Buy the Parent Hacks book!

Asha Dornfest, who started the fantastic Parent Hacks website right around the time I started Ask Moxie, just published a book of the top 150ish hacks of the run of the website!

You should buy it. (At your local bookseller--they can order it for you if they don't already have it--or here:  )

You know how sometimes hacks are just ways to spend more money so you don't have to do as much work? These aren't that. These are genuine "make your life easier by using some five-cent object you already have in your drawer or just doing something in reverse order" time- and effort-saving hacks that don't assume you have unlimited funds or help. Some are for babies, some are for little kids, but a lot are for general family life. They cover a variety of situations and living configurations.

Here's the thing I really super-like about this book, though (being useful should be enough, but that's not my favorite part): It's totally straightforward and helpful and good-natured. It's not snarky or ironic. I know we're all supposed to want to be ironic and not care and be cool, so everything written about being a parent is supposed to be detached and backhanded and uttered between sips of barrel-aged bourbon. But Asha is a real person who wouldn't cut you at the playground for not having the cool shoes, and her book is the same way. Helpful, kind, and no subtext. Refreshing.

If I'm making suggestions, I'd say that a really fantastic one-two punch for a baby shower or new parent gift or anytime gift for a parent would be this Parent Hacks book and my You're The Best Parent For Your Child book. Asha's got the practical stuff covered, and I've got the emotional stuff covered. It's a You Can Do It kit.

tl;dr version: Buy this book.


Pardon the interruption

My uncle died. He was never married and didn't have kids, and I became his de facto next of kin over the last year or so of his life. He died way too early and I miss him.

My uncle was a really complicated man, but one thing was not complicated: He loved me and I loved him, without an agenda. An I always knew what he never figured out about himself, that he was enough, exactly as he was.

The logistical outcome of his death is that I've been focused on everything that needs doing. My brother and I are doing all the tasks involved in sorting out someone's estate and the legal and financial stuff. The kids and I have moved into my uncle's house to sort and donate and clean and redo it to sell it. I've been processing my grief by watching hours and hours of HGTV. And I've been thinking a lot about all the things I learned in the year I was 42 (it was one of those years that gives answers, after lots of years that asked questions) and from being with my uncle in the months before his death and giving him the best death I could.

There's a project that's going to come out of this. I'll let you know when I know what it is.

When "just work it out" creates more trouble

I've been sick this week and have been lying down on the job with parenting my kids. I've been sleeping a lot in the evenings (or just zoning out on the couch while I try to drink fluids) and my kids have been doing the stuff they're supposed to do (mostly), which is the benefit of having a teen and a tween instead of little kids who need to be directed. But one thing that's been happening is that my older one has been mean to his younger brother and I haven't been catching it and setting up any expectations for better behavior. They've been dealing with each other on their own, and it's become a little lopsided.

Not coincidentally, I've been talking to clients and friends who are dealing with situations in which one employee is either bullying others or simply blocking action so no one can get anything else done. And management hasn't been stepping in to censure or fire the problematic employee because they want everyone to "just work it out."


There's this fundamental misconception that people are just going to be able to work things out and be harmonious and work together, as siblings or coworkers. And that's clearly Just Not True. First of all, not everyone wants things to work out or wants harmony. In every work-related situation I consulted on this week, the employee creating the blocks was doing so specifically to attempt to preserve power. And my teen is messing with his brother because he thinks it's fun. The only people who want harmony in these situations are the people who can't create it (because the other person is causing the problem) or the manager/parent (um, me) who isn't stepping in. 

Second, allowing both parties in a dispute to just resolve it on an even playing field only makes sense in a situation in which both (or all parties) have the same intentions and weight of risk of the outcome of the dispute resolution process. Basically, we're assuming there's a free market of intentions and that all other things being equal, the logical course of action is going to make the most sense and everyone will agree with it. Insert your own joke about how Milton Friedman must never have met YOUR kids, because there's no such thing as a free market of intentions in a conflict situation.

If we were in the same room, I'd talk with my hands or use M&Ms to show you how this all plays out, but we're not, so let me just go back to Game Theory and use numbers to explain it: 

Let's say that Person X is trying to hoard information about something I need to get done at work, and I can't do my job effectively because she won't tell me what she knows. So our boss tells us to go into the conference room and talk it out, ladies. Going into this conversation/confrontation, I'm 100% invested in this, because if I can't get her to lay off the gatekeeping and just let the info come to me, I'm hosed. I can't get my job done. At the same time, she's just trying to stay in power and she knows there's nothing I can do to her (because if there was our boss would already have told her to cut it out), so she comes in invested maybe 30% in this negotiation.

