity to speak;
d. I was sitting very far away from the desk, with no colleagues closer to me than 15 meters.

So at this point he asks for questions, no question is posed (I think it was this way). Anyhow, right now I basically yell at Eric KISH, and due to the emotions, I sound an angry voice. “What’s the salary you’ll pay us when we return from studies?” I think this is a situation. Now comes the psychological solution of freeze-fight-flight. Which to pick? I’ll just say that he mirrored me (of course, for me to hear better) and says “I haven’t heard that question before. If I say to you that I’ll pay you after all those years the current minimum wage per economy, would you accept?” (in Romania at that time both inflation and salary increases made a current salary look small after a few years) I could have given solutions like evaluating in dollars, but just mentioning minimum wage salary cleared my questions. And I was like dead nervous.

So the Rompetrol experience ended there, me and a few colleagues went to the beach that day. I told a friend that I’m thinking about that “I haven’t heard that question before” thing and I wonder if I did wrong. The friend says that it was a justified question, so I calm a little.

To see what effect made this affirmation on me, I’ll present you two situations:
a. Third year of studies – during one exam; The teacher calls the list of present students; He gets to my group of 20 people (in the room there were about 1-200 people; all seminar hours were done with my group of about 20 persons); He calls one name, another, almost the whole class; There was basically one large group with all the students in my group and another “island” with two persons; He finally gets to me; I was in the back of the room, no other of my group mates was any closer than 20 meters, in a corner; I yell at the teacher “[I'm] Present!”; Like a Romanian writer (Ion-Luca CARAGIALE) used to say: rumor in the room;
b. The end of second year of studies, last real class (the last one was mostly for fun); A teacher finally says to me, after two years of waiting for this moment: “You should do like everyone else does!”; (regarding my staying all alone, putting not-so-pleasant questions, doing things like I want, and not one time caring about “I haven’t heard that before”).

So, I’d say I really did change my behavior after meeting with Eric KISH. Now I place myself farther away and act more annoyingly different.

And I must add that while most speakers would say “That is a very good question”, Eric KISH’s solution of “I haven’t heard that question before” is a quite welcomed differentiator.

So this is how my Rompetrol experience ended. And while I entered life, in that autumn of 2001, with high hopes in my skills and with good feelings about my emotions, the Bucharest life would soon change this. So much that four years later, in the summer of 2005, after graduation, I was entering life yet again with lesser hopes in my skills (good in Navodari, not-that-great in a competition environment), with crushed emotions (Bucharest and all), but with a brand new hope: neither the skills nor the emotions are that important, but the willingness to continue to fight is. What’s that? The basic thing that in a no-need-to-be-improving situation, I still need to improve. It’s that simple.

During the first year of studies, I found out about a colleague in the hostel who has seen him as a presentation of an volunteering organization in the Academy of Economic Studies – Volunteers for Ideas and Projects. He was impressed by what Eric KISH said about doing great stuff about Petromidia. Now the flower thing pops up in my head and I argue with him, but I didn’t convince him.

I think it was sometime in the winter of 2002. I was sitting in a hostel from my University (the area where I lived is known in Romanian as “Agronomie” – Agronomy – due to the closeness to the main office and University campus of University of Agronomical Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Bucharest). In a certain week, sometime in the week-end (Saturday or Sunday, perhaps even in the time-frame designated to learning by the University and used for a lot of other activities by the students, see below), there was an event with Eric KISH. I called upon my room-mates at the hostel to come with me, they refuse me. (and follow their financial career, instead of wasting time like me) So I go all alone, in a not-that-busy town (Bucharest can be quite Ok with low traffic of morning week-end) to the Academy of Economic Studies – Aula Magna. I place myself in the first or second row of seats of a room filled with people and watch the show. What really amazed me (besides the fact that no one was learning in this school) was the fact the room was full of people. And I don’t speak about a small seminar classroom. No. It was a very large room. I was surprised that so many people came. He was the only speaker on the list.

