For example, staying in Romania is a definite answer for me due to the opinions of Horia-Roman PATAPIEVICI on the subject.

Find out below what has changed since then.

There are two things which I considered regarding emigration:
a. My duties to the past of the country you belong to (people died trying to protect the liberties I currently enjoy, for example);
b. Horia-Roman PATAPIEVICI said so; It’s that simple;

How did things change?
a. I know I have a duty for my country; But I also know I have a duty for other countries also; People died everywhere for the gift of liberty, for the values of democracy, for the virtues of life; My duty is universal;
b. In the blog post about Horia-Roman PATAPIEVICI I wrote:

The writer I analyze in this blog post considered that there are two kind of people in this worlds: some which consider that the fact that they were born within the borders of a country comes as a mere statistical probability (you have no connection to the land you were born on), while there are others for which the past matters a lot and live with an eye into the past.

Well, while I admire Horia-Roman PATAPIEVICI’s view and values of the world, I don’t necessarily share them all; So, I don’t think I have the same value regarding the place I was born (Romania); I don’t think that being born in Romania is a statistical happening, but I also don’t think that I have a duty to the Romanian people for being born here.

In a few words, this is how my values have a bit changed.

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.

First of all what did I learned about promoting a coaching or a training business?
1. Most of the promotion should be on:
a. Competency;
b. Human Factor;
Those are the most important factors in deciding to participate at a training or coaching session;
2. You should avoid promoting a brand or doing a commercial;
3. You have to convince the consumer that the training brings him value;
4. Lots of hard-to-define insights from entrepreneurs;
5. Bobby Voicu answered me a private question about web directories; Thanks!

What did I like best about the conference?
1. The form for entering the conference looked just great (nicely done);
2. The questions received rather long answers; It was not a fast, quick, rapid fire of answers; Instead, the questions were answered with lots of details; Lovely!
3. You could see that the speaker had a great time; It was fun, people laughed, everybody seemed to enjoy the show;
4. Both the questions put and the answers received were smart;
5. The promoting of the conference was good (and I helped a bit);
6. The sweets were delicious;
7. Speakers came from various fields of activity;
8. Great place for networking;
9. There was great emphasis on “How is it in Romania?” rather than “How is it worldwide?”; That’s just great.

What would I do better?
1. If I am presented with a form with 5 questions to enter the conference, I’d love to see those questions asked at the conference; If you want me to have just one question, that’s fine, but asking me for 5 things, from which I should pick just one – well, that’s not that good;
2. There were two speakers in the room at the last panel of speakers:
a. Speakers who spoke a lot;
b. Speakers who spoke less than a lot;
I would have preferred to see them all speaking; (this could be arranged by the organizers, by invited the speakers to – well – speak;
3. The conference should have begun at 10 and have a schedule; The conference begun later than 10, and all the day there was a rush to recover the lost time, which ended in a very short lunch break; I would have preferred the conference to start at 10 and keep the schedule;
4. A lot of small breaks? I’d much rather prefer a smaller number of larger breaks;
5. At the beginning speakers were not introduced and I had to deduce who does what (an answer from an accountant is usually from an answer by a advertiser);
6. I had the impression that the catering was done something like that:
a. Either too many waiters at the same time;
b. Either no waiter;
Anyhow, it was fine, no big deal;
7. In the morning it would have been Ok to have some snacks;
8. I was in the first row and I didn’t hear everything; I wonder how it was in the back of the room.

All-in-all, a great conference, lots of things to learn and to enjoy the show.

This blog post’s contents:
1. What’s the basis for comparison?
2. How have I met Ana-Maria CORLAN?
3. What impressed me?
4. How to contact Ana-Maria CORLAN?
5. Conclusions

1. What’s the basis for comparison?
Besides teachers, I think the number of persons I’ve seen talking for more than 40 minutes with an audience that included me are professionals speakers. Speaking in public has many meanings, from conference speakers, seminar trainers, moderators, but all-in-all I can say I’ve seen quite a lot of speakers.

