Assure vs. Ensure vs. Insure - Get That Righteous Feeling

I was once in a meeting with some colleagues when I used the word "ensure" in the context of making sure something happens. To my surprise, a woman in attendance corrected me on the spot. She said I had confused "insure" with "ensure." The Duke Ph.D. in English part of me rankled at this, and I told her that while the two verbs have similar connotations, their meanings were the opposite of what she said. But she held her ground over this interesting point of grammar. I realized she had a strong need to be right, and with an open mind said, "You may be right," and let it go.

Today, 30 years later, I remembered this incident. Don't ask me why. At my age a lot of off-the-wall memories pop into my mind. Maybe my life is flashing before my eyes.

So just to be sure, I googled it, and the top-rated grammar website happened to be my favorite: GrammarBook.com. If you're ever concerned whether you're about to make a fool of yourself by misusing the English language, I highly recommend it. Search for the issue, or get the book and keep it close.

It's amazing the mistakes people make, especially news and sports announcers. Book authors not so much; they have editors to keep them straight.

Here is what Grammar Book says about assure vs. insure vs. ensure:

Assure is to promise or say with confidence. It is more about saying than doing.
Example: I assure you that you’ll be warm enough.

Ensure is to do or have what is necessary for success.
Example: These blankets ensure that you’ll be warm enough.

Insure is to cover with an insurance policy.
Example: I will insure my home with additional fire and flood policies.

So. I was correct. And even better, I restrained myself from arguing about it at the time. I just love righteous memories.

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2015. Building Personal Strength .

Adolescent Rites of Passage - Something of Monumental Importance Has Been Lost

I've been reading about traditional and modern rites of passage. So far, the two most helpful books have been Crossroads: The Quest for Contemporary Rites of Passage, ed. Louise Carus Mahdi, et al (1996); and From Boys to Men: Spiritual Rites of Passage in an Indulgent Age, by Bret Stephenson (2006).

A consistent theme: Long ago, "primitive" cultures evolved effective initiation rites to guide young people from childhood to adulthood. Modern adolescents feel the same powerful need to break away from childhood, prove themselves, find their identity, and be acknowledged by and accepted into the adult community. But traditional rites of passage have for the most part been diluted or discarded, and most young people are left to find their own way, often with disastrous results.

My reading has caused me to reflect on what happened to me during my own adolescence. My conclusion: I had amazing luck in the rites of passage department.

• At age 13, I earned the rank of Eagle Scout after two years of hard work.
• At age 14 in the Explorer Scouts I experienced the "Order of the Arrow' initiation ritual.
• At age 15 my father was assigned to Germany. Our family was on a waiting list for housing, and I had to take his place to help my mother control my six younger brothers and sisters for six months until we could join my father.
• At age 18, after 12 years at the top of my class, I gave the valedictory address at my high school graduation.
• At age 18, I survived the West Point summer "Beast Barracks" training and was accepted into the Corps of Cadets.
• At age 19, I was "recognized" at the end of "Plebe" year and became an upperclassman.
• At age 22 I graduated from West Point and was commissioned a second lieutenant in the a Regular Army.
• At age 22 I was married in a Mormon temple with my grandfather officiating.
• At age 22 I successfully completed the Army Ranger School.

Each of these rites of passage required that I accept a "call to adventure" and survive an ordeal, a test to prove myself. After successful completion I was recognized by my community in a way that made me feel I had arrived at a new level in my life. In other words, I was involved in several structured processes that helped me develop personal strengths that would empower me throughout my life and careers -and be recognized for doing so!

Nine of them! How lucky is that?

One of my most intense ordeals happened soon after my adolescence. As a young captain I served in Vietnam as an advisor to Vietnamese infantry units. During that year I participated in over 200 combat missions. I was given several awards for valor and service, but at the end the acknowledgement and acceptance back into my community was non-existent. Instead there was confusion and alienation. I remember an incident during my graduate studies at Duke University when an enlightened coed called me a "baby killer." So my service in Vietnam never became a true rite of passage.

And it wasn't a rite of passage experience for the three dozen of my West Point classmates who died on the battlefield. And soldiers returning from combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan aren't made to experience developmental rites of passage either - a huge opportunity wasted.

Young people will always need to be challenged, tested, guided and accepted in a powerful way in order for them to define who they are and feel they've put childhood behind them. But modern culture has abandoned the old structures without replacing them. Gangs, high society, and college fraternities and sororities have their initiation rituals, but these are pathetic remnants of ancient traditions. It's a tragic, mostly unrecognized shortfall that has left our youth adrift.

The consequences of teens trying to find their own way towards being adults - unwed teen mothers, gangs, crime, substance abuse, and suicide. And yes, middle-aged offspring who still live at home and who have never become adults.