What did Eric KISH say in there? I mostly forgot, but I do remember some things (approximate understanding):
A. (being invited by AIESEC organization to this event; they put all the work in making that room filled with people) “You know, doing volunteering work for an organization such as AIESEC doesn’t really impress me as an employer. I’d much rather see a McDonald’s employee coming to my office”; He went on to tell us just how much McDonald’s invests in trainings and that an employee must smile no matter how its feelings are in that moment; (he actually spoke some unpleasant words in here, for which he apologized) My reaction to this? (and other times he says he can predict what changes people – a certain action) Well, putting it simple you can’t predict anything; I can surely make a person to sing for money, work in foreign countries, serve the military, do karate, be a workaholic, love challenges, and be nowhere near Eric KISH is; The fact is that:
a. Besides behavior, there are things like environment and genetics; (some people may live a different life in the Israeli army right now due to changes in the environment; and some people won’t have a voice to sing, a body to do karate, or they can need more sleep to perform well – genetics plays a huge role)
b. If I can make an association to what Eric KISH says, it’s like that: “If I learn Greek well enough to read Plato’s Dialogues in Classical Greek, and the book puts its mark on me, then Plato’s Dialogues are the one book to be read by everybody to live my life”; But Classical Greek can be understood well only if I read other literary works, not only blunt Grammar; If I read works on arts in Classical Greek to learn the language, I’ll interpret the book differently than if I read works on philosophy in my learn-the-language period; If I read religious texts, I will understand things differently than if I read historical texts of that time; It’s not only Plato’s Dialogues that form me, it’s my whole experience that surrounds it; And while I can say that Plato’s Dialogues are a great thing to read, life is much more than that; Coming back to the example, there are many other forming things in a career than a job at Mc Donald’s; It’s just not that one event, is the never-repeating mix of events;
c. I also believe that while there are sure paths to failure, there is no sure path to success;
Anyhow, saying to AIESEC in their face that they are not such a thing to be joined took some courage; It’s also a paradox that he accepted their invitation, while Rompetrol sponsored them; I can assume that the paradox is only on the surface – He can say that a sea is green (it really is; and it sounds cool), he can say that the sea is blue (it is; lovely thing to say), but he would much rather say that the sea is not green and blue at the same time (it sounds so boring); So, to me Eric KISH’s paradoxes are expressed in such a way that do a little thing called “Shock you!”, while they not fully express what he means; It’s definitely not a lie, just an incomplete truth; You can associate this with the answer to “What are you doing”: “I’m doing great!”; Surely, you may be doing some things which are not that great (and Eric KISH’s might actually go into those answers, to shock you), but the answer itself is not a lie; It’s a just a way of partially saying the truth; It’s also one of the reasons why I left the PR career;
B. I think it was at this event that I’ve heard him saying that he used to sing in the faculty for some events;
C. (related to point B.) He said that going to school was a big waste of time, we are much better skipping classes; (I remind you that he was speaking in the most important room of the Academy of Economic Studies) Also: “Teachers are failed persons who can’t get a decent job elsewhere”; You can’t but wonder why at Navodari he invited so many teachers near him, while he also said that he wanted to teach at a University; I would say that he feels that his sentence is true, and in the same time there is another factor which holds the paradox together; He just chooses to tell you one side of the paradox;
D. At some point some one in the audience asks him how useful was the MBA for him; He does a zero with his fingers; He gave some examples that he already knew some of the stuff thought in there; Now, returning to the “zero” argument; You have to option into judging Eric KISH in here: one doubting his intelligence (he could have left the MBA anytime), and one feeling there is another balancing reason for taking a long-term enterprise; So, the full answer would be “Even if I consider the MBA time not that useful, I chose to stay for that long time and study it full-time because …”; He just gave us the short version; Mark it with a live metaphor and you get a great response from the audience and big points for the PR industry;
E. He told us that the moment in which Rompetrol went to the Bucharest Stock Exchange, the informatics system of the institution crashed due to the huge number of transactions in that day; “We crushed the Stock Exchange”; Quite a hard-to-forget sentence, won’t you say?
F. Eric KISH spoke also about making informatics a big part of Petromidia’s life, with real examples; (examples with what I’ve read about him mix in my head, so I’m not sure what he said in there)
G. (tough subject) One person in the room asked him for a change in his life regarding values; Eric KISH said it’s not his task to change the world, but that of the future generation – the persons present in the room; He said he’s too old for that.

