Unfortunately, that’s a tall order. It’s more likely that Mitt Romney, if he’s the candidate, and his party will present a vision that’s largely disconnected from — even denies — facts and realities about today’s world. Therefore, they’re likely to offer solutions to problems that derive from their alternate reality.

One way to explain this oddity is from a political psychology perspective. That is, let’s examine the emotional attitudes and beliefs that may underlie the Republican Party’s view of reality and the solutions they offer to problems as they define them. For example, the party appears wedded to a singular view of what “success” in life is, and should be. And yet, that vision is increasingly disconnected from emerging new realities. Those point to the need for a broader, more inclusive view of success in today’s world, and how to achieve it.

The New Normal

You’ve probably noticed the following:

• Unrelenting turmoil, disruption, and unpredictability throughout the world.

• Worldwide interconnection and transparency, socially, technologically, and economically.

• Rising diversity (which will become a majority within the current decade) along with acceptance of working and living with people of different backgrounds, beliefs and sexual orientation.

• Increasing scientific data about the impact of humanly-created climate change upon water shortages, famines, and weather extremes — events we’ve already witnessed, with more already waiting in the wings.

• Factual evidence that Keynes was correct and continues to be — made even clearer by the failure of austerity measures in the Eurozone.

The scope of the new normal is broad and encompassing. Recognizing it as a reality is the basis for creating solutions to the new challenges that worldwide turmoil and interconnection create. And that includes defining what success in personal life and for a society really means, in this new era. The problem is, current Republican ideology doesn’t even acknowledge the new normal. Within its alternate universe, success means exclusionary pursuit of extraction and possession for oneself and like-minded associates.

That is, the Republican candidates embrace a self-interest-oriented, wealth-based view of success. It maintains that success and stability occur and prevail through unfettered pursuit of self-interest and in the absence of government regulations. It includes the failed policies of deregulation, lower taxes for the wealthiest and reducing the deficit. It also includes social and religious values that are acceptable to them as necessary for a successful life, as they define it.

In short, the Republican candidates’ view of success is exclusionary, anti-inclusive, and opposed to serving the common good. Consistent with that view, Romney sees any criticism of it and of the financial inequality it creates as simply “envy” of the rich. But describing its negative consequences isn’t “putting free enterprise on trial,” as Romney likes to claim. Nor is it a stepping stone to a “European-style social welfare state.” In fact, the recent polls showing opposition to the growing inequality between the rich and the rest of society reflect increased awareness of the negative impact the singular view of success had, the one that Republican candidates willingly embrace.

Until recently, that is. By attacking Romney’s work at Bain Capital as “vulture capitalism” and destructive to people’s lives, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry have — perhaps unwittingly — heightened public awareness of the damage created not by capitalism, per se, but by different kinds of capitalism, as E.J. Dionne pointed out in his recent Washington Post column. It’s the contrast between the goals of extracting value vs. building something that generates value; “vulture” vs. “creative” capitalism.

The Republican candidates express a more entrenched, extreme version of an old theme, actually — the consequences of intoxication by financial wealth, power, and possessions. That view of success can warp and distort the ego to the point of self-delusion, self-deception and self-aggrandizement. We read about examples in the media most every day.

Some recent studies point out the social and individual dysfunction this can create. One found that people in power tend to shift to analytical thinking which then becomes divorced from perceiving the larger context of the problem. While that can enhance the capacity for power and control, it also diminishes the ability to recognize how achieving power and maintaining success depends so much upon others; your interconnection with them. That diminishment fuels what I’ve called our “empathy deficit disorder” in a previous post.

Moreover, another recent study found that humble leaders are more highly effective than those who are egocentric. The latter are more associated with an exclusionary, self-focused view of their success and importance. In a similar vein, recent research finds that lower class people are quicker to show compassion in the face of suffering. The point is that a singular pursuit of wealth can, in fact, blunt your capacity for compassion and negatively impact your effectiveness in your work roles or other relationships.

What’s “Success” In Today’s World?

The interdependence and turmoil of the new normal point towards expanding our view of success to one that’s more relevant to our times. It includes being able to build, contribute, create and innovate in ways that have impact on and can benefit all people and institutions for the long run, not only oneself or one’s allies. Now, more than ever, it’s true that “nothing comes from nothing.” Creating success for oneself is inseparable from individual actions and public policies that promote security, opportunity for growth of competencies, physical and mental well-being, and a sustainable environment for future generations. Success means contribution to all of those things.

This broader view of success is increasingly framed as serving the common good, something larger than just your own needs and desires. That orientation reflects an awareness that beneath our surface differences we’re all One. We experience the same human needs, fears and longings. We’re all intertwined in mutual dependency on this shared planet. We’re all equal shareholders in the future.

That perspective is the foundation for creative solutions to today’s challenges. Psychologically, it fuels the capacity for empathy and compassion; honest self-awareness and harnessing the self-centeredness that’s part of being human. It includes mental attitudes like flexibility and openness; “thinking like Google.” This is a view of “whole life success.” It’s less defined by personal financial wealth and self-interest alone, and more by living a successful, sustainable life that is grown through active support of the well-being of all.

The prospect of a societal shift towards a more inclusive view of success and how it can contribute solutions to our challenges is heightened by trends in that direction already visible. Some examples:

• A growing movement towards serving common good through charity and individual acts.

• The application of scientific research to building compassion and diminishing egocentrism.

• The simple expression of a little girl who, in this video, instinctively “gets” the reality of interconnection.

• New management philosophies about sustainability and leadership.

• The growing merger of new psychological perspectives about emotional health, ancient spiritual teachings about the authentic self, and the discoveries of modern science, as Deepak Chopra and others have written about.

Meanwhile, in the political arena, we’re witnessing the clash of two visions: one that pulls towards the old extraction-oriented, self-serving way of life that produces “winners” and “losers;” the other, towards behavior and policies that promote successful, sustainable lives and resources for the many, and positive interconnection with others, through tolerance and acceptance of the differences among people on our planet. The political debate would be more honest if it took place around those different visions of life and the consequences they have for our future.

In brief, it’s that management practices, the workplace relationships that result from them, and the overall business model is stuck within a 20th century mindset and worldview. And that’s dysfunctional in today’s world of chaos, interdependency, and transparency. Today, collaboration and openness are essential for generating and sustaining success, both in work and in life outside of work. The new world environment includes clear shifts in what people look for and want from their careers; and from the organizations to which they’ll commit their creative energies. These new realities are pushing companies to transform how they do business and how they treat people working within them. The push is towards supporting new learning, creative innovation, and long-term vision that promotes sustainability as well as contributes to greater well-being via the product or service.

What Happens At Work

With those emerging shifts in mind, some of the new findings shed light point to what may help support these transformations in people’s life at work and within business leadership. Consider a new survey from the consulting firm rogenSI. It reports that about 25% of the global workforce is depressed. The primary source is people’s experience at work. In fact, 92 percent of those surveyed linked the state of their mental health to their job.

That’s no surprise, really: A ComPsych survey finds that two-thirds of employees report unprecedented levels of stress. And 29% report feeling so stressed that they’re often unable to be effective at all, during the workday. Of course workload is a factor. But the impact of other sources has been increasing. They include negative, unsupportive and undermining relationships on the job, including those with peers; destructive interactions with management; and the negative impact of a management culture that’s stifling or unrewarding of talent.

Another study finds that work actually makes many people physically sick. It’s not so much the long hours but conflicts with others, each day at work. Also contributing to sickness are confusion, ambiguity or negative competition around roles; in addition to insufficient resources or other organizational constraints. A recently promoted senior executive described the latter, telling me that her new role didn’t include the staff and other resources she needed to be effective.

Overall, continuous intense pressure and heavy workloads fueled by negative management practices will generate fear and anxiety, especially when employees lack the flexibility or resources they need. These are unhealthy Catch-22 situations, and the research shows the consequences: a close association between physical symptoms and each of the above factors. Moreover, research finds a link between your level of stress at work and the length of your life. In a literal sense, your work may be killing you.

Chronic stress takes an emotional and physical toll, and working within a negative, unrewarding workplace and management culture are prime contributors. Researchers find that such factors are the single most important factor related to length of life, especially the absence of positive support and collaboration in relationships with co-workers. Another study found that the level of engagement and connection in people’s workplace relationships with co-workers and in performing their workplace roles corresponded to whether they felt they were thriving, struggling….or suffering.

Most of these destructive features coalesce around trying to succeed and have impact within a workplace culture that either undermines what you need to be successful, or is stacked against you to begin with. When I first wrote about the link between career success and emotional conflict in Modern Madness a couple of decades ago, I found that the main conflicts people typically experienced were enervating trade-offs and feelings of self-betrayal — especially around personal values and ideals that clashed with the behavior and attitudes necessary for career advancement. Much of that is still true, but those conflicts have been mostly supplanted by two major changes: In the world that organizations operate in; and in what people look for in their careers today.

The Backstory

The Crash of ’08 helped unraveled the old model of career pressures to cope with unhealthy work and role behavior in exchange for financial reward and steady career advancement. That’s now gone. Much of the mental and emotional distress people experience today reflects the disruption that we’re now in the midst of. Robert Reich has described the heart of the current unraveling, writing that,

In that old view, being rich was proof of hard work, and lack of money proof of indolence or worse. The old view was anyone could make it in America with enough guts and gumption. The old view was also that great wealth trickled downward — that the rich made investments in jobs and growth that benefited all of us. But that view, too, has lost its sheen. Nothing has trickled down.

 At the same time there’s rising awareness that many alternative paths to success and fulfillment are sprouting all over the place. That can leave one chagrined about what’s happening – the current decade’s version of “Mr. Jones” in Bob Dylan’s “Ballad of a Thin Man.” For example, recent stories in the media question the value of college and it’s relevance to a successful, fulfilling life. And New York Times columnist Tom Friedman described an emerging, relevant theme of younger people who see themselves as a pro-active personal vehicle of innovation and success; of their own development — what he calls “the start-up of you.” A great illustration of the new paths and attitudes that are breaking free from the old model was a recent story in the New York Times Magazine about Lex Luger, a young, highly successful music-maker who dropped out of high school, driven by his love of what he wanted to do, his pro-active attitude and his talent.