So I'm at 100% risk and she's at 30% risk, before we even walk into the room. Now, as all good faith negotiations go, we each use a lot of "I statements" and we take turns with the talking stick and blah blah blah. THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT BOTH OF OUR POSITIONS AND FEELINGS ARE EQUALLY VALID. No one penalizes her for being a jerk who's trying to screw with my ability to get my job done. No one gives me credit for just trying to come in and do my job well every day. We're assumed to be equal. So then the solution we arrive at involves each of us compromising equally, 50/50. I give 50% and she gives 50%.

Now do the math: 

Me: 100% x 50% = 1.0 x 0.5 = 0.5 = 50%
Her: 30% x 50% = 0.3 x 0.5 = 0.15 = 15%

So I got penalized 50% FOR A SITUATION I DIDN'T EVEN CREATE and she got penalized 15% for deliberately messing with my job and life and ability to feed my children.

And I still don't even completely have her out of my business, because we compromised.

You can go in and substitute any situation in which one person is harassing another person or blocking another person, about video games or chores or project metrics or who gets to ride in the front seat or program funding or face time with the CEO or meeting deadlines or anything that happens at home or work. This is why you can't go into couples' counseling with an abuser. This is why you can't go into mediation with a vendor who has no legal repercussions for not fulfilling a contract. It's all about risk and investment, and the problem of assuming that both parties get equal say and equal priority.

So, what does this all mean? It means that if you're a parent, please please don't do any of that "I don't care who started it; I'm going to finish it" crap we grew up with that assumes a free market of intentions and ability to change a situation. Instead, if you notice that one of your kids is consistently the aggressor, make that a no-win situation for them (without involving the other kid, if possible) to guide them into better behavior toward their sibling.

And it means that if you're a manager, step in. Don't tell your employees to hash it out on their own. That's lazy and cowardly, for one thing. You can be conflict-avoidant on your own time, but if you're being paid to run a team, run the team. Spend some time and do some due diligence on what the underlying dynamics are so you can identify who's doing the blocking. And then require better behavior of them. If they can't stop, they need to move out of your team. You cannot sacrifice the entire team and your employees who are 100% invested because you're afraid to fire someone who's trying to hoard power or prevent the team or others from doing the best work.

Here's a plug for my RISWS process for managers: It's a low-stress, high-reward way to figure out what the flow is in your department so you can see this stuff coming and head it off before it becomes a big problem OR you can gather the evidence you need to be able to fire someone who is taking the whole department down. Anyone acting in good faith benefits from using this process and anyone who's not acting in good faith gets flushed out.

If you are an employee in a department in which the manager won't take any action to guide a bullying/blocking employee into better behavior: Ouch. I'm sorry. It's not you. And you can't fix this. And being kinder and nicer and more accommodating to the blocker is only going to make things worse (because they'll gain even more power from that and less investment, while you now have even more investment). You could refer your manager to my RISWS process (because we spend time working on interpersonal dynamics in the department as I teach the manager the process) if you think they'd go for it. You could find another job someplace else (that's probably the simplest thing to do, as long as you don't carry any bad feelings about not having been able to fix the situation on your own). You could see if you can go over your manager's head (DICEY, and I don't recommend it unless you really have a direct line that won't come back and bite you later). Whatever you decide to do, just know that it isn't you. 

If you want to read more about Game Theory in a way that you don't have to be a mathematician or strategist to understand, check out The Art of Strategy: A Game Theorist's Guide to Success in Business and Life by Dixit and Nalebuff.

Giving the benefit of the doubt

(I pulled the best of the emails I sent to subscribers from last year and posted them at so you can read them. If you missed them or have been thinking about subscribing but want to know what the emails are like, now you can see.)

The other morning my younger one, who is 10 1/2 now, was cuddling in bed with me, and he looked at me and whispered, "I just want to snuggle with you forever."

It was the moment you think is never going to come when you're dealing with a non-sleeping newborn or a recalcitrant preschooler. It was the moment that validated everything. And it was a continuation of the night before, when he said to me, "Mom, I like that you treat me like I know what I'm doing." What a gift he gave me, to give me that feedback that I was saying the right things and with the right attitude to let him know I trust him and think he's good enough.

People just want to be given the benefit of the doubt. And then they'll do a good job, because they want to know what they're doing.

That same day a friend told me she was looking for a new job, because she'd had her annual review and her boss had spent the entire review berating her. So she was walking, because she isn't about to be treated that way. 

My first reaction was to be thrilled that she knew she could find something else, and wasn't telling herself she had to stay and be treated like that. (Remember when I figured out that people weren't stuck anymore so companies had to start getting their acts together?) And then my second reaction was to hope her boss didn't have children, or was radically different at home than at work. Because anyone who thinks that berating another person who's putting in a good faith effort is a legit way to manage people probably also thinks that berating kids is a legit way to parent.

