Don McMinn

In the past ten years I’ve led groups of friends on annual trips to Paris, London, Europe, the Mediterranean, Baltic States, Russia, and North Africa. We’ve never had a malfunction or bad experience; just memorable, life-enhancing moments. I call these trips — Travel with Friends.

In July 2021, I took 18 people on a once-in-a-lifetime trip to one of the great historical and geographical countries in the Southern Hemisphere — Peru. Here’s a short video about our trip.

Travel takes time and money, but it’s worth the investment. You’ll be stretched and challenged, and you’ll learn more about the world in which you live and the life you live in the world.

Soon, I’ll announce a trip scheduled for October, 2022.

During World War II, the American military asked mathematician Abraham Wald to study how best to protect airplanes from being shot down. The military knew adding extra armor would help, but adding thick metal to the entire plane would make it too heavy to fly. Initially, their plan was to examine the planes returning from combat, see where they were hit the worst – the wings, around the tail gunner and down the centre of the body – and then reinforce those areas. They concluded that since planes coming home from battle have bullet holes everywhere but the engine and cockpit, it would be best to put armor everywhere except the engine and cockpit.

“But Wald realized they had fallen prey to survivorship bias because their analysis was missing a critical element: the planes that were hit but didn’t made it back. As a result, the military was planning to reinforce precisely the wrong parts of the planes. The bullet holes they were looking at actually indicated the areas a plane could be hit and keep flying – exactly the areas that didn’t need reinforcing.” [From BBC article]

This phenomenon is called survivorship bias. It happens when we only consider things that have survived or been successful and ignore those that have not. It is the logical error of focusing on successful people, businesses, or strategies and ignoring those that failed. We are tempted to think most success is due to particular characteristics that can be easily emulated.

Survivorship bias tends to distort data in only one direction, by making the results seem better than they actually are, which can lead to false conclusions and bad decisions.

Here are some more examples.

• In its advertising, a gym might feature clients who’ve toned up quickly as a result of going to their facility but, of course, they never show those who signed up but had little or no results.
• We often admire and are tempted to emulate people who have “beaten the odds.” For instance, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and Michael Dell all dropped out of college but eventually became billionaires. Before following their example, students should consider the millions of students who dropped out of college but never got ahead in life (data shows that most college graduates eventually have higher income and better positions). 
• In the world of investing, survivorship bias is very prevalent. Poorly performing funds are often closed down so they’re not represented in the data and significantly distort performance figures.

To avoid survivorship bias, simply ask this question: Are we only considering examples that represent success or does the data also include instances in which the system failed? For instance, consider the three examples from the previous paragraph. It’s obvious that only one side of the story is being considered. So analyze the data sources and don’t be misled.

Here’s a must-read article

Conversations are the life-blood of relationships. Lucy Folks wrote an insightful article titled How To Have More Meaningful Conversations. In the article, you’ll be able to download Arthur Aron’s 36 questions that lead to deeper relationships.  

“If I had to do it over again, I’d ask for help.” Anonymous

I wish I had read Dan Sullivan’s book, Who Not How, fifty years ago when I started my career. It’s a simple but significant message: When you have a project to do or a goal to achieve, don’t ask “How do I achieve this task or goal?” Rather ask, “Who can help me achieve this?”

I’ve always been a high achiever with a good work ethic, which is admirable; but often it’s been counterproductive—I work hard, but sometimes I don’t work smart. Even to this day, when I identify something that needs to be done, my first thought is often, “How can this be done?” I may even take it one step further and think, “How can this be done and when can I do it?” So instead of asking for help, I do it myself. For instance, I have a hard time paying someone to do house repairs that I can do myself (I still trim my own shrubs), but at times that’s not the best use of my time and energy. 

This mentality was set early in my life. I grew up in a low-income family and we didn’t have money to hire work done, so we did everything ourselves. This has been a blessing and a curse. A blessing in that I’ve learned how to do a lot of things myself; I’ve learned how to get things done (process thinking), and I’ve saved a lot of money.   

But there’s downside: I tend to do things that I should delegate to others. If I delegated more often, I would have more time to focus on things that only I can do, and, with professionals doing the job, the result is usually superior.  

I continue to wrestle with the financial aspect. If I had unlimited funds, of course I would ask who instead of how, and simply contract others to do the work. But I don’t have unlimited funds.

Can any of you, my readers, offer a solution to this conundrum? Do you struggle with the same thing? 

I should probably heed the advice of author Greg McKeown: “Only once you give yourself permission to stop trying to do it all, to stop saying yes to everything, can you make your highest contribution toward the things that really matter.” 

I recently went to the emergency room with severe vertigo. My world was spinning. 

In the first 30 minutes of being in the ER, as expected, many staff members came and went into my room. Nurses, clerks, helpers, technicians, custodians, physicians…it was a busy place. 

Each person who entered my room greeted me, which was good. But some greetings were more appropriate than others. For instance, some greeted me with a smile and an upbeat greeting, “Hi, how ya doing?” 

I was tempted to say, “How do you think I’m doing? I’m in the ER with acute vertigo. Why are you greeting me like I just sat down at a fast-food restaurant?” 

But I sensed they were good-hearted, well-meaning people so I said something like, “It’s been a challenging day.”

The physicians were more subtle and emotionally tuned. They would greet me with “Hello, I’m Dr. ____. I’m here to help you. What’s been happening?”

The experience reminded me of the importance of carefully crafting appropriate greetings. 

Greetings are important. Whenever we come in contact with another human we need to graciously acknowledge his or her presence using carefully chosen words and appropriate body language. A proper greeting creates a friendly social space and a pleasant beginning to conversations. But in each instance, we should evaluate the social setting and the person we’re greeting, and customize an appropriate greeting.  

Phone calls can be particularly tricky because we’re not privy to where a person is or what’s happening in her life at that specific moment, whereas when we’re physically with someone (like in an ER) it’s easier to appraise what’s happening and assess their emotional state.

Recently I blew it. I called a friend who was suffering with depression and started the conversation with a cheerful, “Hey Charles, how are you doing?” I should have said, in a subdued tone, “Charles, this is Don. I’ve been thinking about you lately. I know you’re going through a difficult time.”

Verbal greetings are important; if we neglect this social norm, we’ll appear unfriendly. But don’t depend on generic, one-greeting-fits-all-situations type greetings. Take a split-second to evaluate each setting and craft a proper salutation.