Consuming Passions, Consuming Success

The other day I went shopping at a local consumer electronics warehouse where they have everything from talking toasters to serenading telephones. I was looking for a new printer since mine had just died from a respiratory belt problem.

As I shopped around, I was simply amazed at how large the warehouse was and the selections available. The television section alone covered an area the size of two tennis courts with screen selection sizes running from 6 inches to large plasma screens over 1,000 inches (Ok, I exaggerate).

After purchasing my printer, I had to pick up my item at the ‘back’ of the warehouse where all major electronic purchases are finalized. As I stood there waiting, I saw people zipping around in forklifts, pulling up to mammoth racks that towered some forty to fifty feet high and bringing down pallets of electronics while others rushed around with the proper paperwork to fill the pending orders. The coordination was amazing; it was like watching a ‘production ballet’.

As the warehouse folks filled the order, they would call out the name of the buyer. The buyers would then signal by raising their hand and then point to their car to indicate where they wanted the merchandise dropped.

As I waited I noticed a lot of people were buying huge electronic appliances, with the majority being big, giant plasma screen televisions or large audio-speaker systems for achieving that ‘surround’ sound while watching television.

As the warehouse people brought the units over to the customers’ car, I also noticed that in many cases the new television or audio system seemed to be worth more than the car that would carry it. I know we shouldn’t judge someone’s financial success by what they drive or what they wear, but it may give you some indication. For example, one gentleman was driving a car that seemed to be 20 years old and was sputtering fumes as it drove away trying to accelerate while under the load of a new 60 inch plasma television roped into its trunk. Something was wrong with that picture.

The average American today is carrying a credit card debt of anywhere from $5,000 to $7,000 (does not include car or house payments). Some studies have shown that individual savings rates are a little more than 5% of our annual salary. Another study showed that 50% of Americans wouldn’t be able to survive for more than 3 months without some type of public assistance if they were laid-off or fired. That number rises to 70% if they were unemployed for six months or more.

As I stood there and watched the warehouse folk load up the cars and trucks with expensive merchandise, I couldn’t help but reflect on consumer debt and our obsession with possession (my new rhyme). Americans have a passion for consuming. We like to buy things. Heck, we like to buy a lot of things to fill our homes with all the comforts this great system of capitalism has to offer. But there has to be a point of reasonability, a point where we have to put on the consumption breaks and realize that having more is not better.

Does having more, mean having less?

Every week it seems that my neighbor buys a new toy. I don’t mean just televisions, stereos and the like. I mean a motorcycle, boat, a scooter, etc. He also runs his own company and is very successful at it. In his case, he does have the money or resources to pay for his passions.

The other day we happened to get into a conversation about having time to enjoy life. He eventually confessed during our conversation that although he had all these toys, he didn’t have time to enjoy them. In fact, he had been working so hard that his wife was complaining that he wasn’t spending enough time at home. And, since his wife was unhappy, it made trying to enjoy the toys more difficult especially when it took away more time from the family. My neighbor was coming to the conclusion that having more, means having less.

Here we have two extremes. There are those who don’t have the resources (money) and spend it as if they did. And then there are those who do have the financial means but sacrifice too much in order to get it; both have a passion for consumption.

For those without the financial resources, their debts will continue to mount and their ability to dig themselves out of it will become more difficult each day. They won’t be able to focus on ‘possibilities’ or dreams of being successful because they’re too focused on trying to pay next month’s credit card bill.

In the latter case of my neighbor, he demonstrates that having money does not guarantee happiness. Both will eventually learn that success is about moderation, not excessive consumption. Less is more. Sound familiar?

Don’t be consumed by the passion to consume or that same passion will consume your financial success and your personal happiness.


R. Wade Younger, MBA, CSP, CSM, TEFL – International Speaking & Business Consulting – The World’s Largest Collection of Life Skills for Kids

Change Your Thinking

There is a law in psychology that if you form a picture in your mind of what you would like to be, and you keep and hold that picture there long enough, you will soon become exactly as you have been thinking.

There is a law in psychology that if you form a picture in your mind of what you would like to be, and you keep and hold that picture there long enough, you will soon become exactly as you have been thinking.

Once upon a time there was a woman, about 30 years old, married with two children. Like many people, she had grown up in a home where she was constantly criticized and often treated unfairly by her parents. As a result, she developed deep feelings of inferiority and low self-esteem. She was negative and fearful, and had no confidence at all. She was shy and self-effacing, and did not consider herself to be particularly valuable or worthwhile. She felt that she was not really talented at anything.