Given that the rituals that served ancient and primitive cultures are inappropriate for our time, is there a way to recreate effective rites of passage for today's youth that are appropriate for modern life? It's something I think about a lot these days.

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2013. Building Personal Strength .

Reading - It Can Help Your Teen Build a Fine Mind

I have a friend whose dad had a personal library of several thousand books. When my friend was about ten years old, his dad enrolled him in a speed-reading course. Soon afterward, he began reading the classics of world literature.

One great book at a time, he became a passionate reader. As a consequence, he began to ponder the meaning of life. The more he read, the more thoughtful and independent his mind became. At age 15 he left home to pursue a life as a painter. And he continued to read, roughly a book every day for the rest of his life.

At age 70, he is now a world-famous artist. And his personal library contains over 18,000 volumes, almost exclusively nonfiction. And he has one of the most interesting minds I've ever encountered.

Of course, his mind isn't the product of a formal education. He didn't graduate from high school, and he didn't attend an esteemed university. He is a self-made man who reads every day and continues to pursue his passion with intensity. The last time I visited him I saw a copy of William H. Gass's latest collection of literary criticism, Life Sentences, lying on his coffee table, bookmarked at chapter four.

If you are raising children and want the best for them, a college education is not the ultimate answer. Don't get me wrong. A college education can have major benefits. It can expose kids to ideas, give them learning skills and punch their ticket for that first job out of college. But you need to know that very few professors consciously try to teach kids how to think. As they see it, that's not what they're getting paid the big bucks for. Their job is to pass along the latest information, to give them the answers.

The problem is, even the best knowledge, information and answers can't guarantee success. In the world of action, it comes down to what you do with what you've learned - action - exercising good judgment and decision-making.

If your child ever does acquire good judgment, it will have to be because you stimulated your child's mind in youth. Or maybe they got lucky and other adults, such as teachers, coaches, counselors, relatives, or other adults who cared about your child encouraged her to think for herself.

When I was in high school, I had a friend who had a fine mind. He knew things I didn't know. He understood things I didn't understand. He had learned to do things I could not do. I admired him and wanted to be like him. I discovered that he read a lot. So I began to read the books he recommended. It was quite an awakening. And it happened at the right time, while my brain's prefrontal cortex, which handles comprehension, analysis, judgment, decision making, planning and organization, was in the sensitive period of development that begins and ends during adolescence.

I was lucky to have a few influences like that. I didn't start reading voraciously until I was 16, but after that I read obsessively.

I earned my Ph.D. from Duke University in 1977, but I like to tell young people that as glorious as that experience was, 99% of what I know today I've learned since then - on my own, from reading.

Reading benefits a young person two important ways. First, it helps build his vocabulary. Having words for things is essential to creating and organizing concepts in the mind. No language, no knowledge.

Second, the content of books can reveal insights which make the child reflect on important issues, to help the child use his or her mind to connect the dots - while programming the prefrontal cortex for critical thinking.

Language. High-level thinking. These are the two mental abilities that separate us from all other species on Earth. And you can get these life-changing powers from reading the best books.

Encourage your kid to read.

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2012. Building Personal Strength .

Passion and Level of Effort - The Magic Ingredient

Men's NCAA basketball - On January 4, 2012, Duke (ranked 3rd in current ESPN poll) was beaten by unranked Temple 73-78.

Big deal. Top-ranked teams get upset all the time.Well, it was certainly a big deal for the Temple fans, who stormed the floor after the game.

But it's interesting to appreciate why this happened, why a team with less talent can take control, lead the entire game and beat a team like Duke, most of whose players go on to play professionally. The answer comes from the Duke team itself.

Duke Head Coach Mike Krzyzewski - "They played with great toughness....For some reason, we didn't show up with the enthusiasm and the toughness that we usually display."

Duke's top scorer, freshman guard Austin Rivers - “We were slow and they played a lot harder than we did....They just outhustled us. We have a great team, but we just didn’t fight tonight.”

I watched the whole game and came to same conclusion. Duke has four players 6' 10" or taller, and most - if not all of them - were high school all-Americans. Only one of Temple's players is that big. But at the end of the game Temple had more rebounds than Duke. Duke always has a talented team, but usually when they are beaten it's because the other team played harder.

I often say that any unranked team can beat any top-ranked team if they play with more heart, with more ferocity.

I mention all of this because I love college basketball. And I'm a big Duke fan. I love to see them win, and I hate to see them lose. But beyond that, two questions...

1. Why can't legendary coach Mike Krzyzewski, who has won more games than any other coach in the history of Division 1 men's basketball, inspire his team of talented players to play with heart? Why can't he get them fired up for every game? Coach Dunphy did it for the Temple Owls. Why couldn't Coach K do it for the Duke players? I think it's a fair question.
2. How can YOU bring "toughness, heart, passion and ferocity" to your work? How can you engage your maximum level of effort to achieve what's important to you?