2. How have I met Ana-Maria CORLAN?
In the winter of 2008 (20th of February to 26th of February 2008) I took part to a winter school about Programmes and Project Management in Predeal, Brasov, in a lovely location on some mountain (or hill). It was organized by National Agency for Supporting Youth Initiatives – ANSIT Romania.

How I got to Predeal? Me and a person I’ve known only via Internet arrived by car in the first day in the evening from Bucharest. After I met my apartment colleagues, we go to dinner. I decide I should sit at a crowded table, with no familiar face (very easy to meet conditions in the first evening). There were 5 persons, not a single boy. After I present myself, another person takes initiative and presents herself, and everybody says a few things. I thought everyone was from the same group of persons, and I only replied to conversations, didn’t initiate any (but I was not very silent, either).

After dinner, an official presentation of the program takes place. One trainer presents his program joyful, full of life, funny. He then invites the other trainer to speak – surprise! It turns out Ana-Maria CORLAN was at the table I was sitting. She gives a less-than-enthusiastic presentation. We are then told by the organizers that we’ll be separated into two groups, randomly. My preference was for the first trainer – I could communicate, laugh and he could motivate me. The second trainer spoke very little both at the table and at the presentation and she wasn’t that funny for my taste.

The next morning I see the lists (we were separated into two groups). “Huh? I’m into this group? No way! I wish to switch!” Switching was not possible, we were told the day before. I go to the training with low morale. I was the last one to enter the room. The chairs were ordered in a U-shape, and there was one empty chair right in the middle of the imaginary U. Someone suggests me to take the chair. I give a “Huh?” look, take a chair from the back of the room and place it right near one end of the U letter, the closest to the flipchart (and where the action takes place).

I knew no one in the room, nobody was talking one to another, after a failed initiation of a conversation with the only person sitting next to me, I get a newspaper and start reading. The training didn’t start yet. The trainer comes and suggests I should put my paper away. “Huh?”, I think, “But there’s really nothing else to do. I can’t just sit here and look at the ceiling. What a waste of time!” Anyhow, I put my newspaper away.

There’s an introduction to the course, we write our names on a name tag, and things start moving. At the end of the first day I was thinking something like “I can’t believe what just happened! This can’t be a training! Wow, and to think I would have switched the trainers. No way!”

What happened next? Imagine courses of roughly 6 hours per day (with minor and major breaks), each day. It was quite intensive.

There were two groups, each with about 20 people, each with its trainer. As said, I was lucky enough to be in Ana-Maria CORLAN’s group.

The training methods involved a theory part (rather short), a work-in-groups part (much longer) and from time to time some fun activities (also known as “energizers“).

The group I was in was kept for the whole week, which meant we could establish good bonds and by the end of the training I had a lot of fun in that group.

3. What impressed me?
At the very beginning of the training there was a definition: What does “Project management” involve? The very first words of the trainer were not “The project is…” Instead, they were “What is a project, from your perspective?” It takes quite a bit of courage to put even the definition of the project, the very first words you start the training with, in the hands of others.

And people were telling things on Project Management, some closer to the definition, some further away. Words pop up, people came with ideas. And the trainer was writing them all on a flip chart. At the end of this there were a lot of words written down.

I was expecting to challenge a few ideas (“wouldn’t you think that it’s better?”, “hmmm, why do you think that?”, “are you sure that’s true?”), to politely refuse others (“yes, this is a worthwhile idea, but I prefer not writing it down”, “yes, that’s true, but it’s better we keep to the core of the definition”), to avoid repetition (“this was said before, even if with different words”) or to come up with hints (“what would you say project management involves on the financial aspects?”) or some brand new ideas by themselves (“would you think that the GANTT chart is involved in the project management?”). Nothing like this ever happened. The trainer carefully listened to each idea, wrote it down. No idea was even challenged, not to say refused, a lot of ideas involved repetition (and they were all written), no hints were given by the trainer (not to mention brand new ideas).