My friend is going to move on to something better, and new people will cycle through the position with the ineffective boss. Those people will be unhappy and then will leave, and the company will never do as well as it should, but everything will basically be ok. But if the boss is treating their kids with the same lack of care and common sense, it will harm those kids for life.They can't escape their family and that parent. And your parents voices are the voices you hear in your head forever, or until you've done some really extensive therapy. So berating a child has very real, long-lasting negative consequences.

If you are an employee and you are not being given the benefit of the doubt for good faith effort at work, find another job. Now is the time.

If you're a kid and you're not being given the benefit of the doubt by a parent, I am so sorry. You deserve to be treated like you have the capacity to make good decisions, even if you've made some mistakes. It gets better. Hang in there until you can leave. If you're an adult child of someone who doesn't give you the benefit of the doubt, know that it's not normal or healthy, and you have a right (some would argue a duty) to put up some boundaries so you aren't hurt anymore by your parent's lack of faith.

If you are a manager or a parent and you find yourself berating an employee or child or withholding the benefit of the doubt, remember that this says way more about you than it does about them. It might mean that you're overwhelmed with having to be in charge. It might mean that you're out of resources. You might simply be reenacting what happened to you as a child or an employee. Take a little bit of time to figure out why your first reaction is anger at someone who is primarily trying to make you happy. Then figure out why you're letting that first reaction dictate your behavior. (There are probably two distinct layers here. Tease them out so you really know what's going on.) 

Then make a plan to fix whatever problem you're having that is causing you to react in such a negative way. How can you give yourself enough space/confidence/energy/perspective/etc. to be able to use this as a moment to teach and to work with your child or employee to solve the problem? Remember that you can't pour from an empty cup. Self-care is VITAL, in the workplace, too.

It's possible that you're going to have to do some intensive teaching and mentoring of your child or employee so they know what you need them to do. That's good. Yes, it's easier and faster to do it yourself. But the time you put into walking them through what to do so that they fully understand is going to pay off for both of you. If you have an employee who genuinely can't do the work, find another place for them in your organization or somewhere else. If the employee doesn't want to do the work, let them go with kindness and good wishes.

I'm not suggesting that you give everyone off the street the benefit of the doubt: Trust in God but lock your car. But the people who are on your team--your kids and your employees--deserve the benefit of the doubt from you, repeatedly and instinctively. If you can't give that to them, that's a problem you need to solve.

Is it your problem to solve?

Ellie Newman interviewed me for her radio show “That Got Me Thinking” on KDPI 88.5 FM out of Ketchum, Idaho. Listen to the interview on Ellie's website here.

The interview is on the topic of change, and how we solve problems to create change. Which is, of course, what I’m always thinking about. The fantastic thing about this interview is that Ellie immediately got my focus on both parenting and managing people, and how they’re the same thing for me. I know it’s a big leap for a lot of people to switch back and forth from the work space in their brain to the parenting space in their brain, but that’s where I live all the time—those two zones—and Ellie didn’t bat an eye at my assumptions that they’re the same thing. There’s also a lot in the interview about my process of solving Flash Consultations, and the types of questions I get.

Last week was the first week back for most of us, to work and to school, and I think it was both a relief and a confirmation that there are real problems for a lot of us. A relief because being out of the regular schedule is stressful. Kids get very very stressed out by the combination of being out of the regular routine and not necessarily knowing what to expect next, and seeing people they don’t usually see while not seeing the people that they see every day in school. If they don’t like school, it can be hard to process the relief of not being there, plus there’s the negative anticipation of going back. If they like school, they may genuinely miss it, and they might feel at a loss without those activities and those people.

Adults are the same way for the same reasons, and there’s another huge layer of cultural expectation that we’re not supposed to want to be at work. (Think of the Powerball frenzy of the last week. Half a billion dollars would utterly ruin your life if you won it out of the blue, but everyone’s so conditioned to think we’re supposed to not want to work that people stood in line for hours to buy tickets to misery. 4 8 15 16 23 42.) But being at home (or “at home” if you were running around a lot or visiting people) has its own kind of stress and dislocation.

So getting back to the regular routine can be a big relief, despite the initial shock of having to get up early and put on pants to go somewhere. But then by day 3 or 4 of the week, all the old problems that were chewing at you before the break popped up again. And you have to confront the fact that a) they actually exist, b) they didn’t magically go away on their own, and c) you’re going to have to do something about them.