Can you coach yourself to do it?

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2012. Building Personal Strength .

Mike Krzyzewski's Weakness Exposed - Stall Ball

I almost never post about basketball. But I'm an over-the-top Duke fan, and I rearrange my calendar around Duke hoops. I monitor recruiting. I track what the players are doing in the summer. I read every article about Duke basketball on the Internet. I watch every single game on TV, if it is televised. Even with the windows closed, the neighbors can hear me shouting during games. I've been doing this the whole time that Mike Krzyzewski has been at Duke.

Plus, Mike Krzyzewski and I were cadets at West Point at the same time. I'm a HUGE fan.

Duke's legendary coach has more victories than any Division I men's basketball coach in history. He knows how to attract talented and develop them. He knows how to win. He's the ultimate class act in basketball, whether college or pros. He deserves all the adulation he has received.

But he has an Achilles heel. As I write, he has 910 victories and 4 NCAA championships; but if it weren't for this flaw, he'd no doubt have 950 victories and 6 championships. Most of the TV sports announcers know what this flaw is, and all the veteran coaches know, too. And when Coach K implements this ill-advised strategy, as he often does, the coaches have learned how to counter it.

The flaw is "clock management" or "slowing the game down." Many people call it "stall ball." It was invented by legendary UNC coach Dean Smith. He called it "four corners." The idea was to build up a lead and towards the end of the game, just pass the ball around, running the clock down. It drove opposing coaches crazy, because it didn't leave them with enough time to come back and win. It probably drove Coach K crazy, too.

Maybe that's why Coach K loves to use the strategy.

Actually, I do, too.

The problem is, Coach K implements it too soon.

I believe there's a fairly low-risk way to hold the ball and let the clock run down. It's simple mathematics. If the team that's ahead just holds the ball for 30 seconds, misses the shot, and the other team scores right away, that's no problem if the lead is more than 2 points. If you do that twice and stall for 60 seconds, you'd need a lead of more than 4 points. So the rule of thumb is to multiply the number of minutes remaining by 4 to determine the size of lead you need to play no-risk clock management. Hopefully, the leading team will force a turnover or score, which is all to the good. But if a team waits to stall the ball, using this guideline, it's almost impossible to lose.

But Krzyzewski consistently starts managing the clock much too soon, creating unnecessary risks. For example, in the game with Washington on December 10, 2011, he started managing the clock with 4:46 to go. By my calculation, he would need a 19-point lead to work the clock down to a safe victory. But the lead was only 14. With a 14-point lead, to play it safe, you should wait until 3:30 left. Seemingly, he trusts his team to score or create defensive stops or turnovers. And sometimes they do, and Duke wins. But sometimes they don't.

That's because of three things. First, Duke got the comfortable lead by implementing their offense. Shifting to stall ball means the players have to stop doing that. This is a jarring change of pace. It upsets every aspect of the offensive chemistry.

Second, after holding the ball and with only 10 seconds left in the possession, there's only time for one shot; and it's a pressured, well-defended shot because the other team can see it coming. Most of the time, the shot misses because the only available shot is a low-percentage shot. The other team gets the rebound, attacks, scores and closes the gap. If this pattern continues, Duke loses. So this seemingly conservative strategy is actually a very risky one if implemented too soon. And Krzyzewski all too often makes this mistake.

The third and scariest thing is that once Coach K shifts to stall ball, he almost never shifts back to his regular offense, regardless of how much the lead disappears. Why this is so, I don't know. I can only speculate. But it's great news for opposing coaches.

I remember watching a game several years ago when Duke squandered a 30-point lead against Virginia. They began stalling halfway through the second half. Duke kept missing time-pressured low-percentage shots, and Virginia kept slashing and scoring. In the end, Duke's lead was gone and Virginia won. I've never forgotten that game, because the pattern repeated itself in future games.

Ironically, the most conservative way to win is to stay with the aggressive basketball that got you the lead in the first place. Most teams do that. But Mike loves stall ball. I think he truly believes it's one of the reasons he wins so often.

At the 4:46 mark in the Washington game, Duke led 74-60; and they began slowing the game down. But then Washington stole the ball and scored on a fast break. This pattern repeated itself. Duke lost the ball again and Washington scored. At 3:00 the score was 74-64. Stall ball wasn't working. Duke was losing its lead. According to my formula, at 3:00 they would need a 12-point lead to stall safely, but they led by only 10.

But Duke continued to stall. At 2:17 the score was 75-66. They needed a 9-point lead, and they had a 9-point lead. Luckily for Duke, they were fouled repeatedly and they made some free throws. With 0:50 left, the score was 81-72. Mathematically, Duke's victory was all but assured. Washington had to foul deliberately for any chance to win, and Duke made more free throws. Washington made a buzzer-beater 3-point shot, and the game endded 86-80. Coach K made it happen. His gamble paid off in another victory.