So, at the end of the task, we had a page of flipchart filled with words, some closer to the truth while others further away. Clearly some of the ideas were less important, and we had to know which one was good and which one was bad. Who was the one person in the room who knew most about project management theory, much more than anybody else? You’re right: the trainer herself (Ana-Maria CORLAN). Now she had to have the list reduced to a little more than the current list. And what does she do? Instead of cutting the words on the current page of flipchart (which might offend someone’s feelings), and instead of picking up the right words herself (a thing for which she had the most expertise), she challenges the class: what would you pick to be the right definition of a project?

Now I am shocked: I had to write down on my notebook a small list of words chosen by my colleagues from a larger list of words coming yet again from my colleagues. And I had to learn this definition for a end-of-winter-school examination. At that very moment I didn’t quite realized what happened. But by the end of the day I knew this was one of the most unexpected things I’ve seen in a training until that date. It was huge. After day one I was all eyes-and-ears to everything that happened in the training room. It was just unbelievable.

You may think that this was a one-time event. No way! There were more and more examples of coming up with ideas. I think that a lot of the training was question-based. I came to the winter school eager to accumulate, and I was challenged to give. Now that’s what I call change of perspective.

Hadn’t I known better, I would have doubt her judgment abilities – “you can’t empower others so much. This can’t be. There’s something wrong with your abilities”. But no, it was her option to do it like this. Quite contrary, she was a good trainer also. This is breathtaking.

What determined such thinking from me? The thing that impressed me mostly was empowering. According to Dictionary.com website, citing Princeton University’s WordNet, “empower” means to “give or delegate power or authority to”. Days passed and many things happened, but the most important thing that impressed me was empowering.

Another thing that struck me was the emphasis put on working in teams. This was, by far, the longest type of learning I’ve done at the winter school. We worked on teams a lot. And, for myself at least, I had a lot of fun doing this. What can I learn out of this? Even if I was mostly impressed with the abilities of Ana-Maria CORLAN as a trainer, she still allowed the participants to better express themselves in teams, rather than present them with information. So, she put emphasis on teams, even if she could have done a great presentation, or good interaction with the participants. Now how can’t that be great?

Some people put little emphasis on feed-back. Others more. Ana-Maria CORLAN made it like this: in the first day she asked for a feed-back via a fill-in form. In the last day she asked for feed-back in a form. In the last day she also asked for feed-back in a live manner, with real discussions. I think feed-back is important. How did she treat the feed-back? I’ve noticed a change in the way she reacted to the persons who were late after the first day. Also after the first day she said that some persons asked for energizers. We had plenty of energizers from that day on, and the second day started with two energizers.

At the end of the training, in the last day of training, prior to the examination session, we had the option of switching sides. Yet again I could pick things. My alternatives were this: a cool trainer, funny, very sociable and a trainer which encouraged personal thinking and initiative to the maximum. My general pattern of thinking when choosing this is simple: “if I don’t know you, if there’s something new about you, if I can learn something new from you, I’m your man.” This means I prefer diversity, and I would rather see a new trainer than the same training or trainer again and again. There is just one exception to this: the trainer has to be very good, or to impress me in such a manner that the option of diversity simply fails. In this case the choice was very simple. After knowing her, Ana-Maria CORLAN was the obvious choice for me. It’s nice to mention that I have looked on the presentation written on a large paper for both trainings and the written presentation for Ana-Maria CORLAN was much better this time.

In the last day I found out with great surprise that the class I was part of didn’t behave according to the trainer’s expectations. My reaction was something like “Huh? What did you mean? It was perfect. It was great”. Well, it wasn’t that great after all. It seemed that some things which I appreciated a lot – empowering others, letting them express, encouraging communication -, were misunderstood. Some persons, including me, expressed too freely. It seems the training participants exaggerated the very large options they had. I hope nothing changed with the trainer’s behavior after that.