The consequences of the new world environment for careers in organizations is that people respond with energy and commitment when their workplace is highly collaborative and supports continuous growth; when it enables them to have impact on something beyond just financial reward. And, when the company pursues long-term, sustainable business strategies. People who build success and well-being within such organizations are highly proactive within the “nonequilibrium” world they’re immersed in. These are among the features I’ve described as part of the rising 4.0 career orientation.

If employees are more likely to be engaged and productive when their work provides a greater impact than simply helping increase profit, companies are also more successful when they building a culture of collaboration and transparency; when they create a flexible, long-term vision of the business. All this is a far cry from the old top-down, command-and-control world of yesterday. In short, companies that are able to retain the best workers build a business model that integrates sustainable practices, commitment to high value in their service or product, and contributes to the common good.

Moving Towards Transformation

There are hopeful signs of the kinds of changes that will support positive, healthy practices for both organizations and their employees. Some are found in research findings; others in examples of new business perspectives. Some examples:

• Studies find that well-being is highly related to a sense of positive connection and engagement at work, and to being able to provide service of some kind through your contributions to the enterprise. In fact, only 7% of well-being was attributed to income. In addition — the flip side of the finding that an unpleasant workplace can shorten your life — positive relations with co-workers and a supportive, positive management behavior is associated with a longer life. The perception of emotional support at work was the strongest indicator of future health.

• Increasing movement towards a business model that prioritizes well-being over growth, in which a company’s products, services and brands support maximum flourishing for customers, workers and society. For example, Dov Seidman calls it the rise of the “new normal,” marked by high degrees of transparency, interconnection and interdependency. Successful companies embrace these perspectives, rather than ignore or resist them. Short-term mindsets become displaced by long-term perspectives.

• The best businesses realize that they are more than just engines to make money, as Rosabeth Moss Kanter pointed out in the Harvard Business Review, writing that they are “also vehicles for accomplishing societal purposes and for providing meaningful livelihoods for those who work in them.” The most successful companies consider whether or not they are building long-term institutions of society. They invest in the future while paying attention to the needs of society and people.

The upshot of these encouraging signs is that employees will feel their work is meaningful and will be more engaged when it has some wider benefit other than simply increasing profits. But that’s part of a larger shift in leadership and business perspectives that represents, in effect, an evolution of the “DNA” of the organization’s culture at all levels. For the individual worker, that means healthier interactions with co-workers, subordinates and bosses, and a diminishing sense that your work is “interfering” too much with your life.

A team from Cornell’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Notre Dame and the University of Western Ontario conducted the study. They surveyed people’s self-reported descriptions of their level of “agreeableness.” The researchers found that men who rated themselves “highly agreeable” earned less money than men who described themselves as less so — on average, about 18 percent less annually. The gap was found among women as well, but to a lesser degree. Regarding these findings, one of the study’s co-authors, Beth A. Livingston, concluded that “Nice guys are getting the shaft.”

But how, exactly, did the researchers define “nice” or “agreeable” in the study? Moreover, it’s notable that defined “success” solely in terms of income, and that may not be the criteria that everyone uses — especially since the post-2008 crash.

The researchers asked the participants to rate themselves along several related dimensions, such as “agreeable” vs. “quarrelsome;” “difficult” vs. “cooperative;” and “stubborn vs. flexible.” One problem with this is the wide variation among people’s self-definitions of “agreeable,” “cooperative,” and so forth. And, those traits were contrasted with traits the researchers provided to reflect the other end of the scale, which prevented considering that such “opposite” traits might co-exist in a person. But overall, I think the researchers failed to understand today’s changing workplace — how the highly fluid, intensely competitive, interconnected, unpredictable business and economic environment shapes the criteria for success.

That is, a more accurate interpretation of the findings that linked “nice guys” with less financial success is this: People who chose “agreeableness” and related descriptions as better descriptions of themselves then the alternatives they were given, like “stubborn” or “quarrelsome” (even though they aren’t mutually exclusive, as I explain below), are likely to share some traits. They’re likely to be less pro-active; more complacent and less assertive in their roles than others who are more successful, innovative and productive in their careers.

To explain, the researchers seem to have assumed that being “nice” — as they envision it — means being passive or less actively engaged. Hence, Dr. Livingston’s comment that men who are too “agreeable” may not conform “…to expectations of ‘masculine behavior,” and that such men may be less successful because they’re not living up to longstanding expectations that men be aggressive, combative or even rude.

However, the reality of successful companies today trends towards a different, more complex direction: towards people and leaders who embody on the one hand, assertiveness, engagement, passion, high energy, and self-assurrance; and, on the other, collaboration, positive team relationships, keeping their ego in check, and willingness to put their energies and skills into serving the larger enterprise.

The latter traits are less characteristic of inhibited, demure and passive people. And their career success and financial rewards are likely to be more limited. But the successful traits go hand-in-hand with “niceness” in the sense of demonstrating respect, mutual support, working together towards common goals. In short, you can be highly engaged, collaborative and pro-active; but not dominating, controlling, or a jerk. These are the features of people who increasingly populate today’s organizations — what I’ve called the rise of the 4.0 career orientation in a previous post.

In today’s business and career environment, one will see strong argument, debate and highly charged discussion around decisions and projects. But all of that goes hand-in-hand with civility and mutuality; all necessary for teams to perform at high levels. Kathy Savit, CEO of Lockerz, a Seattle-based company, pointed this out when she emphasized the difference between being respectful and being agreeable. “We are not about being ‘nice’ or ‘agreeable’… we have a lot of robust debates about all kinds of things. But we do stress the notion of being respectful.”

Being “nice” or “agreeable” in ways that lead to success means being open, flexible, collaborative, and non-defensive; along with high energy, creative innovation, and commitment to new learning — generally, highly pro-active behavior, the orientation that Thomas Friedman described in a recent column as, “The Start-Up of You.”

Of course, there’s often a fine line between self-assurance, conviction… and arrogance. Steve Jobs was recently described as having both — “…the last great tyrant,” as David Streitfeld described him in the New York Times. But Jobs is likely to have kept his self-assurance on the productive side of self-destructive, narcissistic arrogance. We’ve seen the latter topple some CEO’s careers and their company’s success.

In fact, research finds that the negative side of the Type A personality and extreme Alpha Male behavior are not very successful in today’s work culture. Nor are they healthy. For example, the Alpha Male has a high level of physiological and emotional stress and is more prone to heart disease and a host of other problems.

The True Links Between Personal Traits and Success

Overall, considerable research and other observations of workplace behavior supports the alternative finding, that “niceness” is linked with success. Some examples:

• People who maintain positive moods and attitudes perform more effectively in the workplace. They create greater profitability, customer satisfaction and peer-rated performance. An atmosphere of rudeness and disrespect undermines success.
• Vigorous, engaged, but collegial discussion and argument lead to more effective problem-solving. However, that’s diminished when the tone of interactions is negatively competitive.
• More broadly, positive leadership is linked with increased levels of employee health and well being. And speaking of health, research also finds that collaboration and positive workplace relations can increase your lifespan.
• As far as relationships outside of work, the rude, hostile and arrogant behavior that the Cornell research team concluded was more “successful,” doesn’t do so well at home, either. It’s found to unleash uncivil behavior upon family members, and contributes to domestic dysfunction.

In fact, there’s evidence that the more people feel devalued at work, whether by peers or management practices, the less energy goes into creating value and contributing to the product or service. Top performers recognize such negatives, and that often leads to their leaving the organization.

I’m interested in hearing about your own experiences and observations, in your comments, below. Meanwhile, try staying “nice,” mutually supportive….and highly assertive!

• A public interest organization engaged in social justice advocacy is confronted with staff allegations of hostile, abusive management practices. “We’re all committed to our mission,” its director tells me, “so we shouldn’t be having these kinds of problems.”

• A humanitarian organization witnesses increasing dysfunction of a senior staff member. Management time is swallowed up trying to deal with the person’s declining performance, absenteeism, and erratic behavior toward coworkers. The CEO doesn’t know what to do. Fire the person? Get him help? He asks me, “How do we balance compassion for this person with our need to carry out our work?”

All organizations want to be successful, whether for-profit businesses or those in the non-profit world, large and small — such as trade associations, humanitarian government contractors, advocacy groups or government agencies. All of them grapple with new challenges emerging from our insecure and shifting economic, political and cultural environment. The later also includes growing workplace diversity and changing attitudes about career and leadership. But organizations in the nonprofit realm are especially vulnerable to problems like the examples above. That’s partly because their mission is often at odds with the behavior of its employees and leaders. Increasingly, that clash is reflected in an intertwined mixture of personal conflicts and dysfunctional organizational management.

Several new circumstances contribute to the blend of personal and organizational conflicts that nonprofits deal with today. For example, they face intense competition for funding in the new economic climate. Some operate within a political culture that’s overtly hostile to their mission, such as the expressed desire of some Republican politicians to abolish the EPA or FDA. They’ve  tried to claim that advocacy groups promoting clean air, clean water, or public safety in food products harm the economy, contrary to fact.

One consequence is that nonprofit organizations recognize the need to become more efficient and focused; and need to apply management and fiscal practices from the for-profit realm. Such strategies are good steps when they work. But they can also create new, confusing conflicts for the organization as well, if new, “business-type” practices appear to contradict the organization’s mission and values. That can generate confusion or suspicion among staff regarding the leadership’s intent and trustworthiness.

Moreover, a range of career conflicts often occur among employees. For example, many are attracted to an organization’s ideals, especially those that with an advocacy or humanitarian mission. But over time, they may become increasingly motivated by career, financial and personal goals that are limited by virtue of working within such organizations, especially those with limited budgets and few opportunities for career advancement. That can create conflicts between personal desires and ideals.

The leadership of nonprofit organizations often makes the mistake of assuming they’re immune to any of these conflicts simply because they’re committed to missions they believe in. But no organization today is immune to the larger forces impacting our society. One example: People attracted to working for economic or social justice organizations nevertheless want and expect a positive management culture and collaborative work-place. The rising orientation to work and career that I’ve described as the “4.0″ career orientation includes wanting greater meaning and purpose in work, and having more integration between work and personal life. The latter is especially true among the younger generation of workers. Moreover, women and minorities expect that equality and respect will be actually practiced, not just listed as principles in a mission statement.