Time passes yet again. I get to find out about some projects of Rompetrol to offer scholarships for students, for some projects to hire fresh graduates from Universities, the commercials on TV for Rompetrol were quite lovely. (see a IQads page in Romanian on that – scroll down)

By that time, I was from time to time asked in an organization I was part of – LEADERS Romania – what speakers I would invite to the conferences? It’s hard for me to remember a time in which I haven’t recommended Eric KISH. But my colleagues were smarter than that, and it would take years before Eric KISH was invited by LEADERS to speak at their events. I wonder what he has to say about the organizers of these events.

Here comes the spring of 2006. It was a time between jobs. I was so stressed by that fact, that I went to every conference I could, from time to time being out from dusk untill dawn. In this period of time I take part to a three-days event at Sutu Palace in Bucharest: Expedition in Human Resources.

If you wonder how could I, a masters’ student, join a conference in which there was a registration form for only for students interested in HR, well let’s just say I have nothing to declare on that. But I was strangely silent those days. I was sitting in the first rows.

I’m looking at the list of speakers, and Eric KISH is marked as a special guest. What did he said? At this point I’m pretty sure I was writing everything down, so somewhere in my home there is a paper with this. But I do think it’s more relevant to say about the things that really left a mark on me and I remember them by memory:
A. Eric KISH gets to speak right after a representative of another multinational company; At the very beginning of the presentation (which was more like a workshop, the audience was involved a lot), Eric KISH picks on the company before him; He knew some cool stuff (only from the spectators’ point of view) about their leader (he forced some good transaction for its company and bad for the providers due to the size of its company; he fired a lot of persons); At some point, he said a memorable fact (approximate quotation): “They always tell you you could be CEO. You’ll never get to the CEO position”; (which is quite funny, considering his own positions; I think you know it by now – add this to his quote “but I do have mention that” and things get clearer) Anyhow, this is right about the very first time I ever heard someone picking so hard on the previous speaker; Funny thing to imagine: “Who’s next on the discussion list? Oh, no! It’s Eric KISH. He’ll pick on us. Nooo!”;
B. Somewhere at the beginning he defined his presence in the room: “I’m here to provoke you”; And provke us he did;
C. He started doing this right with the title of the conference – “How do you define success?” he asked; People spoke mostly about career, and he put emphasis on the personal part; By this time, it should make no surprise to you that a person who declares that works a lot, goes from a country to another following a career path, considers personal life so important;
D. The “Why?” thing: He said at some point that in a factory there were a lot of problems solved by the fact that a manager kept asking “Why?” and they got to a very nice observation and helped solve a problem (or I might have read this in a paper and now I wrongly associate it with this event); Anyhow, he started picking on a poor student (the student enjoyed this, I think), continuously asking him “Why?”; At some point the student was blocked, but it was funny to see it; A psychologist might tell him that “Why?” question has some bad interrogatory-like associations with it, and it can be rephrased with things like “What’s the reason …”; (or you can also use “Why?” it even more thoroughly, if provoking was the intention)
E. (regarding D.) He said that this is why he has a problem with God – God doesn’t answer the “Why?” question; I think that besides Horia-Roman PATAPIEVICI and Nicolae STEINHARDT, both self-declared Orthodox persons, I won’t comment on any religious views of persons I talk about in this blog; So, let’s us the declare-in-public opportunity and give a reply; There are two options for reply – defensive reply or provocative; Let’s try both – How can one Christian (such as I) reply to the “Why?” question:
Defensive reply:
a. If by “Why?” question one intends the very means through which one gets to God (“Why is it that God …”, “Why do priests …”, “Why do churches …”, “Why do believers …” – a lot of people stop on these), I can give comforting news: means don’t really matter all that much; You are told not to do this and that; You are told not to do this and that; (this is where means get involved, a lot of people stop here) But you are also told that you can be forgiven for all those things in the very moment you wish to stop doing them and confess past things; You are also told to be perfect, and in the same time reminded that only God is truly good; (so it’s somehow not expected from you to be perfect, even if you should strive to be so) You are also not given a scale; (I do this good deed X – this values like Y sin; they compensate; we’re even now; No! You don’t know the scale; You can’t tell how much value does a good deed bring and how much bad value does a sin bring; Not having a scale means that you can’t tell if you really did all that good on Earth or you did bad; You don’t have the scale to judge it) Through all that, I think there is enough evidence for this: There are a lot of ways to get to God, it might be simpler than thought, and not one person on this Earth can thoroughly evaluate another person – “This one will get to heaven, this one will get to hell”; The uncertainty solves, at least to me, the means: you can save your soul in different ways, unexpected perhaps; The thief on his right of Jesus, on the very basic level, only said two things right before dying.
He is thought to be the first one to enter the Heaven, in front of all those patriarchs of the Old Testament; The “Why?” question regarding means is really not that much of a deal; Regarding my own observation on this level: I have yet to meet a priest (doing everything he can regarding the thought-to-be-good means) about whom to write on this blog; Perhaps I evaluate on different ways than expected; This doesn’t stop me to consider that I am an orthodox;
b. If “Why?” question refers to the very question of God: I will solve this with the help of a paradox; You have two options:
i. Don’t believe in God, try the empirical method – “I believe in what I see, feel, touch, hear”;
ii. Believe in a God who has, among others, the purpose of letting me free to decide – “I believe in something that is present in my untouchable soul. He deliberately chose to keep Himself hidden.”
I can’t answer the paradox, I can’t tell you why i. is to be preferred to ii. That’s for you to decide. On a logical level, you might only pick i. The lack of proof make it a clear choice. On a wish-to-believe, dare-to-hope, try-to-love level, things might be a bit different. (you might pick ii.) Anyhow, I can solve the paradox just by creating it: you have reasons to trust sciences, you have emotions to believe in God. If there is an option, the paradox is created and option given. The solution is not mine to live, but, nevertheless, it still exists.
Provocative reply: How could I attract one to orthodoxy? To Nicolae STEINHARDT, described on this blog, considers orthodoxy to be best explained by paradox. It doesn’t give you a solution, by the contrary – it asks for opposite things in the same time. (you can’t be perfect, you must strive to be perfect) This quote about paradox is a favorite of Nicolae STEINHARDT: “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!” (Mark 9:24) I’ll consider this: if you pick one side of the paradox, briefly explain it to make provocative assumptions, what would you say about this – you can live a life the paradox unsolved (not one thought to the left, not one thought to the right; not to the middle; and each of them, taken separately, can be great solutions), while the life will be much tougher than a provocative assumption. Choosing a side of the paradox may create good PR, may be an excellent way of presentations, but living the paradox (and Nicolae STEINHARDT thinks that orthodoxy is just about it) can be so much better right within you. The feelings might be better than making one’s mouth drop. End of advertisement;
F. At some point Eric KISH spoke with a student: he put a question, the boy answered fast; Then Eric KISH said we shouldn’t be really speaking from textbooks; He wants to hear our own words; Not too many rushed to say something;
G. (regarding F.) Eric KISH gave us a little test: What was (at the beginning of 2006) the biggest car producer in the world? An answer came to say that it was General Motors; Eric KISH contradicted him, and said that recently (for that time) Toyota‘s sales were announced to be higher; Now it was really unimportant for me which was number one on the market, but I’d have to say that the point was well taken: you can’t learn the latest news from the books and I understand why it is important to practice more than reading stuff in books;
H. At some point, he asked the audience on a dilemma: he is doing a nice life in Israel, and yet he has a job opportunity in Hong Kong; (I hope I haven’t mixed locations) Good job, but would require a lot of changes in his life; What to do? Even if he spoke quite a few things on living a perfect family life should be the real success, there were a few replies, all of them in favor of the “leaving” part; (perhaps the stay-in-Israel people were quieter; family persons) He said he hesitates on this one, the answer is not that clear. (which, if this phrase is not added: “although I must say”, would mean something bad about his actual decision; he did go to Israel, so the phrase must be longer than that)