Regarding empowering actions: she asked for help whenever needed (help with materials, arranging the room). During games, she asked for help from some participants.

4. How to contact Ana-Maria CORLAN?
You may find another training with her. Leaving a comment for her on this blog post might also help.

5. Conclusions

_______________
Bottom line: I took part to other summer and winter schools, to other trainings, conferences, seminars and workshops. I’ve made friends at the winter school in Predeal and I have some great memories in there. But the empowering abilities as a trainer of Ana-Maria CORLAN impressed me most for any public speaker I’ve seen.

Related posts to this blog story are:
a. English message: How to make a career decision? IT – Economics – PR – IT back again (personal case study);
b. English blog post: Status on self-improvement: March 2008. What you can learn from this;
c. Romanian text: Cea mai penibila intamplare din viata mea si ce am invatat din asta.

Have I left a mark on you? Do you have an opinion you wish to share with the world? Please post a comment below.

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.

This blog post’s content:
1. How many Romanian trainers did I see? (with whom do I compare?)
2. History of events (when have I seen Bruno MEDICINA?)
3. What do I like most about him? (What makes Bruno MEDICINA a great trainer?)
4. How to see Bruno MEDICINA for yourself?
5. What decision to take?

Note: you may wonder why in this blog post I say little to nothing on what Bruno MEDICINA actually says. The reason is very simple: the thing I like most about this speaker is not the way in which he speaks or the things that he says. It has mostly to do with what I feel when he speaks. And this is largely unwritable. I will describe some general feelings on Bruno MEDICINA, but I can’t give you too many examples.

First of all, who is Bruno Medicina? You may wish to see his profile on Business Edu web site or his own web site.

1. How many Romanian trainers did I see? (with whom do I compare?)
In the autumn of 2001 I joined the Faculty of International Business and Economics (the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest). I would stay in there for four years. After college, I’ve worked full-time, and then for almost an year I’ve been a freelancer. Now I work for another full-time job.

Most of those four college years, and the year working as a freelancer, I’ve taken part to a large number of activities involving public speaking (other than formal education). Even when working full-time I went to a lot of public speaking events. I have even created a mailing list dedicated to such events, where I informed my readers about conferences. I’ve been a member of some NGOs specialized in event organization, and basically I have been always interested in hearing someone speaking. You might want to note the fact that the “trainers” category of professionals I recommend is currently the largest one. Most of the speakers I’ve seen were Romanians, but some International speakers also. I can say I compare Bruno MEDICINA with quite a few other trainers or speakers.

2. History of events (when have I seen Bruno MEDICINA?)
The very first time I’ve seen Bruno MEDICINA was actually at a fair, rather than a conference event. I was living in a hostel of the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest, somewhere near RomExpo exhibition centre (the area is know 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). I think it was in a winter or spring, perhaps in 2001-2002 or 2002-2003. Anyhow, sometimes between autumn of 2001 and spring of 2003.

I came to the fair with two thoughts: to see the fair itself as quick as possible and to attend to at least one workshop. By the time I finished seeing the fair, the Bruno MEDICINA workshop already begun. It was in a room with multiple entries, there weren’t that many people present (it’s natural for this to happened at an under-promoted fair), and I sat in there. I didn’t understand everything Bruno MEDICINA was saying (he was speaking in Romanian, but with an Italian accent), and this lead me into not paying attention. Writing down wouldn’t help either – I was writing down words, but wasn’t paying all that much attention. I left disappointed. Time passed and I forgot his name, but the attitude remained with me. Back then I was only focusing on what can I learn from a speaker, not on the things that happen within me.

In the second (or third maybe?) year of faculty, I found out about a fire walking experience, first time in Bucharest, for free. Just the thought of it provoked me badly. “Me on fire? Wow, now that’s something!” But I managed to cut down on enthusiasm and self-convince that it isn’t all that great (not that I was, by any chance, afraid). I thought “What a waste of time”. I didn’t know back then who Bruno MEDICINA was, even if I’ve seen him before, so I didn’t associate the two events.