All of these issues directly affect a person’s well-being, work relationships, and creative energy in the workplace; often more so in nonprofit organizations because explicit ideals are embodied in the organization’s very purpose and mission.

What Helps?

Successful dealing with problems that impact nonprofit organizations include good fiscal and organizational leadership, and programs that support ongoing learning and development of employees. But especially important is linking the ideals of the organization’s mission with positive, supportive management practices. Ironically, what often fails to help is bringing in an organizational consultant to restructure communication and management systems. Or, asking the employee assistant program or human resources office for help when there’s an employee or executive of the organization who appears emotionally troubled, dysfunctional or abusive. Either approach may either be ineffective, or even make matters worse.

Here’s why: Your typical management and organizational consultants don’t necessarily share the same values or ideals with the nonprofit organization that’s asking them for help. That’s often true for those engaging in advocacy-oriented or ideologically committed causes. Consultants might recommend changes or restructuring in areas that clash with organization’s values, mission or image of itself. Charges about “selling out” the mission for the sake of organizational “efficiency” may result. The consultant may not have been tuned-in to this possibility.

When a member of the staff appears out of sync with the culture of the organization, and/or seems to be dealing with personal troubles that undermine working relationships, a different kind of challenge exists. Referral to the employee assistance program or to the organization’s wellness center usually miss the mark, in terms of identifying the source of the problem and what could help. An executive coaching program may not address the source of the work-related conflict, either. Consequently, no change results, or the problem may get worse.

The challenges, here, include separating out conflicts that are a situational response to something work-related from those that reflect some disturbance within the person, independent of work; identifying when the two are, in fact intertwined; and knowing how to best deal with any of them.

When I began working with the link between work and behavior issues a few decades ago, confusion around understanding these challenges was the norm. Today, it’s better, but not much. Most managers and leaders — as well as most mental health practitioners and business consultants — lack sufficient understanding that the management culture, career conflicts and desires, and minority and gender diversity all impact and shape a person’s emotional attitudes and behavior. They can exacerbate old vulnerabilities, mask conflicts, or create new ones.

Although nonprofit organizations face unique issues, what does help is a version of what companies in the corporate world need to do for effective dealing with their own people-organization conflicts. An important first step in either world is commitment to self-examination – self-knowledge, on the part of managers and leaders. In the non-profit world, that means confronting the gaps that may exist between the organization’s purpose and mission and those embodied in “real time;” that is, in those reflected in its leaders’ actual interaction with and management of employees. Many nonprofits ignore this gap, or think it’s irrelevant. And then they’re flummoxed when they’re accused of contradictions between the organization’s actual workplace culture and what it presents to the outside world.

It’s also crucial to become aware of and embrace the fact that people want a positive, creative, energized, and learning-oriented workplace culture. Opportunity for growth and development, and for having an impact through work are significant drivers; as are wanting a culture of respect, recognition, teamwork, and creative opportunity. This orientation isn’t nullified just because the person works for a mission-driven or service organization.

Today’s workers repudiate arrogance, authoritarian behavior and insensitivity on the part of managers — even though they may share the same ideals or ideology. I witnessed an example of this recently when the young staff and interns of a small nonprofit rebelled against the executive director’s old-style “command and control” management, and complained en masse to the Board of Directors. There are many nonprofits whose values and mission are completely at odds with the tyrannical behavior of their leaders, who would easily qualify for a listing in “Worst Bosses in America.”

When a consultant is brought in, his or her own perspectives and values need to be in synch with those of the organization. The consultant’s experience and savvy dealing with the link between personal and organizational conflicts is relevant; as is the consultant’s point of view regarding sustainable practices, social responsibility, transparency and related issues.

The bottom line is that the successful nonprofit organizations — whether small advocacy groups, large charities or foundations, USAID contractors, trade associations, or professional membership organizations — give more than lip-service to the developmental needs of staff as well as to current anxieties and uncertainties that affect everyone’s work and career. The most successfully functioning nonprofits know they need to practice their own ideals inside the organization, not just in their work within the outside world.

The research says that fantasizing about achieving goals makes you less likely to achieve them because it drains the energy you need to pursue them. I think the research is as flawed and distorted as The Secret and similar teachings, but for very different reasons. Let’s take a look.

This study, from New York University’s Motivation Lab, found that “positive fantasies” predict poor achievement because they don’t generate the energy to pursue the desired future. That is, if you create idealized images of future outcomes, your fantasized ambitions are less likely to become reality. That’s because positive fantasies are de-energizing.

The research contains so many confused ideas and faulty assumptions that it’s hard to know where to begin. But it does, indirectly, open a door to understanding some important elements for turning your goals into reality.

Ironically, the popular idea it’s based on — that visualizing your goals with enough “intent” will make them happen — is, itself, a twisted and misunderstood version of an ancient spiritual perspective. But this new research also confuses a “positive fantasy” with visualizing a goal or objective. They are different. And, the research also misunderstands what you need to turn a vision into a reality.

The research was done using college students. (That’s typical, for academic research, which is then extrapolated to people of all life stages and all post-21 experiences, but that’s another story.) Researchers examined the effect of experimentally induced “positive fantasies” about the future, in four different studies.

For example:
Women were asked to fantasize positively about looking and feeling good in high-heeled shoes (I know – and I’m not even going to try commenting on the merits of that Mad Men-era “positive fantasy.”)

Some participants asked to fantasize positively about winning an essay contest. And some were asked to describe a positive outcome for the week ahead, including imagining getting “A” grades, or being sought after by a desirable sexual partner.

The researchers decided to induce these “positive fantasies” because they assumed that those are the most desirable things one would want to achieve. Note that they’re actually acquisitions, or accolades for looking good, or getting recognition for oneself. I don’t see any “positive fantasies” such as, say, creating a new, useful iPhone app; or having created a service to feed malnourished children. But more about that later.

The researchers measured the effect of positive fantasies upon systolic blood pressure. They had decided that would be a good measure of “low energy;” that “low energy” would indicate that positive fantasies translate into poor achievement.

That is, the assumption was that people’s “energy,” defined by this measure, decreased as the participants engaged in positive fantasies, compared with another group who looked upon the fantasies with more skepticism. The latter group included women who were asked to fantasize more critically about the pros and cons of wearing trendy, high-heeled shoes; people who were asked to fantasize more negatively about their prospects for winning the essay contest; and those who were asked to just daydream about the coming week rather than fantasize about a hot date or getting “A’s”.

In short, researchers concluded that positive fantasies result in less energy than fantasies that question the desired future. That is, that positive fantasies will drain the energy you need for doing the work that will make them achievable.

What you can draw from this study is grossly misleading, at best. And that applies to its definition of desirable goals; what it means by a “positive fantasy;” and its assumption about what really helps achieve your goals or objectives. But through its flaws it illuminates some important things that are helpful to know about how you can, in fact, increase the possibility of achieving a desired dream.

Fantasizing vs. Envisioning - There’s a big difference. A fantasy is more like a wish or ungrounded notion of something you hope for or idealize acquiring. It’s usually thought of in terms of the end result. That’s closer to a daydream, and, interestingly, the researchers instructed people in a control group to just daydream about anything at all, rather than, for example, getting all “A’s.”

Creating a vision, however, is a more specific and developed formulation. It’s more of a picture of something you that you can envision pulling you towards, like from a magnet or rubber band. You experience it as a process, steps along the way that you move through, in order to turn it into reality. A fantasy is likely to just linger, hover in the air, and go nowhere. You work at a vision, because it pulls you along a path — from its beginnings, in a thought, a wish, (or fantasy); towards more fleshing out of what it could look like; towards steps that require your mental, creative, emotional and strategic powers, to bring it into fruition.

What Goals Are Desirable Ones? - The goals in this study were all self-serving, self-centered ones – “getting” for oneself to consume or to glorify the ego. Such goals are, in fact, less likely to generate positive outcome, whether in personal life or at work. The most creative, positive accomplishments and achievements result from leaning to “forget yourself,” in the sense of putting your energies into something larger than just your own ego-gratification. I’ve described this in some previous posts about what supports finding a fulfilling life purpose, and what enables people to evolve in healthy, productive ways in their lifetime.

Examples of the contrast between purely ego-related, self-absorbed goals and a larger vision would include the difference between a goal to create a great new product or service, rather than trying to capture a big market share from the product. Or, building a solid, mutually loving relationship with a partner, rather than wanting to “have” a girlfriend or boyfriend to show off or have readily available sex with. Too much self-interest tends to undermine success in life. That’s been observed in the business world, by looking at the goals of those who proved to be most successful: They achieved business and career goals by pursuing themindirectly; by deliberately not pursuing them. In relationships, the same principle is visible among those whose aims are not so much to “acquire” a new partner, but who wants to experience pleasure and enjoyment in relationships, and then find that one may grow and develop over time

What Does It Take To Get There? - The assumption that lower systolic blood pressure means you don’t have enough “energy” to achieve your goals is very mixed-up thinking. It confuses lower motivation associated with residing in a wish-fulfilling, ego-serving fantasy – and which may correlate with lower blood pressure — with the ingredients for energizing the cognitive and emotional capacities you need for achieving a goal or objective that you’ve visualized, not just fantasized about.

That is, an internal state of calm — associated with lower blood pressure — can underlie both wishful thinking and having a clear focus on and determination to achieve your visualized goal or objective. Much research supports this. For example, a large number of studies of the impact of meditation upon the brain and behavior show that internal calm, centeredness, focusing and mindful attention enhances both your cognitive powers and the strategic actions you need to undertake to bring your vision into reality.

The upshot: Know the difference between idealized fantasies that go nowhere and a vision of possibility that activates your powers and your actions. Pursue goals that have worthwhile impact on something more than just your own narrow self-interest. And realize that internal focus, mindfulness and physiological calm activate the right kind of energy for making your vision possible. And that’s no “Secret!”

Many people struggle to find ways to better cope when subjected to unhealthy, abusive management. Often that means learning stress management techniques. They can be helpful, especially when you don’t think any alternatives exist. But ultimately, they aren’t enough. However, reframing how you envision your situation to begin with can open the door to proactive, positive actions in the situation you feel trapped in.