One day, as she was driving to the store, another car went through a red light and smashed into her. When she awoke, she was in the hospital with a mild concussion and complete memory loss. She could still speak, but she had no recollection of any part of her past life. She was a total amnesiac.

At first, the doctors thought it would be temporary. But weeks passed and no trace of her memory returned. Her husband and children visited her daily, but she did not know them. This was such an unusual case that other doctors and specialists came to visit her as well, to test her and ask her questions about her condition.

Eventually, she went home, her memory a complete blank. Determined to understand what had happened to her, she began reading medical textbooks and studying in the specialized area of amnesia and memory loss. She met and spoke with specialists in this field.

Eventually she wrote a paper on her condition. Not long afterward, she was invited to address a medical convention to deliver her paper, answer questions about her amnesia, and share her experiences and ideas on neurological functioning. During this period, something amazing happened. She became a new person completely. All the attention in the hospital and afterward made her feel valuable, important, and truly loved by her family.

The attention and acclaim she received from members of the medical profession built her self-esteem and self-respect even higher. She became a genuinely positive, confident, outgoing woman, highly articulate, well informed, and very much in demand as a speaker and authority in the medical profession.

All memory of her negative childhood had been wiped out. Her feelings of inferiority were wiped out as well. She became a new person. She changed her thinking and changed her life.

“You are not what you think you are, but what you think, you are.”

I would love to hear your thoughts on change.

Wade Younger

McDonald’s wins with all-day breakfast!

Give the customers what they want! You can never go wrong when you list to your customer.

McDonald’s sales at U.S. outlets open at least 13 months rose 5.7 percent in the quarter ended Dec. 31st, the best quarterly growth in nearly four years and far ahead of forecasts of 2.7 percent.


McdonaldsMcDonald’s Corp (MCD.N) smashed expectations for quarterly same-restaurant sales as the launch of all-day breakfasts proved a hit with diners in the United States and demand continued to recover in China. The performance adds fuel to McDonald’s revival, after the chain had seen its U.S. sales fall for two years up to the third quarter of 2015 following a series of missteps under former chief executive Don Thompson, who left the world’s biggest restaurant chain last year. This was due to a greater need for healthier food choices.

McDonald’s new CEO, Steve Easterbrook implemented a turnaround plan last year that involved making the menu simpler, improving service times and raising worker wages.

McDonald’s launched the all-day breakfast menus in October in the United States, a move aimed at countering increasing competition from chains such as Wendy’s Co (WEN.O), Starbucks Corp (SBUX.O) and Burger King (QSR.TO).

“All-day breakfast positions us to regain market share we had given up in recent years,” Easterbrook said on a post-earnings conference call, adding it would take at least six more months of positive sales to cement a more sustained turnaround.

R. Wade Younger, CSP

401 North Tryon Street
10th Floor
Charlotte, North Carolina, 28202, U.S.A
980.200.3000 – International Speaking & Business Consulting – Project Leadership & Organizational Development – The World’s Largest Collection of Life Skills for Kids

Being the change

Ghandi said “You must be the change you wish to see in the world.” And he was absolutely right. But how many of us really believe him?

I find that most people are waiting for someone or something else to be the change they wish to see in the world. Let me give you some common examples:

Employer X wants Employee Y to sell more. Rather than being excited about the new products and offering more training and reward opportunities (i.e. being a better leader), he requires Employee Y to make more cold calls. You can force an employee to take certain actions, but they will only be effective if they do them with all their heart. They will only do that if you have inspired them with YOUR actions. Employer X can only get real change by changing himself.
Jill X wants more love in her life. Rather than working on being more loving or loving herself more, she tries to get Joe Y to love her more. This will never work. The only person Jill X can ever change is herself.

If you pay attention, you’ll see this phenomenon all the time. This summer season I went to Washington State and fell in love with hiking. When I returned home I wanted to join a hiking club. When I found none existed in Charlotte, I took the next obvious step and started one. Over eighty people have since contacted me and all have said, “I’ve been waiting for a club like this!” Starting the club wasn’t hard. But someone had to be the change. What change have you been waiting for?

Do you realize how much power you have if you simply act? Want to mend a relationship? Pick up the phone. Need a new job? Reply to some job listings. Want a better employee team? Start being a better leader.

What change do you want to see in the world? Be it!