But why gamble? Does Coach K enjoy the thrill of the risk? Duke went from a 14-point lead to winning by only 6. "Duke held off Washington," said the reports after the game. Actually, during that final 5-minute stretch Duke did not make a single basket. By contrast, Washington scored 20 points in those five minutes. Scary. But Duke was fouled several times and made about half of some free throws.

If I were to presume to advise the legendary coach, I'd tell him this - "When you get a nice lead, continue with what got you there. Keep playing aggressive basketball until the lead is 4 times the number of minutes remaining. Then - if you must - start slowing the game down. Train your players to protect the ball, because your desperate opponent will try to steal it and break for an easy score. My preference, though, would be to keep on working your offense and try to increase the lead. That's what the players would like to do and it's less risky. But if you absolutely must shift to managing the clock, don't do it too soon."

Coach K - "Thanks for your analysis, Denny. Good food for thought."

Denny - "You're welcome, Coach."

NOTE TO MY REGULAR READERS. Thanks for letting me depart from my usual focus on personal strength, people skills, personal strength and teen development. In a way, this article is about some of that. I know the chance that Coach K will see this article is pretty small, and even smaller that he would give it any credibility if he did read it.

But maybe...

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2011. Building Personal Strength .

Achievement Rule #1 - Ignore the Naysayers

When I was 25 and serving my combat tour in Vietnam, I got two important letters.

One was from the head of the Department of Psychology at West Point.

The other was from the head of the Department of English at West Point.

Psychology and English were my favorite subjects when I was a cadet.

My professors had loved me because I was passionately interested in my studies and worked hard.

Both letters invited me to teach in their department at West Point.

I was thrilled.

I replied to both that I would love to teach there, and what would be my next step?

I figured I would go with the one that responded first.

That turned out to be the Department of English.

I never heard back from the Department of Psychology.

I later learned that the Department of Psychology mysteriously never got my letter.

So it goes.

So I pursued a graduate degree in English at Duke University.

Duke accepted me even though I hadn't majored in English.

The Army told me I had two years to earn a masters degree.

I studied the catalog and determined a masters degree could be earned in one year.

All my Army colleagues at Duke had to take a semester of undergraduate make-up courses first.

To complete a masters in one year, I would need to take graduate courses right away.

I typed and signed my course request card for masters-level courses and gave it to the department head.

He said, "No one has ever completed a card without counseling before. You already know what you want to do."

He seemed impressed and approved my request.

So I didn't have to take any undergraduate make-up courses.

When I shared my ambitious plan with some of my fellow students, they said it was ridiculous. Everyone takes six or seven years to get a Ph.D.

Some of the graduate students who started with me already had a masters in English, but they were required to take the full course load anyway.

Truthfully, I was in over my head.

In class, my professors talked about novels I hadn't read.

At night I would go home and read one of the novels.

That meant reading a novel almost every night.

My classmates used fancy words I didn't understand.

That night I would look up the words and add them to my vocabulary.

By the end of the first term, I felt confident enough to speak up in class.

By the end of the second term, I knew what I was talking about.

I took the exam for the masters degree and passed it.

By the end of the second summer and the third term, I had finished all 60 credit hours.

I had met all the requirements to take the Ph.D. candidate exam.

I took it and passed it.

After starting behind the eight ball, I had achieved "all but dissertation" status in 18 months.

My classmates who entered the program with masters degrees were still taking courses.

I decided to write my dissertation about the celebrated American novelist John Cheever.

I met him, and we became friends.

When my two years were up, I had completed my academic research and had written three chapters.

I joined the Department of English at West Point and maintained my friendship with John Cheever.

He lived an hour's drive from West Point, so I visited him once a month.

He told me everything about his life and work.

I earned my Ph.D. in 1977.

All this hard work changed my life.

This isn't a story about "fake it till you make it."

It's about following your passion, believing in yourself, being bold, working hard and never quitting.

I wouldn't be where I am today, who I am today, if I hadn't tried to do things that had never been done before.

It's amazing what you can do when you ignore people who say you can't do it and just get to work.

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2011. Building Personal Strength .

Why the U.S. Women's Soccer Team Blew the World Cup Final

Yesterday I wrote about why Phil Mickelson blew his chance to win the British Open. The U.S. women's loss in the World Cup final game was my second huge disappointment.

In her AP summary of the World Cup title game, Nancy Armour said that "the Americans lost this game as much as Japan won it."

She's right about that. But not because the Japanese players made three of four penalty kicks, while the U.S. players made only one of four.