Cathy’s example contains some ways you can do that. She was at mid-level in her company and had a record of steady promotion. At one point, senior leadership in her area changed abruptly, and she was now reporting to a newly appointed boss. “I’m here to shake things up,” he told everyone when he took over. “Everyone’s job is on the line.”

Cathy’s assessment of her new boss was that he didn’t really know her area of expertise, nor was he very interested in learning about it. Nevertheless, he freely criticized her work. Moreover, he kept sitting on a promotion that she had been in line for.

It wasn’t just her: Her boss stirred up much resentment among others because of his arrogant, controlling, dismissive style. When Cathy researched something he had requested and presented it to him, he exploded, saying that she had wasted her time doing something that had “no relevance.” When she pointed out that he had requested the analysis to begin with, he denied it.

But Cathy didn’t just hunker down, become stressed and depressed, or feel disempowered. First, she used a meditative technique to focus her attention on just observing the negative emotions her boss’ behavior aroused in her. That is, she practiced “watching” her emotions as they passed through her. This helped her refrain from being pulled by angry emotions into greater, more debilitating depths, or into unproductive behavior.

Doing that enabled her, in turn, to step “outside” herself (that is, outside the narrow vantage point of her own ego). She looked at herself as if she were a character in a movie. She imagined rewriting the dialogue and actions of the character that was herself, and she envisioned how this “character” might create a different scenario.

This is a form of what I’ve called learning to “forget yourself” (that is, moving beyond and through your immediate self-interest to see yourself in a larger context). Cathy’s enlarged perspective enabled her to accept that her boss was simply acting in accordance with the person he was, regardless of the reasons or how she judged them. Doing that helped prevent her from being drawn into taking his behavior personally, even though it impacted her personally. She rose “above” her situations with, in effect, “engaged indifference.”

That is, she remained “indifferent” to her own emotional reactions, yet she stayed very engaged in looking for solutions from within her broadened perspective. She considered the possible viewpoints and agenda of her boss, from within his possible mindset. That added to her capacity to figure out what might be going on — and what might help.

For example, she thought about what might be some drivers of her boss’ behavior. Was he simply a jerk? An unskilled manager? Did he have an agenda that she didn’t understand? Was he dealing with some insecurities of his own? Personal issues at home? She did a little sleuthing and learned that her new boss had been brought in under a lot of pressure to create some major changes in that part of the organization. Moreover, she learned that he had a troubled teenager at home. Knowing these things didn’t change her opinion about his behavior, but it helped her realize that it would be useful to both of them if he didn’t think of her as a thorn in his side. And it was up to her to try to make that happen.

In essence, she saw the whole picture as a set of circumstances that created a “perfect storm” for her, and that called for an effective solution, from her. So, when her boss criticized a report she had prepared — on the grounds that it didn’t include something that he had previously told her to ignore, but which he now claimed he needed and had told her so — she anticipated that. Rather than reacting with anger, defensiveness or frustration, she simply said she would provide it immediately and asked how she could best help him with anything else that he needed at this point.

Now this may sound counterintuitive, or that it’s “giving in” to a tyrant. But from an enlarged perspective of indifference and engagement, it’s not. That’s because you’re taking into account the emotional drivers and needs of the difficult person you’re dealing with. And you can’t do that if you’re driven solely by your own.

By stepping “outside” herself, Cathy saw some ways to provide her boss the support he need to feel, which, in turn, could help calm his anxieties. She asked him for ways that she could aid his objectives. At the same time, she decided to cede control of some areas that didn’t matter to her, but which her boss seemed to enjoy micromanaging. Cathy felt secure in the knowledge that her expertise wasn’t diminished by her boss’ agenda or his actions.

But there was one more important step that she took: looking down the road, Cathy concluded that her future under him was probably a dead end for the foreseeable future. So she immediately updated her resume and began looking for a new position. She kept her eyes on her own career development objectives, while at the same time navigating through her situation with as little friction as possible.

Learn To ‘Enlarge The Problem’

President Eisenhower once said, when speaking about his experience as Allied commander during World War II, that if you have difficulty understanding a problem or figuring out how to solve it, “enlarge the problem.” That’s what Cathy did. Her example provides some general guidelines that can help, at least in some situations. They include:

• Create an emotional buffer zone. Observe your internal emotional responses to your situation, but recognize that you’re not obligated to act on them. Visualize a “space” between your emotions and how you choose to deal with them in your behavior. If you don’t, you’re likely to say or do something unhelpful or damaging to yourself. That is, stay fully aware of your buttons that your boss is pushing, but separate that from simply reacting to what he’s triggered, or from taking his behavior personally. Don’t get drawn into reacting to your boss’ emotional issues. Recognize that you always have a choice about what you do with your emotions in your conduct.

• Expand your perspective. By not reacting externally to your internal reactions, you are, in effect, learning to be “indifferent” to them. This allows you to enlarge your perspective about the whole situation: what’s feeding into it, and what’s driving your boss’ conduct. When you expand your vision beyond your personal, narrow vantage point, you can see the problem in a much larger context. That includes the multiple factors that feed into it, such as the role of other players or other organizational issues and politics, regardless of what your opinion is about them. This includes getting inside your boss’ mental perspective to understand what he or she may be sensitive to or reacting to. For example, some of your boss’ controlling or abusive behavior may reflect fear about her or his own security in the position.

• Create productive actions with “engaged indifference.” That means staying proactively engaged with solving the problem, yet “indifferent” to your own emotional reactions. Then, you avoid getting sucked into unproductive behavior fueled by anger, resentment or self-pity, or staying fixed within too narrow an understanding of the problem, which leads to a dead end.

Ask yourself what you can do proactively, even if it means “feeding the dog what it wants to eat,” regardless of your opinion of your boss’ choice of “food.” Visualize alternative takes of the “movie” about your situation, as Cathy did. Use them to identify some new actions that reflect “turns of the plot.”

You might decide to go along with some parts of your situation, because your enlarged perspective enables you to see down the road, as you might from the rooftop of a building. You may decide that that’s the best strategy for achieving your longer-range objectives. That might sound like “giving in,” but it’s not when you know what you’re doing and why. For example, you might look for ways to help your boss feel more secure or supported, despite what you think of him or her, because that diminishes your boss’ anxiety and will therefore make your life a bit easier, as long as you remain there.

Of course, it’s important to self-examine at the outset, when you find yourself in a bad situation. Look honestly, with outside help, if necessary, at what you might be contributing to the problem. Ask yourself, “How much is it me or the situation?” Without doing that, you might take actions that you later regret or that prove to be unhelpful.

Finally, it’s crucial to leave any situation that becomes outright abusive, or if you’re subjected to humiliation and extreme denigration. And then, do the research when considering a new job: look for signs of a potentially negative situation, tune in to what you hear during interviews, ask people within the organization what it’s like to work for that company or that boss, heed any red flags raised by what you hear, and don’t enable history to repeat itself.

“This company values incompetence,” he continued. “That’s the real problem. That shows you how screwed-up it is. But they’re telling me that I’m the problem! That I need help? It’s the people upstairs that need it!” He shook his head in dismay.

Sound familiar? People like Ralph are all too common in companies today. He illustrates just one type of abusive boss, often part of an overall unhealthy management culture that takes an enormous toll on both workers and business success.

In this post I describe some examples of that toll in today’s workplace culture and point towards some ways to deal with them — ways that require something different from the usual coping and stress management strategies.

You might guess, correctly, that Ralph was oblivious to the fact that his description of others was how his co-workers and subordinates described him. One of his colleagues had e-mailed him after their last encounter, saying “If you ever set foot in my office again, I’ll throw your ass right out the window.” Ralph dismissed that with a wave of his hand, saying, “That’s typical – he’s threatened by me because he knows I’m leagues beyond him. Always have been.”

Ralph is a senior executive and, in fact, a high-level performer in his company. But his abusive management and poor relationships were generating a growing chorus of complaints. To its credit, his company wanted to salvage rather than fire him, and offered him an executive coaching program. But Ralph saw this as punishment.

Of course there are psychological roots to behavior like Ralph’s. But that doesn’t matter much to the people who have to deal with the consequences on a daily basis. It doesn’t matter what drives your boss’ or coworkers’ behavior if you’re having to pop Xanax to cope with it.

Ralph’s an example of just one kind of psychologically unhealthy management you might encounter at work: the narcissistic and arrogant boss. Others are more abusive, bullying people who create a great deal of suffering for those reporting to them. I find that some with those tendencies often gravitate towards companies that either implicitly sanction or actively encourage such behavior; organizations whose culture is marked by a hostile, abusive work environment.

An unhealthy management culture has a negative impact on both the employees and the business success of the company. Research shows that an unhealthy management culture and the stress it generates diminish the mental efficiency of workers subjected to it. For example, a Gallup survey found that such work groups are on average 50 percent less productive and 44 percent less profitable than more positively managed groups.

There’s even some evidence that psychologically unhealthy management can create a form of post-traumatic stress disorder, like that seen among soldiers returning from combat.

Abusive bosses often run into problems themselves, eventually, especially in organizations that require a high degree of teamwork and collaboration for both individual and business success – increasingly the norm, today. Nevertheless, many companies continue to harbor or foster unhealthy, toxic management. In fact, some research suggests that it’s on the rise, both in the U.S. and abroad.

It can be devastating. For example, Margaret landed a job with a small but growing event-planning company when she was just a few years out of college. Initially she was pretty excited by “wide-open opportunity” for career possibilities that her boss described to her. Unfortunately, the reality proved otherwise. She soon discovered that she was working for the classic Boss From Hell, like portrayed in the movie “The Devil Wears Prada.” Margaret was subject to daily tirades, name-calling, and constant threats of being fired. She heard through the grapevine that her boss always managed people this way, especially those in entry-level positions. Constant turnover was the norm. That seemed to be fine with her boss, probably because it made pay raises unnecessary.

Margaret sought advice from an older employee, but that didn’t help much. She was told that she was simply spoiled, like most 20-somethings; that she should feel lucky to have an entry-level job with benefits, in this economy. Margaret didn’t know which way to go, but she knew she had trouble sleeping and felt like she was developing an ulcer.

“When I finally leave after a 12-hour day, I’m usually in tears all the way home,” Margaret told me. “Some of my friends say I should just ‘suck it up.’ Others say I should quit right now, and some tell me I should just tell the bitch off. I don’t know what I want to do. I need the job, but I’m a wreck at the end of every day and I can’t take it much more.”