I think I’ve seen him after that at some other conferences, one-time-only events (my memory doesn’t help me all that much). While working as a freelancer (2007-2008), I had a lot more time to go to conferences. I went to see him a lot of times in the middle of the day at a tea-shop in the Bucharest center. I was enjoying this a lot, mostly due to the sense of emergency (Some announcements went like this: “Come to see Bruno MEDICINA today, in two hours time, at a Tea-shop”; Quite funny to be always vigilant). I’ve seen him quite a few times like this. The event was filmed and broadcasted on the Internet.

In the autumn of 2007 I went for the very first time at a firewalking. Lots of preparation prior to the event, excitement and fear, enjoyment and stress, all in one. Great day, great memories.

I’ve also seen him a few times in the Faculty of Psychology and Educational Studies, at events organized by ASPSE students’ organization.

I’ve seen him two times at Palace Hall, in the spring of 2008 and 2009 (I have made a video at the last event in here: Bruno Medicina on the things that really matter).

And in the autumn of 2008 I went for the second time at a firewalking event (and this time I had quite a physical experience). You can see me in this YouTube clip: Bruno Medicina – Firewalking at Studentiada (I’m the second one to pass, after Bruno; I’m the white-collar guy).

3. What do I like most about him? (What makes Bruno MEDICINA a great trainer?)
I told you that the very first time I’ve seen him, sometime in 2001-2003, I had a bad impression after meeting him. The two faults I saw were:
A. He said blunt things;
B. I had problems understanding what he said (he didn’t do a lot of question and involvement of the room).

If I were to look at the current behavior, I would say that the biggest two problems are:
A. He says blunt things;
B. He doesn’t involve the audience by communicating directly (even though now I can follow what he says much better).

So, where’s the evolution? Why since 2007 until this day I constantly went to see him again and again? Why is it that I went through fire (literally) two times at events where he lead the action? Why is it that I consider him such a good trainer that he is on my blog? The answer is simple: it’s not the things that he says, it’s the things he provokes in my mind via the things that he says. I evolved during those years, and now I interpret his actions differently.

He has a way of putting my mind to work, that I leave most of the presentations thinking “What was that!?” He says simple things, some things that are really boring. But the way those things make me feel is out-of-ordinary. I’m touched, I have insights, I get new perspectives, I find new paths of thinking, I develop my creativity. He’s that good.

I’m pretty sure that if Bruno MEDICINA would pick a subject he knows nothing about and he would speak about this subject for the first time in his life, I would have some things to learn. Because it’s not the things that he says, it’s not the way in which he says it (he mostly puts rhetorical questions, not involving the audience), but it’s all on how he makes my thoughts wander.

I could go see Bruno MEDICINA for countless times, speaking on no-matter-what. I’ve heard him speaking on firewalking for a quite a few hours, and one year after I repeated the experience. My feelings on that? I want to go again this year. I’ve heard some of his ideas for three to four times. And yet I go again and again to hear him talking.

Unfortunately, it’s not him the one that talks. It’s me. The things that he says wake up thoughts in me. And that’s plain wonderful. Yet I can’t really describe this in detail.

Sure, he has other qualities that make him a great trainer: he’s sincere (to the point that you may wonder if he wouldn’t be losing money if he says some things like that), he’s funny (and laughs at his own jokes, which is cool – I know when to laugh), he’s supportive (I’ve always felt support from him), he does CSR, although he wouldn’t call it like that (how many free events have I seen from him?), he does engage the audience when he wants to (at the firewalking sessions he’s a totally different person than when he speaks in public at a conference), he’s good with technical part (better than a lot of other trainers at least).

There are other persons from which I got more insights on a given period of time. There were people who made my mind wander in a better way. But for a training / public speaking / workshop / conference / seminar of 30 minutes to 5 hours to constantly give me fresh ideas, to constantly provoke me, to fully break barriers in my mind, I’d definitely pick Bruno MEDICINA. Because it’s not on what he says. It’s on what you think about what he says. This is all about coaching.