3. What have I already written about him on this blog?
In a message written in March 2009 – Why, to me, the Strategy Conference in Human Resources, organized by HR Club Romania 12th March, 2009, at J.W. Marriott, Bucharest had the best conference organization I’ve ever seen? – I have already spoken about the last time I’ve met Eric KISH. Here’s what I said (I hope it’s clear now why the MBA part is trickier):

But the speaker I liked most at this conference wasn’t present with his name in any of the speakers’ lists. He was serious, no joke when he held his speech. He had a less-than-one-minute speech, which he started with “I am not a HR person”. In that one minute, he made two affirmations which made my mouth drop:
a. (approximate understanding by me) We will launch a HR Software solution for the US market;
b. (approximate understanding by me) Within companies with a turnover of a range from millions to billions USD, we wish to hire CEOs and CFOs. All of these positions come with no special MBA required.

The affirmations (or at least how I understood) were made by Eric KISH (VP Retail The Rompetrol Group). It made me wish to include him on this blog with a dedicated blog post.

What have I learned from Eric KISH? In his one minute of speaking it made me understand that the MBA has some value (he said exactly the opposite thing, but, nevertheless, it made me wonder).

I could add that in that very morning of the Strategy Conference in Human Resources, I talked with a HR Club little helper and I said “Wow! Eric KISH is on the invites’ list!”, while the reply came “You like Eric KISH too?” Girls …

4. What impressed me most about him?
By now, you should have right about all the major facts that impress me most on Eric KISH. And when I mean “all” it’s like “all”. You’ve got the full picture. I have even given you from time to time my reaction to the things he said. To answer the question is this: what impresses me most about Eric KISH is the way he handles the paradox: from one sentence
“I consider that X is totally …, but on the other I hand I have to admit that X is still …”,
Eric KISH’s style is something like:
“I consider that X is totally …”,
although I feel that the sentence is only spoken that way and thought differently. But hearing him speak like that always makes me wonder “How would this phrase continue?” And I get to lovely emotions, ideas and thoughts just by filling the blanks. The insights I get most of the time are just great.

Yes, he says some smart things, he doesn’t bore you, he makes people laugh (and laughs whenever he chooses), but the main mechanism that makes him so interesting to me is exposed above and that’s why I like him as a speaker so much.

5. How can you see him?
Eric KISH has a way of participating in all kinds of events, and if you’re a student in Bucharest (and not only), you should be able to get to see him sometime. Here’s his public LinkedIn profile, while Googling his name (in Romanian) will also yield some other interesting results. This blog post is strictly referring to the way in which he helds speeches, I can’t tell you about anything else.

6. What’s next?

_______________________________
Bottom line: If you like being provoked, moved, touched, make yourself a present and participate in a conference with Eric KISH. I’ve had the most insights in a given period of time, more than any other speaker I’ve seen.

1. I need quite a few money if I ever decide to go to Navodari
This may seem like a no-brainer, but for me it was not obvious that I needed quite a few money to go to Navodari (I now live in Bucharest, for almost 8 years). What will the money bring? Safety, a net which can catch me if I fall.

The alternative is simple: be so good as a professional, that I can’t possibly fail in anything I do in the online area from Navodari.

Both requirements are quite tricky. What’s important to know is that I need either a financial stability for a few years or be a great professional;

What are my actions for this?
a. Try to earn more money; This should be simple; All I have to do is continue doing what I do now that brings me money and, hopefully, to be able to save more money; No dead-line imposed, but a general objective;
b. Try to improve myself; This includes (and is not limited to) write better in English (the purpose of this blog), be a better professional at Search Engine Optimization (the purpose of GetSeoIdeas.com blog), be more productive (the goal at work); Having a portfolio of clients and improving my online networking skills should also help; I should be physically fit;

2. Focus on the positive things in life
I was talking to my friend (old mate, used to live in the same room, along with two other guys while a student in 2002-2003) about our common past. What I’ve noticed about the past:
a. Oh, those time were great; Lovely times, beautiful life, great friendships; (It’s also a sign that people tend to remember only good memories in the past – see this article: “We Don’t Remember the Bad Stuff So Well”);
b. During that time, I focused on a few bad things;
c. Focusing on those bad things didn’t bring any obvious advantage.

Come to think about it, I’ve had a great life, but I focused on some bad things (and this focus didn’t bring me value).

Now I looked at today’s life. There are two aspects:
a. Life;
b. Work.

I think I have a great life, and a wonderful work. Sure, there are things to improve, but the bottom line is that my life and job are very close to being perfect.

What will I win if I focus on the negative thing? Aside frustration, not too many things can be changed easily.

What will I win by focusing on the positive things? “Oh, what a beautiful life! Oh, what a beautiful job!”

There are some things to keep a close eye on (I seem a little brain-dead), but, all-in-all, it’s a pretty neat way of thinking.

What will my actions be on this?
a. Try to emphasis positive things in life;
b. Capture the moment; Smile, laugh if you have to, but, oh!, be so happy;
c. Only focus on negative things if you can make your life better.

PS: I’ll look at this blog post years from now and I’ll probably thank myself for good ideas. But why not start thanking myself right now?