When you’re on the receiving end of bosses like that, you’re likely to feel highly anxious and on guard, at best. A senior executive of a large corporation once told me, with apparent glee, “This is a paranoid culture. We want people to feel that someone’s always looking over their shoulder, ready to catch them on something. That’s what keeps them sharp.”

But does it? Surveys find that large numbers of American workers are dealing with abusive and/or incompetent managers, and it hurts the companies they work for. A Gallup Poll of 1 million workers found bad bosses are the No.1 reason for quitting a job. And a 2011 pollconducted by Harris Interactive for the American Psychological Association found that 36 percent of workers report ongoing work stress, most of which is related to negative or outright unhealthy management practices. Between 40-50% report heavy workload, long hours, and unrealistic expectations as among the sources of emotional distress. Nearly 50% say they don’t feel valued on the job, and about one-third report that they intend to look for another job within the next year.

Such research and survey data underscore that a psychologically unhealthy management culture extends far beyond the presence of an abusive or bullying boss. It includes environments that denigrate, demoralize and don’t support your continued learning and development. There, you may find that your achievements are ignored or unrewarded. The APA survey found that over 50% reported not receiving adequate recognition for their achievements. Moreover, you might find yourself dealing with constant political manipulation, secrecy, questionable ethical behavior, or other kinds of negative management practices.

In one company the human resources director was told by a consultant about the effect that abusive supervisors were having on employees. The consultant reported that “She got very cranky and said, ‘We don’t have time to be nice to people.’” In such companies, people are likely to be subject to a range of abusive behavior. For example, Samantha discovered that among the unwritten items in her job description was walking the boss’s dog and taking his clothes to the cleaners. Andrew, who worked in a management consulting firm, reported that his boss might scream at him for whatever he decided Andrew had done wrong, or simply not to his liking, on any given day…and then later might flip around and tell Andrew how great he was; how much his contribution was valued.

Of course, one might ask why anyone would put up with abusive bosses or unhealthy management cultures. There are many reasons – and holding on to a career position in a shaky economy can certainly play a role. But there are psychological reasons as well. Unconscious fears and conflicts can pull someone to “find a home” with abusive superiors or authority figures. He or she might be recreating the experience with an abusive parent, unconsciously, in an effort to change or repair the parent, symbolically.

Another person might live with a bad situation because he or she was taught to not make waves; or had learned to assume you can’t change or control your circumstances. Perhaps self-confidence wasn’t sufficiently fostered or strengthened while growing up, or self-esteem was damaged. One hopeful sign is that younger workers tend to be more attuned to recognizing an unhealthy workplace culture and more likely to be pro-active on their own behalf find a healthier environment. These are the kinds of workers I described in a previous post as part of the newly emerging “4.0″ career orientation.

For those who suffer, just learning better coping with unhealthy management practices with stress management techniques isn’t enough. What helps is thinking “outside the box” and creating a mental and emotional perspective that frames your dilemma differently. That can open up new, constructive actions – though they may appear contradictory at first. I’ll explain and describe some of these in Part 2 of this post.

This post originally appeared in The Huffington Post, in somewhat different form.

The list goes on, the latest being the Anthony Weiner’s “rolling disclosure” episode. The Washington Post recently compiled may of the scandals into a nice summary – for those who are interested in keeping track.

But I think this steady stream of sex-related scandals is just the most titillating and graphic part of something more widespread and troublesome in the lives of many men and women today: the gap between people’s public lies and private truths.

That is, many people live with contradictions between their inner lives (the truths about their desires, emotional experience, self-image and ideals) and what they do with those truths behind the scenes, hidden from view (their private selves), and the lives they conduct publically, in their career paths, their relationships with their families or others they deal with and the positions they espouse or advocate (their public selves).

Public lies that contradict private truths have been part of our culture for some time. But in my work with people over the last few decades, I’ve seen it grow more rapidly since 9/11 and the economic/political events of the last few years. As I reflected on the reasons for this gap, how it damages people and our society, I was reminded of the Egyptian myth of Osiris. He was killed and dismembered, and each of the 14 pieces of his body parts was buried in different places. But then Isis, the wife of Osiris, collected the body parts and was able to put them back together. At that point, Osiris came back to life.

There’s a relevant message for today contained in the symbolism of the Osiris myth, which I’ll explain later. But first, take a look at the usual explanations of the most flagrant examples of the public-private gap, and what they suggest about power, success and social conditioning. The most common reasons offered by both media pundits and mental health professionals include the possibility that the power lust of people — most often men — and the enabling of sycophants around them loosen their control of impulses. Then, the opportunity to act on impulses for sex and domination may increase. Some research even suggests that, as people rise in power, they’re more likely to commit adultery.

In this view, as men rise in power, they have more opportunity to act on their impulses, and will do so. However, it’s not clear whether such people had shaky impulse control to begin with. Perhaps the atmosphere and adulation around power and recognition fuels and reinforces nascent narcissism, like pouring gasoline onto a fire. But it’s hard to say whether such people were narcissistic to begin with, or had tendencies that became strengthened and intensified by the perks and rewards of their situation.

Psychologically, high levels of success and power in business, politics, sports or entertainment can strengthen and fuel self-centeredness, at least. Environments in which you’re often under public scrutiny can also feed heightened aggressiveness and a sense of entitlement, an attitude of “taking what I want, because I can,” coupled with a belief that you can get away with it. Interestingly, research shows that a higher level of testosterone, typical in aggressive, narcissistic, “Type-A” personalities, stifles the natural capacity for empathy. That’s visible in people with power who use others for their own self-centered ends.

These are plausible explanations, per se, but the lives of a broader range of people who aren’t politicians or celebrities also contain private truths and public lies, though less visible and less dramatic. In my view, a major source for those within that larger mainstream is found in how men and women become conditioned into what they think an adult life is supposed to be, or should be. And much of that originates in parental imperatives, whether overt or implied. The filmmaker Spike Lee described that in a recent interview. He remarked on parents who “kill more dreams than anybody,” those who push their children to opt for career security at the cost of pursuing their passions.

Life In A Parallel Universe

The heart of the deception many enter into is that you present yourself in one way in your public role, but feel or behave a different way, in private. Life in your parallel universes often grows gradually, as you adapt to and embrace behavior that you see rewarded, even as it clashes with your own values or beliefs. Over time, that generates increasing discomfort, especially if whom you’re morphing into publically doesn’t mesh so well with the person you are inside.

This can occur when people follow pathways to “success” that are easily available or acceptable to parents. Those pathways might connect with innate abilities, whether they reflect real interests or not. The end result for them is becoming entrapped in their lives. They feel caught between elusive longings for something different and more purposeful, as opposed to settling for what they have acquired in their relationship, their lifestyleor their work.

For example, they may feel vaguely or even acutely at odds with their chosen career path, like the man who said, “I never wanted a business career,” or the woman who said, “I really wanted to be come a research scientist.” Or the feeling of being out of synch may occur in the person they created a long-term relationship with, as in the lyrics of “Once in a Lifetime,” a Talking Heads song: “You may find yourself in a beautiful house with a beautiful wife/You may ask yourself, well, how did I get here?”

This feeling of vague emotional discomfort is often the product of having embraced the “acceptable” or “practical” view of adulthood that’s put in front of you. That may include “acceptable” ways to relate, or what kinds of people to relate to, based on what the parents or extended family wants to maintain; and following one acceptable path that the parents desire and encourage or is part of a family tradition.

Private truths in conflict with public lies often erupt as overt psychiatric symptoms. Self-absorbed, narcissistic behavior may reflect a deformed effort to secure recognition and affirmation of the person’s inherent value and self-worth, an attempt to secure love for who one is inside. That may become visible in unconsciously seeking a state of infantile bliss through the hoped-for love and full attention from the partner. Some are more driven to overt hypocrisy, exploitation and dominance, and they may be fueled by deep feelings of resentment or shame.

Whether the gaps are more benign or malignant, they are the root of much of the depression and anxiety rampant in today’s culture.

Macular Degeneration Of The Self

In today’s interconnected, highly exposed and networked world, the contradiction between public lies and private truths is harder to maintain. That’s good, actually, because it opens the possibility for learning how to create a more integrated life. And that’s healthy and necessary for both individuals and society. While people’s lives are highly fragmented, the need for interconnection and interdependence is greater than ever, for building security, success and well-being in today’s globalized environment.

It’s in the present moments, not in regrets about what happened in the past, nor in fantasizing about the future, that people have the opportunity to create a life of “no more lies!” as a woman shouted at her husband one day. The old ways don’t work so well anymore, and that’s a major reason why the older baby boomer generation struggles with these conflicts. On the other hand, younger people are showing a different kind of orientation. They act more openly to create a more integrated life, one that serves something larger than just their own ego. They do so with energy and commitment. And they’re more likely to reject the “careerism” mentality that’s fueled much of the public-private gap within the older generations.

But revamping how you work and live to serve the social good as well as oneself requires an expanded vision of what you’re working and living for. Doing that is part of building psychological health today in all sectors of life. In your personal life you need an integrated vision of what you’re living and working for, a larger purpose that pulls you toward something beyond your own narrow self-interest. Such a broadened perspective is also visible in forward thinking about business, such as described by management strategist Umair Haque in his emphasis on the need for leaders to build and create value in today’s companies. And the absence of a larger vision in our political and social policies is undermining our country, as some commentators, such as E.J. Dionne, have been pointing out.

Returning to the symbolic meaning of the Osiris myth, “re-membering” the buried “parts” of yourself, those private truths, putting them back together and integrating them with your public life, is the path toward becoming “alive” again. Bringing together your private self and your public self into one person may require healing of emotional damage. And it requires some courage to shift course in your life as you assert who you are and how that impacts the person you will become as you go forward.

Here are some suggestions for beginning to live a life of “no more lies!”:

• Make a list of what you believe are your private truths, including your values or ideals. Look at all parts of your life: as a worker, parent or friend; your creative desires and abilities; your marriage or partnership; your spiritual beliefs or values; your ambitions.

• Next, make a parallel entry for each item on your list that describes your public behavior relative to each of the items. To what extent does your public behavior embody contradictions or outright denial of your private truths? Assign a number from one to five, showing the gap between each of your private truths and public lies.