4. How to see Bruno MEDICINA for yourself?
Bruno MEDICINA is an international man of business, but you can mostly see him in Romania. You can sure provoke him for another country, see what happens. He has a web site, an Yahoo Group, a Facebook profile, a Facebook group, a Facebook page (these three are different one to another), a LinkedIn profile and he works on all of them thoroughly. You can find him on YouTube, you can search for him on Google and see a great article on him on Business Edu. But I do suggest you see him in person to have a clear glimpse on what he can do.

5. What decision to take?
Bottom line: I read articles by Bruno MEDICINA from time to time (I actually read them all). I see him on videos. They’re not that bad, but they’re not that good. But being in the same room with him, letting him play with your mind, is one of the best experiences one can have. Bruno MEDICINA is all about real experience, is all about the things he puts in me. And that’s why I deeply admire him for: for making me think in a really creative way.

Contents of this blog post:
1. History of events
2. Implications into my life
3. What to do next?

Who was Nicolae STEINHARDT? See a page on Wikipedia for him, read some texts and see some photos on OrhodoxPhotos.com, if you speak Romanian there is also a blog on his texts.

1. History of events
The spring of 1999: I am in the yard of a high-school in Constanta, waiting for a regional contest for a subject in the curricula (if you were good at a specific subject, you could compete with fellow pupils from the County – “Olympiad” it was called). This was a few years I discovered Gala GALACTION, an Orthodox Christian writer I mostly admired for what it seemed to me was the closest resemblance to the Christian values. This implied a lot of fanatical/bigot values. I won’t get into too much details, but to me, at that time, Orthodoxy was merely a set of rules – living by those rules would make things right for me. If those rules meant breaking conventional wisdom – well, this is fine also. Gala GALACTION was the ultimate model in Orthodox life for me, nothing else ever existed.

So, I’m that yard, in a morning. I was talking with a girl I barely new, also from Navodari. She recommends me a Jew writer converted to Orthodoxy in the prison. He went through a lot of pain in the prison, the girl said, while he kept a lot of memories within himself. Later he wrote a journal, based on those memories. The person was Nicolae STEINHARDT, while his book was “Happiness Diary”. From this description I left with a poor impression. (Pain and torture in prison? Me to read a book on that?) But I had a very profound respect for her, so I decided to read the book.

It took me a while (more than a month, I think) to finish the projects I was involved (that meant mostly finishing to read some books), going to the high-school’s library, not finding the book, going again, nothing yet, going again. Finally the book was there, it was a bit old, pages were falling.

And I began reading. To my surprise, I really liked the writer’s style. Easy enough to understand most words, hard enough for me not to get any references (he often has mentions to I’ve-never-ever-heard-of-this-book-or-writer; and he has a lot of mentions like this), but most of all very intelligent book. Soon I was not reading the book, I was devouring it.