Like a lot of Americans who don't usually watch soccer on TV, I was caught up in the drama of what our women had achieved. They had won some close games to earn their way to the finals. I wanted them to win. I was glued to my TV set.

I'm not an expert soccer fan. I played intramural soccer in college, but that doesn't count for much. I just haven't followed it over the years. But I could tell that while the Japanese women were fast and athletic and played with a lot of heart, the U.S. team was bigger, stronger and more talented. They played precise, in-your-face soccer, and when Alex Morgan scored at minute 69, I shouted a loud "Yeah!" I couldn't help myself.

But then something weird happened. With quite a few minutes to go in regulation, the U.S. women stopped trying to score. It was as if they all they cared about was trying to keep the ball away from the Japanese players. It was the soccer equivalent of "stall-ball."

I'm an over-the-top Duke basketball fan. I got my M.A. and Ph.D. at Duke in the early 70s. Mike Kerzyzewski and I were cadets at West Point at the same time. I remember watching him play under Bobby Knight. Back then, the under-sized West Point team went to the NIT equivalent of the "Final Four" two years in a row. Today, all my personal activities, including family events, are planned to accommodate the Duke basketball schedule.

Quite a few years ago, one of the better Duke teams surged to a 35-point lead against Virginia. With about 15 minutes left to play, Coach K ordered the team to hold the ball and milk the clock. I won't bore you with the details, but here's what happened. Duke would hold the ball until there was about 10 seconds left on the shot clock, and then they would make their move to the basket. But that's only time enough for one play, and Virginia's defense would see it coming. They disrupted the shot, got the rebound and charged down the court and scored. Too easy. Imagine my chagrin when this pattern repeated itself until Virginia erased the advantage and won the game. It was an abomination - a totally misguided strategy.

This wasn't the last time Duke would blow big leads playing stall-ball. It gives the opponent a tremendous advantage. You can't make baskets when you aren't trying to make baskets. It's hard to make a basket when you make only one time-pressured attempt. The other team continues to play aggressively, so they score. Besides, Duke always has talented players on the bench who need playing time experience. If you have a big lead, why not put them in and tell them to show their best stuff?

I know that as soon as the 2011 season starts, Coach K will have won more games than any coach in the history of Division I basketball. But in my opinion, he could have won more. This has always been his greatest weakness as a coach. He's a smart guy, so I always wondered why he continued to do this. Even the announcers and commentators would talk about it, so I know the opposing coaches knew and were waiting for their opportunity.

Actually, I believe Coach K has improved in this regard. He doesn't use the stall-ball strategy as often, and he doesn't initiate it as soon as he used to. Watching his end game is a lot more fun.

So when the U.S. women started playing stall-ball, I got worried. A one-point lead is no lead at all. There was quite a bit of time left. What if the Japanese team scores? Then the lead is gone. You can't score goals if you aren't trying to score goals.

Well, the Japanese team did score on a late possession, forcing the game into extra time. The U.S. team scored again at minute 104. Alex Morgan kicked a perfect set-up pass to Abby Wambach, who headed the ball into the goal. The U.S. took a 2-1 lead. If they had scored again, they would have iced the game and there never would have been any penalty-kick finish. But they didn't try. They immediately shifted to stall-ball again, trying to keep the ball away from the Japanese players.

When the Japanese team got the ball, the pace picked up. Sure enough, they scored again.  And when tiime ran out, the game was decided by penalty kicks, which are a very chancy way to win. This time, the luck fell to the Japanese kickers, and everything the U.S. women had worked so hard for was lost.

After the game, Abby Wambach said, "Evidently, it wasn't meant to be." That was a gracious thing to say.

But I'm going to say it differently. It wasn't meant to be because the U.S. coach, Pia Sundhage, thought it would be a great idea to play stall-ball with only a one-point lead, instead of trying to score a decisive goal.

I think it's important to name names and hold people accountable. The U.S. women played their hearts out. They couldn't have played better. It was the coach who lost that game. She didn't play to win.

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2011. Building Personal Strength . (Permission to use photo purchased from fotolia.net)

The Secret to Great Achievement - You Really Gotta Wanna

The 2011 NCAA men's Division I basketball tournament turned out to be one of the most unusual. Not a single No. 1 seed made it to the Final Four!

For Virginia Commonwealth to advance, they had to beat Kansas, arguably the most talented team in the nation. And yes, my favorite No. 1 seed, Duke, was blown out by Arizona in the Sweet 16. And for the second year in a row, lowly Butler defeated superior teams to make it to the Final Four.

How does this happen? How can superior teams lose to teams of lesser talent when so much is at stake?

The answer is simple. They didn't WANT it as much as the underdog. They played with less hunger and ferocity. In the NCAA tournament, desire nearly always trumps talent. Kansas knew they were a much more talented team than VCU and were so sure of victory that they didn't play as hard as they needed to. That's why so many fan brackets turn out to be wrong. Who can predict when a great team will play with less intensity than the underdog?