• What would you need to do to reduce the lies? What can you commit yourself to doing? What kind of help do you need?

• Set a reasonable time-frame for reducing your gaps.

I’m often asked, “Why can’t I find the purpose of my life?” Over the decades I’ve heard many men and women — whether they’re psychotherapy patients working to build healthier lives or business executive trying to create healthier leadership — say at some point that they don’t know what they’re really here, for, on this planet. They’re not necessarily religious or spiritually inclined, but they feel a longing for that “certain something” that defines and integrates their lives.

Many turn to the various books and programs purport to identify their life’s purpose, but most come away dissatisfied. No closer than they were before, they identify with Bono’s plaintive cry in the U2′s song, “I still haven’t found what I’m looking for.”

And yet, many do find and live in harmony with their life’s purpose. Here are some of my observations about why many don’t, and how they differ from those who do.

First, I think everyone feels a pull towards some defining purpose to his or her life, no matter how much it may have become shrouded over along the way. In fact, you can say that all forms of life, all natural phenomena, have some purpose. There’s always movement or evolution towards some kind of outcome or fulfillment — whether it’s a tree that produces fruit or clouds that form to produce rain. But we humans become so enraptured by our daily activity, engagements, goals and so forth, that our awareness of our own unique life purpose is easily dimmed.

And there are consequences to not knowing or finding your purpose. I often see men and women who’ve become successful in their work or relationships — their outer lives — and yet they feel hollow, empty, unfulfilled. They describe feeling “off-track” in some way, or incomplete, despite a conventionally successful life. Sometimes they wonder if they’ve been on the “wrong” path all along — chosen the wrong career, or the wrong life partner. Or that perhaps they haven’t realized that their chosen path could be more meaningful or purposeful to them, if they let it. Moreover, they wonder how you can tell the difference?

One thing is clear: The consequences of not finding your purpose include chronic, lingering dissatisfaction; an absence of inner peace and a sense of not being fully in sync with your inner self. That’s because your true inner self knows that your life purpose is out of sync with your outer life. The latter is often a false self, but you’ve identified with it because it’s been so rewarding to your ego.

I think most people retain at least a glimmer of awareness of their life’s purpose within their inner being. It often feels like a leaning, an inclination, that continues to pull at you. Sometimes is right in front of your eyes but you don’t allow yourself to see it, like when you’re hunting for your missing keys and then discover that they’ve been right in front of you the whole time. For example, an investment advisor found himself doing more and more work with charity organizations. He finally realized that what he felt most in sync with was hands-on work helping people. That was the part he enjoyed about his work, not the money managing per se. Helping people was his true calling, and it was staring him in the face the whole time.

Those who experience a clear inclination but don’t pursue or fulfill it remain incomplete and dissatisfied. But it’s important not to confuse seeking happiness with finding your purpose. Happiness is what you experience in the daily flow of life — the highs and lows that are situational. They will fluctuate. But purpose is deeper. It’s more of an underlying sense of peace and fulfillment overall, a sense of integration and continuous unfoldment of your being. It transcends everyday ups and downs, the disappointments or successes, even. When you’re living in accordance with your life’s purpose, you view all of the above as part of what you encounter along the road. They don’t distract you from that larger vision, your ideal, which is like a magnet steadily pulling you towards it.

Themes Among People Who Find Their Purpose

There are commonalities among those who find their true purpose for being. One major theme is that they aren’t very preoccupied with self-interest, in their ego-investments in what they do. That can sound contradictory. How can you find your life purpose if you’re not focused on yourself? The fact is, when you’re highly focused on yourself, with getting your goals or needs met — whether in your work or relationships — your purpose becomes obscured. Your ego covers it, like clouds blocking the sun. Self-interest, or ego in this sense, is part of being human, of course. It’s something that requires effort and consciousness to move through and let go of, so you don’t become transfixed by it, as the Sirens sought to do to Ulysses.

Letting go of self-interest opens the door to recognizing your true self, more clearly, so you can see whether it’s joined with your outer life and creates a sense of purpose — or clashes with it. Knowing who you are inside — your true values, secret desires, imagination; your capacity for love, empathy, generosity — all relate to and inform your life purpose.

A second theme of those who discover their life purpose is that they use their mental and creative energies to serve something larger than themselves. That is, they’re like the lover who simply gives love for its own sake, without regard for getting something in return, without asking to be loved back or viewing his actions as a transaction or investment. That can be hard to imagine in our mercantile society, but giving your mental, emotional and creative energy from the heart comes naturally when you serve something larger than your self-interest. It beckons you; it calls forth your spirit.

This theme of service to something larger than your ego, larger than “winning” the fruits of what you’re aiming for, takes many forms in people. For some, their service and sense of purpose is embodied in the work that they do every day. That is, what they do reflects the paradox of not directly aiming to achieve something, because doing so only fuels the ego. This theme is described by John Kay, former Director of Oxford’s Business School, in “Obliquity.” There, he shows examples of achieving business or career goals by pursuing them indirectly; by deliberately not pursuing them. That is, too much self-interest tends to undermine success. It’s the difference between passion in the service of creating a new product, rather than trying to capture a big market share from the product.

Service towards something beyond ego is always visible in those who’ve found their purpose, whether younger and older. Sometimes it’s by conscious intent. For example, letting go of a previous path when they awaken to it’s not being in sync with their inner self. Sometimes it’s triggered by unanticipated events that answers an inner yearning

One example is a 20-something woman who, disenchanted with college, returned home and happen to join up with some other musician and artist friends. That led, in turn, to creating a nonprofit organization, the GoodMakers Street Team, a group of passionate young adults who are bringing positive change to communities. Older people are also discovering a newly-found life purpose. For example, the rise of “encore careers” and projects or engagements that they discover are more in sync with their inner selves; and perhaps have lingered in the background of their lives for years.

Sometimes one’s purpose is awakened by a tragedy one learns about, such as person who become moved by victims of torture and discovered his life’s purpose in helping them. Or, a tragedy one experiences, like John Walsh, whose nationally-known work in criminal justice was spurred by the murder of his young son.

Some Guidelines

If you work towards weakening the stranglehold of self-interest, you can take an important step towards discovering your life’s purpose: Learning from your choices and way of life. That is, they can give you important feedback about the path you’ve been on, in relation to your deeper life purpose.

Begin by examining what you’re currently doing in your choices, way of life, and commitments, looking from “outside” yourself.

Try to discern what the outcomes — whether successes or failures — reveal to you about your inner self. Look for where there seems to be resonance or not. That is, don’t try to “find” your purpose by tweaking or fine-tuning what you’ve been doing in your work, relationships or anything else. Instead, let all of that teach you what it can. That is, look at what it tells you about your longings, your inner vision and predilections that you might be trying to express through your outer life, even if the latter may be an incorrect vehicle.

When you do feel a pull towards some purpose, activity or goal that you feel reflects your inner self, then pursue it fully and vigorously, and with great intent.

Keep looking for the feedback your actions give you along the way. It doesn’t matter if your purpose is something more concrete or more spiritual. If you pursue it with minimal self-interest, with “obliquity,” you will learn from what happens if it’s the true path for you or not.

Infuse all of your actions with a spirit of giving, of service; in effect, with love for what you’re engaging with.

That includes all the people you interact with, as well. The more you consciously infuse your thoughts, emotions and behavior with positive, life-affirming energy – kindness, compassion, generosity, justice – you’re keeping your ego at bay and you’re able to see your true purpose with greater clarity.

Of course, this is hard, and you might encounter opposition from cultural pressures or others who have their own interests at stake. Keep in mind, here, something Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote:

Whatever course you decide upon, there is always someone to tell you that you are wrong. There are always difficulties arising that tempt you to believe that your critics are right. To map out a course of action and follow it to an end requires courage.

The Sufi spiritual leader Hazrat Inayat Khan, who brought his teachings to the U.S. and Western Europe in the early 1900s, described the pull of your purpose in an interesting way. He wrote that one

…may suddenly think during the night, “I must go to the north,” and in the morning, he sets out on his journey. He does not know why, he does not know what he is to accomplish there, he only knows that he must go. By going there, he finds something that he has to do and sees that it was the hand of destiny pushing him towards the accomplishment of that purpose which inspired him to go to the north.

I find that men and women who set out to “go north” and awaken to their life purpose radiate a calm inner strength, inspiration, power and success in whatever they do with their lives. It radiates to all around them.

A version of this article was originally published in The Huffington Post.

Consider this: The old, conventional view of a successful life is mostly defined by financial and self-interested criteria — getting, consuming and possessing for oneself. As Ronald Reagan once said about pursuing the “American dream” everyone “...wants to see an America in which people can get rich.”

But as President Obama pointed out in his address, “That world has changed. And for many, the change has been painful.” The reality of today’s interconnected, highly interdependent world, greed is not good. It’s psychologically unhealthy; it undermines the values, mindset and actions people need to strengthen in order to meet the challenges we face as individuals and as a nation.

That is, our security, success and well-being now require strengthening communal values and behavior; working towards common goals, the common good. Acting on self-interest alone, especially in the pursuit of personal power, steady career advancement and money… well, that’s a non-sustainable way of life. Even when it “worked” it left a hollowness inside, that people longed to fill but didn’t know how. Today, the consequences of that old vision have become heightened for many men and women in the aftermath of the recession, as they struggle to deal with a world that feels turned upside-down and insecure.

But more ominously for “winning the future,” the consequences of the old definition of success are taking an emotional toll on the younger generation. The very next day after Obama’s SOTU speech, a major survey of college freshman was released. It found that their mental health has declined to the lowest level since the survey began 25 years ago. Rising numbers report depression, anxiety and a rapid rise of using psychiatric medication.

However, the explanations offered for this decline were all filtered through the same lens: that the students’ mental health is being damaged because they realize that they won’t be as “successful” as their parents’ generation; or as much as they expected they would be — all defined by financial success and career advancement. No question, economic uncertainty creates anxiety. But I think that one-dimensional explanation ignores a broader problem that the younger generation struggles with: It looks at the adult careerist culture that equates self-centered careerist and financial goals with a successful life; and then considers the rapidly changing world they will be entering. As a result, they don’t see much to look forward to, as a way of life.