The concept of paradox, the new ideas, were all great. I would then understand the world through these variables. But what really struck me at that time was:
A. The brand new emphasis put on emotions; A true Orthodox should always be smiling; (tell that to Galaction, who’s love for a military-style life was obvious, and who on most pictures I saw back then seemed so frowned) And while politeness rules should be a minimum in life (my life wasn’t ruled by those at the beginning), the Christian life is much more than that – you should be much better than polite: love, care, help etc.; (this was also new to my style) The Pharisees were all about dogma and rules, but Christ, according to Nicolae STEINHARDT, was more than that – he dared to change conventional wisdom; All-in-all, it was very likely that I should put things in order a lot on the emotional part and leave some rules apart;
B. There is a only a small reference in the “Happiness Diary” regarding Gala GALACTION:
English: “Also be blessed father Gala Galaction for finding – even as a balance pan with two or three faces, as it was – for some of his books, titles with an wonderful echo: Bells of the Neamt Monastery, Near the Water of Vodislava, The Chief Cornerstone, The Small Church in Razoare” (titles translated with the help of Wikipedia) – translated by me from:
Romanian: “Blagoslovit fie si parintele Gala Galaction ca a gasit – asa taler cu doua sau trei fete cum a fost – pentru unele din cartile sale titluri cu minunat ecou: Clopotele manastirii Neamtu, Langa apa Vodislavei, Piatra din capul unghiului, Bisericuta din razoare.”;
Now this can be understood easy or hard; (to me it’s so hard that even today I can’t really tell what it means) But due to the logical construction of the phrase one can easy see that it has negative implications; (“Although Gala GALACTION is …, God should still bless him”) This got me into an all-or-nothing thinking: either Nicolae STEINHARDT is right on this point, and life is really nothing on dogma, and is mostly on love, or Nicolae STEINHARDT is all wrong and Gala GALACTION is the right model for me; I worked on solving this very troubling mystery for me and within a few weeks Nicolae STEINHARDT was the new person leading my life, while Gala GALACTION would get very far from me; So far that even today one of the basic criteria on which I analyze a Christian is on this level – “Are you putting religion so high that you get to be dogmatic?”; I’m sorry to say this, but besides Nicolae STEINHARDT (who I only knew in writing) and, in some part, Horia-Roman PATAPIEVICI, no other person in this life is a relevant criteria in Orthodoxy; Putting the dogmatic filter upfront helps me clear things quite fast.

I reread The “Happiness Diary” in the summer of 2003. I reread it about two years after, in 2005. I was happy to see that I understand, as time went by, more and more of the references in the book. I was sad (for my part) to see that the percentage of what I knew compared to his knowledge is ridiculously small.

I also read two times (last time in the spring of 2007) “Through Giving You Shall Receive”, and that’s a very good book also.

I read once “Monologul polifonic” and “In the Manner of… Youths”, but they impressed me little.

2. Implications into my life
A. If you would have asked me in that spring of 1999, prior to the discovery of Nicolae STEINHARDT, when did my real Christian life begun, I would probably answer: in 1997; If you’d ask me now, I’d say that 1997-1999 were discovery years (the concept does not really apply to Orthodoxy; you can’t really discover God in two years; but this is how I see those years), while the period from that spring of 1999 and until today (11 years after) was mostly a time of what I perceive as Orthodoxy in my life;
B. How did things go after 1999 until today? I started loosening, more or less, most of the rules I made for myself; Right now I am tightening them a little (after more than 10 years!), but it’s still nowhere near what typical wisdom says on being a Christian; (things I do as a Christian are really atypical, from my perspective) See an analysis of the movie I love best – Le Notti di Cabiria – The best movie I’ve seen. The one movie I recommend seeing to anyone I know over 15 years of age. Go see it now! – and see for yourself if that’s an Orthodox perspective or not;
C. There are things that are easy to understand in Orthodoxy (“You shall not steal”), and there are things which are not simple; (ecumenical approach on religions) Whenever in doubt, my first thoughts go to Nicolae STEINHARDT;
D. I can say that I own only a few books: Nicolae STEINHARDT’s “Happiness Diary”, “Through Giving You Shall Receive”, “Nobleman articles” (I haven’t yet read this one), a few books by Horia-Roman PATAPIEVICI (to be completed with the whole collection, or at least the books I can understand), and a book on Psychology – “Essentials of Understanding Psychology” (by Robert S. Feldman); I have a few books more, but my plan is not to keep them after I finish reading them; So, I really own quite a few books, and three of them are by Nicolae STEINHARDT; (I plan for a few more with or on him)
E. I once saw a show on Realitatea TV with Stelian TANASE and Mircea DINESCU; Mircea DINESCU suggested that Nicolae STEINHARDT should be sanctified; Stelian TANASE (who knew Nicolae STEINHARDT in person) replied “I agree”; A lot of thinking from my part on that small dialogue.