It's a lesson that's repeatedly learned and forgotten.

I have this memory of players of the losing team sitting at a table answering questions at a press conference. One of them says glumly into a microphone, "They just wanted it more than we did. They outhustled us."

When I was a "plebe" (freshman) at West Point, underclassmen were required to eat at rigid attention unless the "table commandant," usually a "firstie" (senior) gave the plebes permission to "fall out" (eat in a relaxed, normal manner).

During my first summer there, I endured a phase of basic training called "Beast Barracks." One day while eating lunch, a chocolate cake was brought to the table. In accordance with tradition, the table commandant ordered a plebe to cut the cake. The guy on the spot this time was my classmate, Al, who sat across from me. "Mister, you have ten seconds to cut ten equal pieces. Go!"

Usually, the result was a mess. If the plebe actually cut ten pieces, instead of say, eight, they were of varying sizes. This allowed the upperclassmen to heap criticism on the plebe while helping themselves to the larger pieces.

But that's not what happened that day. Al completed the task in five seconds, not ten. And all ten pieces were of equal size. It was a practically miraculous accomplishment. The table commandant was so impressed he said, "Good job! All you plebes fall out and enjoy your cake."

Al was a stocky, powerfully built guy, and he eventually played Army football on special teams. I admired him, and once I asked him what he thought was the key to success as a cadet. He didn't hesitate. "My high school football coach told me the secret to success is desire. You gotta wanna. If you really want it bad enough, you can do almost anything."

And by the way, his cake-cutting skills foreshadowed his future. He eventually became a highly successful plastic surgeon. I think he must have wanted that pretty bad, too.

So whether we're talking about sports, or life, or work, that's the secret. If you "bring it," you can win. Not just talent - but desire. Not just in spurts - but for the entire game.

In the second half, Arizona out-rebounded Duke even though they were a much smaller team. They drove to the basket with a kind of ferocity that Duke wasn't familiar with. Arizona brought the SHOCK, and Duke responded with AWE. This is the real reason Duke was blown out.

It's why in 1983 North Carolina State won the national championship, even though they had a poor won-loss record and wouldn't have been invited to the tournament if they hadn't played themselves in by winning their conference tournament.

It's why in 2010 a less-talented Duke team surprised everyone by winning it all. They played ferociously for 40 minutes in all six games. I know because I watched them all. It was great.

And it's why in 2011, in spite of the predictions of the experts, VCU and Butler were in the Final Four - not the top four teams in the nation.

By the way, if anyone reading this has any kind of connection with Mike Krzyzewski, please give him a link to this article. I'm a HUGE fan, and I suffer the pain of defeat almost as much as his players do. The best coach in the nation must know a way to inspire hunger and ferocity in his players when it matters.

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2011. Building Personal Strength. (Images used with permission)

When It Comes to Winning, What Matters Most Is Heart

As I write this post, my favorite college basketball team, the Duke Blue Devils, are warming up for their first game in the 2011 NCAA men's basketball tournament. You may remember that Duke had an improbable run through the tournament last year and won it all. I'm still on a high about that. They weren't the best team in the tournament, but they played with so much heart in every game that they outlasted all six of their opponents.

Nolan Smith & Coach K

This year, the Duke team has much more talent. At least five players on the team will eventually have NBA careers. One is Kyrie Irving, the top freshman in America and is ranked third pick in the NBA mock drafts. One is senior Kyle Singler, who does it all for 40 hard minutes every game, last year's NCAA tournament MVP. Another is senior Nolan Smith, first-string All-American, ACC Player of the Year and winner of several national player of the year honors. And deadly 3-point shooter Seth Curry, younger brother of Stephen Curry, star NBA point guard. Duke also has three talented "bigs" at 6' 10" and taller. One of these, Ryan Kelly, has a super-high work ethic and basketball IQ and a sweet 3-point shot. Then there's Andre Dawkins, a lights-out 3-point shooter. And there's more talent on the bench. So Duke is balanced, big, talented, athletic, experienced and deep. And they know how to play lock-down team defense. They have what it takes to beat every team they will face and win it all.

But will they?

As I've said before, it all depends on whether they come to each game wanting it more than their opponent. It turns out that the crucial factor in winning is none of the things I've already mentioned. It's between the ears. Duke will have to play more ferociously than the other team to win. It will have to bring heart.

That's the way it is in the NCAA tournament. It's a simple fact, and yet it amazes me that some of the big teams don't get it. They show up thinking they can just run their plays and win. On the first day of the tournament, favored teams Louisville and Vanderbilt lost to Morehead State and Richmond, respectively. And Kentucky beat Princeton by only 2 at the last second. Amazing.