That is, they don’t see a whole lot about the adult career world worth aspiring towards. They know they’re living in the midst of major social and political transformations within a globalized world, but they continue to be sold the old 20th Century careerist message that happiness, success and — yes, mental health — are derived from achieving personal power, more money and career advancement in a stable environment. It feels false and unauthentic.

Of course, the hollowness of that singular vision has been visible for generations, but it’s even more pronounced today. J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher In The Rye was the most impactful for the generations that grew up after World War II. And as Kenneth Slawenski has emphasized in his new biography of Salinger, that novel also tapped into a larger theme — the search for ideals, authenticity and something that makes life worth living; necessary for both personal meaning and survival.

Those themes are current today, in the new world environment. David Foster Wallace’s writings are a good example. They’ve generated a following within the current younger generation, in particular. His themes — longing for authentic connection in the face of chronic disillusionment and ongoing life crises — resonate with many experiences of today’s young adults, although his own tragic end leaves many of his admirers lost in confusion.

Nevertheless, Obama’s call for a shared, communal vision for our future points the way to an antidote to the emptiness of having nothing to look forward to adult life. It’s through defining success to include the happiness and fulfillment from helping and supporting others; expanding beyond just your own self-interest by recognizing that we’re not isolated entities on a planet that exists for our personal benefit, alone. We all need and depend on each other.

Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum captured the essence of this shift in a recent interview, saying that,

…we have to recognize that the post-crisis world will be very different… from the pre-crisis world. We have to deal with a completely new reality. We have the millennial generation coming up, which will change certain social patterns.” And, “We have to learn from one another. We are now much more in a multicultural world. (One) has to be… not only very understanding about cultures and very at ease in dealing with different cultures, but someone who accepts cultural differences as a natural way of doing business.

All of these shifts contribute to redefining what a successful life is, and how to deploy our personal capacities in ways that benefit all of us, not just ourselves. In fact, we can see many examples of people who find creative and personal fulfillment through serving something larger than just themselves, what I called “forgetting yourself” in a previous post, and through serving the common good.

One example is Abraham Akoi, one of the “lost boys of Sudan,” who escaped his village at the age of 11, and was able to come to the U.S., where he excelled, eventually received an MBA. Despite several offers of six-figure salaries — for pursuing success defined by money and traditional career achievement — he decided to return to Southern Sudan to assist the new government-to-be with his skills; and to put his skills and capacities in the service of ideals and a vision, rather than just his own personal financial reward.  He said,

I have a commitment and integrity to do the right thing for south Sudan… our biggest challenge is creating a system that is bigger than one person, to create a system that will stand the test of time.

A second example from a whole different realm is the decision by injured Kansas City Royals pitcher Gil Meche to walk away from collecting on his $12 million contract, by retiring at age 32. He could have collected the balance of his contract for doing nothing, but said that he needed to keep his self-respect:

Once I started to realize I wasn’t earning my money, I felt bad.  I was making a crazy amount of money for not even pitching. Honestly, I didn’t feel like I deserved it. I didn’t want to have those feelings again.

Examples as disparate as these share an enlarged perspective and different set of values, of ideals, about what makes life worth living. These are not exceptional capacities or shifts. It’s abundantly clear that people are capable of “evolving” in these ways. For example, the mounting scientific evidence that people can build the capacity for and behavior that demonstrates empathy and compassion. It’s “hard-wired,” as is the capacity to changed our brain activity in ways that promote new capacities, as the eminent neurologist Oliver Sachs recently described.

As such examples become more visible in business, personal relationships, and career choices, they define a growing shift towards redefining personal success in work and life with broader criteria that include the common good. And that’s more consistent with something else Obama said, in calling forth Americans’ best spirit: Such attitudes as, “I might not know those people in trouble, but I think I can help them, and I need to try.”

She writes:

F. Scott Fitzgerald was right when he declared the rich different from you and me. But today’s super-rich are also different from yesterday’s: more hardworking and meritocratic, but less connected to the nations that granted them opportunity—and the countrymen they are leaving ever further behind.

If you happened to be watching NBC on the first Sunday morning in August last summer, you would have seen something curious. There, on the set of Meet the Press, the host, David Gregory, was interviewing a guest who made a forceful case that the U.S. economy had become “very distorted.” In the wake of the recession, this guest explained, high-income individuals, large banks, and major corporations had experienced a “significant recovery”; the rest of the economy, by contrast—including small businesses and “a very significant amount of the labor force”—was stuck and still struggling. What we were seeing, he argued, was not a single economy at all, but rather “fundamentally two separate types of economy,” increasingly distinct and divergent.

This diagnosis, though alarming, was hardly unique: drawing attention to the divide….

Click here for the full article.

He had just been let go by his company; he was devastated and frightened about the future. Despite a successful corporate career, he had no prospects in sight, and his wife’s income wasn’t enough to support the family — especially with a daughter in college and a son headed there next year.

He’s one of a rising number of people who’ve been hit hard by the recession in two ways: a forced “career transition” (the euphemism for firing), which is always difficult, and the emotional consequences of job loss, which are more severe in today’s world of uncertainty and insecurity about what the future holds.

Nevertheless, I think the career-related and emotional impact of the economic implosion could prove to be the best thing that ever happened for some people’s lives.

To explain, let’s look at the man I described above. Like so many others who’ve sought my help over the years, he had defined his worth, his value to others, his whole identity, through his career. Now he felt thrown out to sea, alone, not knowing how to “start over when you can’t start over.” In the years prior to the economic meltdown, he could have expected to land another position within a reasonable period of time. He’d probably be dealing with a manageable degree of anxiety.

But that was yesterday. The current economic recession is taking a severe emotional toll on many people: Increasing anxiety and depression, family conflicts and stress-related physical ailments. Moreover, the practical and mental health consequences of job-loss and job-seeking can be especially severe for midlifers. In fact, many are considering the possibility that they may never work again.

So how can I say that this situation could be the best thing that ever happened to someone? It’s because I’ve found that the most helpful strategy for successful career transition in previous economic times is even more essential and helpful for those in today’s environment. It consists of stepping back to reassess and perhaps reconfigure what you’ve been living and working for, or towards, through your values, your life goals and behavior in daily life, reviewing where that path has taken you, and then clarifying what would be the most fulfilling and healthy next step at this career crossroads.

In other words, the best way for some people to deal with job loss — or if you think you might be facing one down the road and want to deal with that possibility proactively — is to start with a self-appraisal of how your work and career relate to your overall life — as an individual, couple or family. And then use that information to drive what you do next.

That appraisal includes a truthful look at what your value drivers are, in “real time.” Those are the drivers behind how you actually conduct your life — materially, spiritually, in your relationships and embodied in your overall sense of purpose. Aligning those dimensions is the source of lasting well-being.

For example, recent research by the Gallup organization found that the key element of what many people consider “happiness” — positive feelings about their lives overall, in contrast to situational ups and downs — is much more strongly affected by factors other than their financial status. Feeling respected, being in control of one’s life and having friends and family with whom one is connected are more important. These are among the non-material dimensions of life, and they fuel well-being over the long run.

From working with people in career transition over the years, I’ve found that those who tackle these larger issues right from the start make the most lasting, successful and fulfilling transitions. Taking the time to reassess what you’re living and working for, and deciding what changes you might want to make at this new turning point in your life gives you a positive boost, emotionally, during your career crisis. It helps you become better informed for planning a “what’s next” strategy for your career transition, one that’s likely to be more successful and fulfilling.

Readers of my posts know that my overall theme is redefining what psychological health means in today’s world — how to adapt in positive, successful ways to the changes and uncertainties that are part of our lives; and how to grow, in all dimensions of life. Today’s world makes it even more crucial to find a psychologically healthy and resilient path through career transition. Here are some guidelines for doing that:

Assess Your Overall Life You can do the following by yourself, or with your spouse or partner. If you’re part of a couple, ask questions, but hold off commenting on or judging what you hear. Just learn from each other’s views. If you’re without a partner, do this as a dialogue with yourself, or with someone you’re close to.

• How do you describe your overall sense of life purpose, or vision? Why do you think you’re here on this planet at this moment in time?
• Describe what you’re working and living for, or towards, in “real time”; 
that is, what’s visible in how you actually live your life each day through your choices and decisions, in contrast to what you profess your values and beliefs to be. What does that picture tell you about what you’ve been strengthening or diminishing within your personality and values — knowingly or unknowingly — as you travel through life?
• Describe what you’re aiming towards at this moment, in view of your career and financial situation to date, including your family needs — if you have growing children or ones already “launched,” or elderly parents who may need care and decision-making. To help clarify that, list your material goals alongside your spiritual, creative or relationship goals for your lifetime. Is there alignment? What does this information tell you about your most important desires, values, aspirations or fears? What does it suggest in terms of your next career step?

Assess Your Career — Past, Present and Future

• How did you come to do the kind of work you now do?
• Why have you continued to do it?
• What has working for this organization meant to you?
• What parts of your work have been the most enjoyable? Why?
• What parts have you disliked, found stifling, or felt were “not you”?
• Has your work served or contributed to anything larger than personal rewards like money, position and recognition? If it has, describe what that impact has been and what it means to you. If it hasn’t, what’s your view of that?
• Has your work or choice of career felt in synch with your true self, your talents, your values? If not, identify the trade-offs of traveling down that same road into the future. What does that point to in terms of possible alternatives?
• Did you turn away from any passions or interests that pulled you when you were younger, that you regret not having pursued? If so, reflect on how you might reclaim some of them in your job search.

Your Fork in the Road

• Make a list of what talents, new experiences, unfulfilled creative needs and challenges you’d like to incorporate in the next phase of your career and personal life.
• For each item on your list, note the changes you would need to make in your next career decision, your personal commitments or relationships. Consider what resources you currently have, and what resources you would need to acquire to make those changes (education, financial, location, life-style, etc.). How do they mesh with those of your partner? What do you do if they don’t?
• With your partner or by yourself, reflect on what’s most important in each of the following areas, and how your answers should impact your next job:

Children: Clarify whether you’re on the same page about what you want for your children regarding education, summer enrichment programs and how you see their personalities, temperaments, interests, cognitive strengths, talents and needs for development.