3. What to do next?
The “Happiness Diary” by Nicolae STEINHARDT is more than a book on religion. It’s a book on the condition of the human spirit. You may find it useful even if you understand it via a non-orthodox perspective. Thus, I recommend you to read two books by Nicolae STEINHARDT: the “Happiness Diary” and “Through Giving You Shall Receive”.

You can support Polirom‘s Publishing house initiative for publishing the entire series of works by Nicolae STEINHARDT by buying right from them.

That’s simple, I can give you two solutions for that:
1. Contact that online store via email and tell them you have a problem with the warranty of a product; See the response time, the way they handle the situation, the solution they offer to you; You’ll get a glimpse on what’s behind that store before you use it; You can use a fake e-mail for this;
2. Ask the store owner for a less-than-usual solution; I personally asked two online stores for this: I wanted to gradually buy all the components from that online store, they should keep them for a 6 weeks tops, and when I get all those components, they should assembly my PC; One store was reluctant and answered my query after about two weeks, the other one answered fast and agreed to my request (it was a computer worth about 5-600 Euros and the store was not the cheapest in town).

Both solution can fail: the owners of those stores can lie to you and only claim that they will solve the warranty and only claim that they will help you (pretend that they are in fact trustworthy when they’re not). But in most cases, I think that these are good solutions to find out how the employees of an online store will treat you.

Oh, and you can also just ask for this information from other sources (from real friends to virtual communities), you don’t really have to find out this on your own.

How do you feel about this blog post of mine?

1. Quote: “When the storm comes, some build walls, others build windmills”;
Some the bad times as crisis, some see it as an opportunity;

2. The whole economy might fail if the governments do nothing about this;

3. How can the world economy grow?
a. More population in the production; (by now, via globalization, about the whole world is involved in the process, except, maybe countries in Africa)
b. Be more efficient (have a better organization; in the Western countries the growth in these areas is low; they are already having good productivity levels; there’s not that much that IT can do now);

4. There is a progressive erosion of trust in managers – and that affects productivity; How can one be a leader in times of crisis, when you’re not trusted? (main reason for dying as a firefighter – not trusting the leader);

5. Romania is lucky for not being so successful in the past, but the crisis will affect us too;

6. Immediate effect of crisis: quality of consumer relations suffers;

7. What to do in times of crisis:
a. (most companies do this) Cost-cutting (including by firing personnel);
b. (there should be much more emphasis on this) Fight for revenues.

8. How to get revenues? One solution is not to offer price discounts, but instead offer other types of discounts / bonuses (like three products at the price of two; an extra service); After the crisis, it’s much harder to get the prices up & running, but it’s easy to remove the extra benefit;

9. You should also look for a better business model; Can you do something different or better? Do it! (e.g.: Do cross-selling, sell additional services with your products);

10. There will still be companies after the crisis; Who remains? The best of the industry; Be better than your competitors;

Joke:
“Two men are walking through a forest. Suddenly, they see a tiger in the distance, running towards them. They turn and start running away. But then one of them stops, takes some running shoes from his bag, and starts putting them on.

“What are you doing?” says the other man. “Do you think you will run faster than the tiger with those?”

“I don’t have to run faster than the tiger,” he says. “I just have to run faster than you.””

11. At the end of the day, leadership values is what remains out of a business; Do great leadership;

12. There is not one single recipe for success, but one path to failure is getting the philosophy of victims;

13. Spend time with your people; Get your sleeves up;

14. In a company the best people always have the best opportunities; They are typically the first to leave;

15. People don’t leave their jobs, they leave their bosses;

16. It is not important to be the best at predictions, it is important to react fastest in a time of crisis.

That just about wraps it up.

A great idea, which I need to apply better, is to have a mission statement for any project / web site / company I work with. That’s just great.

All in all, it was a very cerebral presentation, lovely to hear, great ideas.

This is the presentation ready for download: How managers add-destroy value.