R. Wade Younger, CSP – International Speaking & Business Consulting – The World’s Largest Collection of Life Skills for Kids

Co-Facilitation Strategy Sessions

“Life is the art of drawing without an eraser.”

I believe that co-facilitating a group is one of the most important and helpful steps in becoming a professional trainer. Even after one has gained proficiency in leading groups, co-facilitating is superior to working alone. This article will discuss some major advantages, some potential disadvantages, and some suggestions for avoiding problems in co-facilitating.


Facilitating Group Development

One of the most convincing reasons for working with a colleague as a co-facilitator is to complement each other’s styles. One person may have a group-dynamics focus while the other may have an intra-individual focus. Together they may be able to monitor and facilitate individual and group development better than either of them could separately.

Dealing with Heightened Affect

In some groups (e.g., personal-growth groups or team building), highly emotional situations may arise, and the facilitator must be able to deal not only with persons who have a heightened affect but also with the “audience effect.” It is difficult to help an individual to work through deeply felt reactions and, at the same time, to assist other group members in integrating this experience in terms of its potential learning. In such a situation, it is always advantageous to have a co-facilitator. One facilitator can “work with” the person(s) experiencing significant emotions, while the other facilitator assists the other participants in dealing with their reactions to the situation.

Personal and Professional Development

Co-facilitating offers each partner support for his or her personal development. Facilitating can be a lonely activity; the opportunities for meaningful personal development are lessened by the complexity of the facilitator’s monitoring and intervening tasks. When there are co-facilitators, each can better work his or her personal-development issues both in and out of the group setting.

Another major advantage of co-facilitating is the opportunity for professional growth. Participants usually are not able to offer meaningful feedback on facilitator competence. When facilitators work together, they can provide each other with a rich source of professional reactions. In this way, each training experience becomes a practicum for the facilitators involved.

Synergistic Effect

The remark that “two heads are better than one” often has been validated experientially in consensus-seeking tasks. When people work together collaboratively, a synergistic effect often develops. That is, the outcome of the deliberation exceeds the sum of the contribution of the individuals. Co-facilitating can generate synergistic outcomes through the personal and professional interchange that results from working toward a common task.


One way in which participants learn in training is by studying facilitators as behavioral models. Co-facilitating provides not only two models of individuals coping with their own life situations, but it also offers a model for meaningful, effective, two-person relationships. The interaction between the co-facilitators gives participants a way to gauge dyadic relationships. The likelihood that the training will transfer to the participants’ back home, everyday situations is increased.

Reduced Dependence

A recurring issue in training groups is the problem of dependence on the facilitator. Facilitators who work with many groups alone sometimes dread having repeatedly to face participants’ unresolved authority conflicts. With co-facilitators, the leadership is shared and, therefore, the dependence problem is dissipated somewhat.

Appropriate Pacing

A facilitator can pace himself or herself more effectively when working with a partner. Observing and intervening in a group session is demanding, and the facilitator sometimes is not able to relax enough to permit the process to emerge at its own rate. However, co-facilitators can check each other’s timing of events and provide some respite from the detailed monitoring necessary to provide meaningful interventions.

Sharp Focus

A final advantage is that issues can be focused more sharply when they are seen by two facilitators. Facilitators usually have “favorite” issues that are likely to emerge in their groups, and co-facilitating can offset biases.


Different Orientations

Some dangers are, however, inherent in co-facilitation, and it is necessary to be aware of potential problems. Individuals with different orientations theoretical, technical, personal can easily impair each other’s effect in the group. It is, for example, difficult to imagine a good melding of a Tavistock-oriented “consultant” and an Esalen-trained facilitator. Such partners would likely discover themselves working at cross-purposes.

Extra Energy

Co-facilitating takes energy. Not only are the facilitators occupied with the development of the participants and of the group, but they also have to expend effort to develop and maintain the relationship that may be pivotal to the success of the training. The training sub goals include not only the facilitators’ personal and professional development, but also their relationship with each other.

Threat and Competition

Because two professionals in a group may constitute more of a threat to individual participants than one would, they may see co-facilitators as colluding with each other. The “clinic” sessions that co-facilitators engage in between training sessions can arouse suspicion and create an emotional distance between the facilitators and the participants.  Co-facilitators can become competitive with each other, too. Although they may deny any concern for popularity, they may, perhaps without knowing it, engage in behavior that meets other needs besides those inherent in the training.