Financial: Describe each of your views of financial “needs” vs. “wants,” with respect to your desires for lifestyle, long-term security, use of assets over time, and the role of giving to others in your value system. Discuss where you and your partner mesh, where you don’t, and how to bridge the differences. Focus on the long-term, the decades ahead, and not just immediate circumstances that have been shaped by job loss or the current state of the economy. What are the implications for your next career step?

Geographic: To what extent are the two of you compatible with and have a sense of connection with your geographic location? How important is this dimension to you? Where there are differences, how can you deal with them through compromise or adjustment over time? What are the career implications?

These suggestions are just a beginning, of course. But they’re the foundation for bringing together the different “parts” of your life. That’s a crucial step towards greater intentionality about your career transition, towards greater clarity of mind and emotional awareness. Next steps include applying your learning from the above exercises to the specifics of the job and career search: fine-tuning your resume, effective networking, due diligence regarding new opportunities, assessing the trade-offs likely to be involved, and knowing what to go after with high energy and a clear strategy — or what to let pass by.

Younger workers: “These older people just don’t get it. They expect us to just fall into line, follow bureaucratic rules, and they don’t show us respect for what we know or what we can do.”

The older workers: “These young people just don’t understand how to function within an organization. They want recognition, promotion, everything before they’ve earned it, step-by-step, like we had to do. That’s not how reality is.”

They remind me of a couple who said about each other, “It’s not that we see things differently. It’s worse than that: We’re seeing different things!”

In a way, they are. Different career orientations are like lenses through which you view the world. In my recent post on the rise of the 4.0 career, I wrote that this shift is most visible among Generation X and Generation Y workers, but that it’s a broader movement as well, originating with baby boomers and the 60s generation who are now moving through midlife. But as the 4.0 career orientation grows, it’s also spawning the above differences in perception. In this post I describe the younger generation’s contribution to the 4.0 career transformation. It began before the economic meltdown and will continue to have an impact on organizations and personal lives in the years ahead, post-recovery.

To recap a bit, what I call the 4.0 career orientation includes but extends beyond the 3.0 career concerns that emerged in the last 20 years. The latter are about finding personally meaningful work and seeking a good work-life balance. In essence, the 3.0 careerist is focused on self-development. In contrast, the 4.0 orientation includes but also moves beyond those more personal concerns. It’s more focused on having an impact on something larger than oneself, contributing something socially useful that connects with the needs of the larger human community. The vehicle is opportunity for continuous new learning and creative innovation at work. The 4.0 orientation links with the movement towards creating successful businesses that also contribute to the solution of social problems. In effect, the 4.0 careerist thinks of work as a vehicle for change and influence upon the larger human community.

Who Are The Younger Workers?

Generation X includes those born between 1965 and 1980, while Generation Y includes those born from 1980 onward. Within the latter group, those born from about 1980 to the early 1990s who are now in or about to enter the working world are also known as Millennials.

This younger generation of workers in general is driving the evolution towards the 4.0 further, and in ways that companies need to heed, based on evidence from research and survey data, as well as from observations of leaders and managers in many organizations. Generations X and Y are the backbone of the transformation towards 21st-century leadership and “triple bottom line” success of organizations.

Here are some of the features that Generations X and Y have in common:

Flexible, Open, Collaborative… and Aggressively Seeking New Responsibilities

Younger careerists expect intellectual fairness at the office and anticipate that the best ideas, wherever they hail from in the company, should and will triumph. And they tend to define “best” in evidence-based ways. This makes them more open to and expectant of a collaborative work style, whether among peers or between superiors and reports. As internet entrepreneur Michael Fertik has written, “Immediate feedback loops are part of their social and work lives. They anticipate that transparent and honest feedback will filter out the best ideas and people in the office.”

A Pew research report focusing on the Millennials in particular finds them confident, highly connected and open to change. Similarly, a study by Johnson Controls Inc., reported by GreenBiz.com, finds the younger generation “urban, flexible, collaborative, environmentally sensitive and unconventional.”

It’s often puzzling to older workers that younger careerists want to know, “How quickly will I take on new responsibilities? How meaningful will my work be — immediately?” Older people see this as immature impatience. They fail to recognize that younger workers bring significant energy and passion to work environments that offer the opportunity for having impact and input. They’re looking for a collaborative atmosphere in which all members of a hardworking team share responsibilities. 

An interesting take on the younger end of the spectrum was recently offered by Fertik, who describes the “Generation After-Lehman,” or Gen AL, born from about 1982 to 1986, who graduated from college between 2003 and 2009. Fertik argues that the Gen AL expects less day-to-day fun and short-term reward than their slightly older counterparts. Wherever in the world they hail from originally, they have more of an immigrant, hardscrabble outlook. They expect to work harder and to be paid less at first, and they are hungrier to develop marketable skills and a trajectory for their careers.

More Than Money

Research shows that younger adults think like entrepreneurs, value relationships, are tech-savvy and creative, and are environmentally conscious and mobile — both at work at in their personal lives. This theme is more than seeking work-life “balance.” They see the workplace as an extension of themselves and their home life — a place that supports what they value — and they want it to be green. The Johnson study reports that they are looking for companies where they can find meaningful work and opportunities for learning, because of quality of life issues and who their work colleagues are. Some of those phenomena are visible in features of companies at the top of Fortune magazine’s list of “best companies to work for.”

Younger workers will often ask prospective employers about flexible work schedules before talking about pay or the 401k plans. Those kinds of features are more important to them than pay. In fact, research shows that young adults increasingly say that money is not the measure of success for them. They want something deeper from their work. They are more critical about whether they actually enjoy what they do at work. Overall, they want their work to allow them to thrive as people and leave them more choices in their lives.

Generation X and Y workers value family and personal time as much as career advancement. They reject the often-debilitating trade-offs between them, while the older generation is more prone to accept — and suffer from — those trade-offs. For example, a Families and Work Institute survey found that, above all else, younger people want to be able to shut the door after work and go home to a stimulating personal life that fuels their energy. And they won’t work very long for companies that don’t enable them to do that.

Climbing the Traditional Career Ladder – Not So Interesting

The Family and Work Institute’s survey also found a dramatic shift, from the early 90s to the present decade, from 80 percent of younger adults who wanted to climb the traditional career ladder to 60 percent and declining. Moreover — odd to many older people — younger workers trend towards “serial jobs.” That is, they might quit if they want to have a longer vacation or pursue a personal interest or desire. Then, when they’re ready, they return to their career. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average 18- to 34- year-old invests only 2.9 years in a job before looking to greener pastures. And Taleo, an HR software company, found that 41 percent of those who are no longer working for their first employer out of college left in less than two years.

Green and Sustainable Practices — Required

Younger workers expect and assume that the companies they work for care about the environment and the greater good beyond financial profit. They expect to be engaged and included in making a positive impact as employees. Consequently they seek out innovative companies that want to have impact through corporate social responsibility and green practices.

MBA students are opting for curricula that include more “green” courses so that they can be better prepared to join a business world that they perceive will be more socially conscious. A 2007 Hill & Knowlton survey of MBA students found that environmental policy, ethics and social responsibility were among the top factors in career choice. “The best talent, like the most attractive real estate, will always be in scarce supply,” said Paul Taaffe, chairman and CEO of Hill & Knowlton. “The future winners in the corporate world will be the ones who are the quickest to recognize this and take action to enhance and protect reputation.” Similarly, a 2007 survey by MonsterTRAK found that 80 percent of younger workers said they want to work in a job that has a positive impact on the environment. And 92 percent said they would choose to work for a “green” company.

More recently, a poll by Experience Inc. shows that more students are hoping for a job with a green-minded company. It found that 81 percent of students believe there is value in working for an environmentally aware company, while 79 percent would likely accept a job at an eco-friendly company over a conventional one. And within the workplace itself, the Johnson Controls report found that 61 percent want to work in natural light or with a combination of natural and artificial lighting. They want to be able to “…see and feel the greenness in their workplace and mere compliance isn’t enough,” according to Marie Puybaraud, the author of the report.

Positive Management Culture – Necessary

The Hill & Knowlton survey found that 75 percent of top MBA students say corporate reputation regarding its management culture and social responsibility will play a critical role in deciding where they want to work. The survey was conducted among students at elite business schools in Europe, Asia and the U.S. They cited quality of management among the key drivers of corporate reputation. For example, 40 percent of those surveyed rated social responsibility in particular as an “extremely” or “very” important measure of reputation; 34 percent rated having an environmental/green policy as such.

Other research shows that employees working at companies with clear corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs report the most job satisfaction. They stay at their jobs longer and are more content with senior management than their peers at companies with lackluster CSR programs, according to a survey conducted by Kenexa Research Institute. Companies are responding: The number of CSR job listings has more than doubled over the past three years.

Similarly, a 2008 survey conducted by the Aspen Institute Center for Business Education, a part of the Aspen Institute Business and Society Program, found that corporate responsibility is now a top priority for most MBA students. The survey was conducted on 1,943 students at 15 business schools around the world — from Wharton to the London Business School to the University of California, Berkeley — on a variety of issues, including business ethics, business school coursework and the corporate recruitment process.

The Upshot

In essence, the younger careerist wants to help create social change through business and finance rather than merely profit from it. “In a broader sense, the most important finding is that students seem to be taking a more holistic view of the role of business in society,” says Nancy McGaw, deputy director of the Aspen Program. “But the findings also suggest that while students may have these values, many of them sense those beliefs are not valued by employers or linked to career opportunities.” For example, only 50 percent of students who were surveyed felt that recruiters placed a high value on personal integrity, and only seven percent said they think recruiters place high value on their understanding of sociopolitical issues.

But this is changing. The business community increasingly recognizes that to be globally competitive, you need to understand the risks and the opportunities that natural environments and human needs pose for your business. And discussion of business and society issues has become increasingly commonplace in business schools. In 2002, 70 percent of the respondents said that they felt free to raise issues related to the social responsibility of companies in the classroom. By 2007, it had grown to 75 percent, and it’s probably higher today.

Generations X and Y will continue to drive and further evolve personal and organizational requirements towards the 4.0 career. They are the cutting edge of an emerging business model that combines financial success with serving the common good, one that addresses social problems through products and services that are useful, helpful and enhance well-being of this planet’s citizens.