I'm hoping that Duke "gets it" this year, too. In years past, I've seen super-talented Duke teams lose to much lower-ranked teams. They just didn't believe they could lose to an inferior team. But the other team played their hearts out, and that's why Duke lost and went home to watch the rest of the tournament on TV.

I'll be rooting for Duke to play with maximum intensity against lowly Hampton University, even though no 16th seeded team has ever beaten a No. 1 seeded team in the history of the tournament. Today my team plays during work hours. So yes, I'll be one of those millions of employees who is robbing his organization of productivity. Sorry about that. But a Duke fan's gotta do what a Duke fan's gotta do.

On the bright side, I may be so impressed with Duke's desire and intensity that it will inspire me to attack my own projects with the same high levels of energy - which would more than make up for the lost hours.

Can I write with the same drive and purpose that winning teams deliver for 40 minutes? Yes, I can! This is how people achieve something wonderful.

But will I? Will you?

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2011. Building Personal Strength .

Sobering Thoughts about Time Travel and Life Decisions

I have a Ph.D. in English from Duke University. Studying there some 35 years ago was a peak experience. The learning was intense, and it changed my life. Today, I use the research, reasoning, writing and editing skills I refined there to great advantage in my work. Also, thanks to that education, I have an acutely sensitive appreciation for the arts and literature, which greatly adds to my enjoyment of life.

Still, I sometimes wonder what my life would have been like had I chosen to study psychology instead of English. In my late 20s, I was equally fascinated with both areas. I sometimes wonder if a psychology degree would have served my current work at least as well, if not better.

I have no regrets, however. I don't indulge in time-machine fantasies such as, "If only I could go back in time and change what I did in graduate school..."

I've been watching the History Channel "The Universe" series on DVD, and of course they have a segment on time travel. I trust they decided to deal with this topic because of the public's fascination for it. The segment addresses the question, "Is time travel possible?" The producers did an excellent job of maintaining the suspense of this question while laying out the theoretical possibilities along with the technical impracticalities. The unstated conclusion: Time travel as we know it will never happen. No human being will ever travel back in time to change something about the past.

For those of you who indulge in regret or "if only" fantasies, let me tell you something. Say you could go back in time and correct an event that you considered a horrible mistake. The consequences in the future would not be as subtle and benevolent as you imagine. The changes would be radical and shocking. Everything that happens has consequences. And those consequences have consequences, involving countless other people as the consequences expand into the future.

If I could go back in time and get a Ph.D. in psychology instead of English, I wouldn't be sitting here in my office in the Texas Hill Country with my wife and cats. No, everything about my life would be different. I can't even imagine where I would be or what I would be doing or even if my different life would be a happy one. I might even be dead right now. And much about the world around me would be different, too. The number of new consequences that would cascade from that one small change in the past is staggering. It's a scary thought.

Well, not really scary, because it's impossible.

So consider this:

1. Be aware that your present moment is the result of untold influences that are the product of uncountable chains of consequences triggered by actions in the distant past. There never was any such thing as "destiny." You've always lived in a world of where you and other people do things that affect your life.

2. Be mindful and appreciate your present moment. It's what you have. Don't wish that it were different. Relish it.

3. Rather than indulge in regret, learn from what happens to you.

4. Give thought to your decisions going forward. Respect the fact that your actions will have consequences in the real world. More than you'll ever know.

I hope you can use these thoughts to make your journey a little more productive and satisfying, though I suppose they're a little "heavy." I guess I never would have written a blog post like this if I hadn't gotten that Ph.D. in English so many years ago....

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2010. Building Personal Strength . (Permission to use this photo purchased from istockphoto.com)

The Personal Strength of Creativity - Magical Zulu Bowls and Cups Made from Telephone Wire

One Saturday not too long ago I got to do three really cool things, which is pretty good for one day.

First, I got to pet an alpaca. 

We went to the Old Oaks Ranch, which is about five miles north of Wimberley, Texas. The ranch raises alpacas; sells fleece, yarn and woven products; and has one of the best outdoor sculpture gardens in Texas. A typical alpaca is bigger than a large dog and smaller than a pony. They're a little skittish, but if you let them sniff you, you can stroke their backs (not their heads). They don't bite and they make a funny little purring sound. Pretty neat!

The second cool thing was Market Days at Wimberley, the second-largest outdoor market in Texas (check the photo gallery). It's a monthly event on a dedicated 20-acre site with over 400 stalls. It's like a massive combo flea market and arts and crafts show. It features an unprecedented variety of really good stuff! I thought, "This is the place to come when you need to buy a gift." It's worth traveling 100 miles to do some shopping.

One of the stalls featured beautiful cups and bowls made by Zulu tribesmen out of scrap telephone wire. Yes, you may have to read that sentence again, because the idea is so outside the box. The quality of workmanship is phenomenal. 