It clearly is possible to “overtrain” a group, particularly with the presence of two active facilitators. It is important to recognize that too many interventions may stifle both participation and learning. This is especially true if facilitators play the “two-on-one” game, simultaneously attempting to interpret and facilitate one participant. Group-member helpfulness is one of the most potent dimensions of group training events. After an initiation period, participants as well as facilitators can make meaningful interventions. It is important that the facilitators stay out of the way in order to permit this to occur.

Blind Spots

Co-facilitators may have mutual blind spots in observing inter- and intra-individual dynamics, and it is possible to reinforce each other’s failure to attend to particular areas. If co-facilitators are similar in their theory and technique, it is quite likely that they will pay attention to the same data. Thus, they may neglect (or pay less attention to) other data, thereby increasing the possibility that they will fail to notice significant learning opportunities that are outside their normal purview.

A Misleading Model

In any human situation, there is the possibility that people will react to assumptions rather than to clear understandings of one another. This, of course, can occur with co-facilitators if they are not clear about each other’s positions on recurring and predictable group issues. In this event, they can provide an ineffective model for the participants.  When the relationship between co-facilitators is tense, mistrustful, and/or closed, the modeling is negative. Participants may mistakenly conclude that what “works” in a human relation is to behave in ways directly opposed to the values on which you are based.

Different Rhythms

A final potential disadvantage in co-facilitating is that the facilitators’ intervention rhythms may be different. One may intervene on a “beat” of ten, while the other intervenes on a beat of three. The facilitator who is slower to react or who hesitates in the hope that the participants will take responsibility for the maintenance of the group may find obtrusive the partner who intervenes more rapidly. Disjunctive contacts that may result between the co-facilitators provide a negative model for the participants.


Facilitators who are considering joining together to work with a group can engage in a number of activities to obviate these potential disadvantages. The obvious first step is to share orientations to and experiences with similar kinds of group situations.

A second way of avoiding the problems of ineffective co-facilitation is to solicit feedback frequently and regularly. As a check on behavioral perception, there is no substitute for honest and straightforward reactions.

In order to counteract one facilitator’s tendency to overtrain the group and to cut into the rhythm of interventions of the other, it may be useful to count to ten—or twenty—before intervening. If any participant speaks during that time, the count is begun again at zero.

It is important that the co-facilitators be honest both in presenting themselves and in soliciting feedback from participants. In this way, they can de-emphasize the impact of their presence in the group. Each co-facilitator needs to monitor the reasons for his or her behavior in the group. Each intervention should be “located,” that is, the facilitators need to know what they are observing, what they are responding to, what the needs in the group seem to be, and what the intervention is designed to elicit. Otherwise, it is likely that the intervention will meet the personal needs of a facilitator at the expense of the needs of the participants.

Testing Assumptions

It seems axiomatic that all assumptions need to be tested continually. Facilitators clearly are not above making errors in communication. It is critical that they check the bases of their professional judgments.
If co-facilitators experience difficulty in working together, they may solicit a third party as a consultant. This activity can produce a great deal of learning not only for themselves but also for any observers.

Personal Awareness

In confronting the potential disadvantages of co-facilitating, partners can create for themselves opportunities to experiment with and to enlarge both their personal development and their professional expertise. The following inventory can help facilitators to become more aware of their assumptions, preferences, and motivations in facilitating groups.

  • Learning Style: (Write a brief statement to explain your concept of how people learn.)
  • Personal Motivation: (Complete the following sentence: I am involved in training because . . .)
  • Expectations: (What things do you expect to happen in the type of group in which you will be working? What would be the best thing that could happen? What would be the worst thing?)
  • Intervention Style: (What are your typical responses in the type of group in which you will be working?)

Here are some other examples:

  1. When starting the group, I usually . . .
  2. When someone talks too much, I usually . . .
  3. When the group is silent, I usually . . .
  4. When an individual in the group is silent for a long period of time, I usually . . .
  5. When someone becomes upset or cries, I usually . . .
  6. When someone comes in late, I usually . . .When someone introduces outside information about family or friends into the group, I usually . . .
  7. When group members are excessively polite and unwilling to confront one another, I usually . . .
  8. When there is conflict in the group, I usually . . .
  9. When there is a group attack on one individual, I usually . . .
  10. When group members discuss sexual feelings about one another or about me, I usually . . .
  11. If there is physical violence, I usually . . .
  12. My favorite interventions in this type of group are:
  13. My typical “intervention rhythm” (fast/slow) is:
  14. My style characteristically is more (a) nurturing or (b) confronting.
  15.  The thing that makes me most uncomfortable in groups like this is:
  16. Other information about me that might be useful to a co-facilitator (e.g., FIRO-B scores, social style, NLP preference, training/learning style, etc.) is:

Coordinating with the Co-Facilitator

In planning to co-facilitate a training event, there are several things that trainers can do to enhance the process. The first is to establish a personal connection with each other for at least an hour to share information and expectations. This includes sharing responses to the inventory in this section, discussing professional experiences, and explaining what personal issues each anticipates working on in the group. It is a very good idea to state some of your co-facilitation patterns and to indicate the behaviors that your co-facilitator might see as idiosyncratic. It also would be helpful if each of you were to note issues that have arisen in your past work with other facilitators.

When you have shared this personal information, it is time to define together the training goals of the event on which you are about to work; to reach consensus about the expectations and experiences of the participants; and to discuss your reactions to the makeup of the group, its size, and any other special considerations. Then work to reach agreement on the following issues.

Operating Norms

  1. Where will each of you sit during the sessions?
  2. When presenting and not presenting?
  3. Who will open and end each session?
  4. Are there differences in status between you? If so, how will this be handled?
  5. How will it be presented to the participants?
  6. Will there be open-ended or specific time periods for starting, breaks, etc.?
  7. Will you end at specific times?
  8. What are your preferences for attendance for yourselves and for the participants?
  9. Will either of you be free to leave the group or will you both remain part of the group during all sessions?
  10. How (and possibly when) will you make theory inputs, and which of you will do what?
  11. How will you work to facilitate transfer of learning and back-home application?
  12. Will there be follow-up and, if so, how will it be done?

Co-Facilitating Style

  1. Where, when, and how will you deal with issues between you?
  2. Can you agree to disagree? How much tolerance is there for differences?
  3. Will you encourage or discourage conflict?
  4. How much of your behavior will be role determined and how much will be personal and individual?
  5. Is it possible to use each other’s energy; that is, can one of you be “out” while the other is “in?”
  6. How will you establish and maintain growth-producing norms?
  7. What is non-negotiable with each of you as a co-facilitator?


  1. What are your responsibilities if someone in the group has psychological difficulty?
  2. Are you responsible for referral?
  3. What responsibilities do you have after the training experience is over?
  4. What responsibilities, if any, do you have for screening participants?
  5. Are you adequately qualified?
  6. How will you communicate your qualifications to the participants?
  7. What are your ethical standards and typical corrective measures with regard to issues such as sexuality, prejudice, and so on? (In the U.S., offensive communication based on sex, race, religion, age, disability, or country of origin tends to be prohibited by law.)
  8. After sharing information and discussing it, it might be a good idea to take a break in order to review and consider the information that you have received from each other, and then meet again to discuss any items that need clarification.


“Clinicking” is the term that Fruition uses for the brief, “how-are-we-doing, what-should-we-consider-changing” meetings that co-facilitators have during the breaks in a training event and at the end of each day. Some of the questions that you may want to ask are as follows:


  1. On a scale of one to ten, how did things go in this session?
  2. What is happening in the group(s)?
  3. Are there any problems that need to be addressed? If so, what are we going to do about them?

Soliciting Feedback

  1. What did I do that was effective?
  2. What did I do that was ineffective?
  3. How am I doing as a co-facilitator?
  4. To what degree are we colluding, that is, not sharing all the information we have?


  1. As we re-examine our contract, do we find anything that we ought to renegotiate?
  2. How are we feeling about each other?
  3. What is each of us going to do in the next session?

Finally, it is important to have a debriefing session at the end of the training event in order to conduct a final clinic and to discuss what happened, what was or should have been done, and what each of you learned from the experience. The following questions may be helpful at this time:

  1. To what extent were the training goals achieved?
  2. Under what conditions would we work together again?
  3. What are our personal and professional learnings from this event?
  4. What can I do personally to improve my training competence?

Facilitation is an art that should be developed over time, very much like a skilled pianist.  No one expects us to just walk up to a Baldwin Grand and perform Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 4.  What is expected is a serious period of time that is used for diligent practice, preparation and patience.  View the art of facilitation, whether it’s “co” or “solo” in the same matter – an ability to effectively disseminate information that enhances human development.  Strive to touch the heart, evoke thinking, and stir emotion.  This will move your audience to action every time!

R. Wade Younger, CSP – International Speaking & Business Consulting – The World’s Largest Collection of Life Skills for Kids