It all started when a few men decided to wrap their walking sticks in the colored wire. They discovered they could make wonderful patterns, and they moved on to cups and bowls. Soon they were making so much money doing this that they quit their day jobs.

I was wowed by the creativity of it. About 30 years ago I used to co-train a course called "Targeted Innovation" at the Center for Creative Leadership. One of the skills we taught was "outside-the-box thinking." In one exercise we showed participants an ordinary brick and ask them to list other creative uses for the brick. The trick was to realize there are three levels of creative thinking:
Level 1 - Other uses of a brick as a construction resource 
Level 2 - Non-construction uses of the brick in its current form
Level 3 - Uses of the brick's materials when you change the brick's form

I think the Zulu tribesmen were operating somewhere at Level 2 with their creative thinking: What are some non-telephonic uses of the materials in this telephone cable?
The solution they came up with is magical, because you can look at that gorgeous cup as long as you want, and you still can't figure out how they did it!

Of course, this kind of creativity is possible for anyone. But it takes extra effort to see beyond the obvious to "what could be." That's why creativity is a form of personal strength.

Oh yeah, there was that third cool thing. I got to see my favorite basketball team give their best effort to beat West Virginia by 21 points to advance to the NCAA Finals against Butler. And as you may know, the Blue Devils won a close, hard-fought game against the Bulldogs to become the 2010 NCAA National Champions. I know most spectators were cheering for underdog Butler, but I have strong Duke loyalties and as a fan, this is as cool as it gets.

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., , Copyright 2010. Building Personal Strength . (Photos by my wife, Kathleen Scott. Used with permission.)

On Personal Strength - Wisdom from Classic Novelists

I've been collecting quotes for a long time. I started back in the early 1970s when I was pursuing a Ph.D. in English at Duke University. As a West Point cadet, I didn't major in English, so I had to read about five novels a week to catch up. From time to time an author would say something profound in an elegant way. It was like a little treasure, a gift, and I wanted to keep it. So I began capturing these gems. 

Years later, I discovered that by far most of the quotes were about personal strength. I had been attracted to life wisdom all along. Since then, I've been pretty selective about which quotes I add to the collection. It has to be about some aspect of personal strength, from a credible authority, and stated in a memorable way. Even so, after all these years I've accumulated about 3,000 favorite quotes in my database.

But as I said, I began by saving quotes from novelists. Since I've never featured their wisdom on my blog before, it is, as they say, about time. Here are ten of my favorites, in alphabetical order.... 

On PROACTIVITY - “Far away there in the sunshine are my highest aspirations. I may not reach them, but I can look up and see their beauty, believe in them and try to follow where they lead.” - Louisa May Alcott, American author of Little Women

On OPEN-MINDEDNESS - "I happen to feel that the degree of a person's intelligence is directly reflected by the number of conflicting attitudes they can bring to bear on the same topic." - Lisa Alther, American author of Original Sins

On TOLERANCE - "Oppression involves a failure of the imagination: the failure to imagine the full humanity of other human beings." - Margaret Atwood, Canadian author of The Blind Assasin

On ACCEPTANCE - "People who shut their eyes to reality simply invite their own destruction." - James Baldwin, American author of The Fire Next Time

On SELF-ESTEEM - "Nothing is a greater impediment to being on good terms with others than being ill at ease with yourself." - Honoré de Balzac, French author of The Human Comedy

On INITIATIVE - "I don't wait for moods. You accomplish nothing if you do that. Your mind must know it has to get down to work." - Pearl Buck, American author of The Good Earth

On ACCOUNTABILITY - “Do not wait for the last judgment. It takes place every day.” - Albert Camus, French author of The Stranger

On DECISIVENESS - "Worry and think before you make any decision, but once you make it, be on your way free from worries or thoughts; there will be a million other decisions still awaiting you." - Carlos Castaneda, American author of Tales of Power

On COURAGE - "He who loves wealth loses much; he who loses a friend loses more; but he who loses his courage loses all." - Miguel de Cervantes, Spanish author of Don Quixote

On FOCUS - "The perplexity of life arises from there being too many interesting things in it for us to be interested properly in any of them." - G. K. Chesterton, British author of The Man Who Was Thursday

Post by Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., Copyright 2010. Building Personal Strength . (License to use photo obtained from istockphoto.com)

37 Years Later - The Brooklyn Bridge

In 1972, I was at Duke University studying British and American literature. For me, it was an intense time of learning and personal growth. Since I didn't have the typical undergraduate preparation in English, Duke made an exception to allow me to take graduate-level courses. I was in way over my head. To catch up, I had to study my ass off. I read a novel every day for several months, wrote 200 pages of essays each semester, and struggled to ask questions in class without exposing my ignorance.