Problems such as: your child getting in trouble at school or your boss assuming the worst of you (same problem), your child or your employee getting entrenched in roles and resisting doing something that’s good for everyone just because they don’t want to feel like they have to (again, same problem), chronic miscommunication (with kids or coworkers), gaps in process that means no one’s responsible for something crucial (at home or at work), and generally just being tired of having so many complications to deal with and just wanting to do your work (everywhere). In the worst-case scenario, you really just don’t want to be there anymore.

All of this stuff, though, is just a problem to be solved step by step. Or maybe a few interlocking problems that you have to tease apart. If solving the problem is your responsibility, then you must solve it. And you can solve it. Just look for the most variable part of the problem, and start looking at why that aspect of the problem varies and what that means, and how you can figure out the motivations of the other people involved to change things.

How do you know if the problem is your responsibility? If you are the parent in a parent/child problem scenario, then it’s your responsibility. If you are the manager in a manager/employee scenario, then it’s your responsibility. None of this, “They’re acting childish so I don't have to fix it” stuff. Step back out of your ego and look at the situation from a systems perspective and figure out where the block is and how to fix it in a way that lets everyone feel good about themselves and learn from the whole thing. That's heroism (as well as good parenting and good management).

If you’re the child in a parent/child scenario or the employee in a manager/employee scenario, then you probably can’t solve this problem, just because you don’t have the right access or authority to. So think about how honest you can be with the person who can solve it, and ask them to solve it for both of you. Or, if you can’t be that honest, figure out if there’s a way to sidestep the problem so that you can still get the things done that you need to do, and be as free of stress about it as possible.

If this “Whose problem is it to solve?” perspective is interesting to you, check out the books Between Parent and Child by Haim Ginott and Parent Effectiveness Training by Thomas Gordon. Both of these books are super-useful for managers, whether or not you’re a parent, and a lot of the concepts in them have informed my managing process, RISWS

Status update, December 18

There's some stuff we all need to remember today:

1. You can make it. This is a brutal time of year, with a grinding set of conflicting expectations. I don't know whether it's better to plant your feet and stand up no matter what comes at you, or take a breath and let your head go under and trust that you'll float to the top in a minute, or hunker down low and crawl under the smoke level. You can assess your own situation and decide what you need to do to make it through the next two weeks.

2. Work has value. Your work has value, whether you're paid for it or not. Whether it's something job-ish or emotional work or some other kind of work. All the extra work you're doing right now that you're not getting paid for has value. I appreciate it.

3. If you're having problems with boundaries and clarity at work, it's the responsibility of the manager to fix it. This includes confusion around roles, performance, bonuses, metrics, etc. If your manager isn't clear about this stuff and you're being trapped, don't take it on yourself. And if you are the manager and you see the confusion and feel the drift, put on your big kid underwear and make some decisions and have some conversations. You can do it.

4. Your deadline is not today. Even if your kids are done with school today, you still have to work for two more weeks. You will get a bunch of stuff done next week, and the week after that. Not everyone's going to be working, but there will be enough co-workers and clients and customers who want to get some work done with you that stuff is still going to come together. You can close those sales or finish those projects or do whatever your job involves. You still have a lot of time.

5. "We are going to die. Let's love honestly, courageously, non abusively, stankly before that happens." --Kiese Laymon   


(Go get a glass of water and drink it.)

Create a low-stress Christmas season for yourself

It's back, and better than before! Get Christmased: Create the Christmas season that works for you and your family is a workbook that walks you through a process of figuring out what is meaningful about the Christmas season for you and what isn't, and helps you make deliberate decisions about what to keep and what to toss during the holiday season.

Available in paperback for $9.99 (it's taking 2-3 days to get to people in the US) or Kindle for $3.49 (instantaneous and you can read it on your phone with the free Kindle app). If you get the Kindle version, you'll need a little notebook to write down your answers to all the questions in and sketch out your plans.

This is my labor of love, because I know how painful, confusing, and intense the Christmas season can be for so many of us, that I wanted to help us pull it apart a little and make some conscious choices that would help us instead of letting us keep feeling hurt.

Doing the workbook seems to help the most if you can get it done and planned before American Thanksgiving, so order now and then do it in snatches of time here and there while you're waiting for your kids.

(Here's the link to the Canadian Kindle version, for $4.59.)


A warning to employers

Oh, employers. The tide has just turned. After seven plus years of hearing and saying "in this economy" as an excuse for treating workers poorly and for employees to just take it because they're scared of being unemployed, it's no longer an employers' market. The economy has improved enough that people aren't afraid of leaving a job that doesn't fit or that has bad management, because they know they can find another job. 

How do I know? Because I just said "What are they going to do, fire you?" to the third person in two days.

I am not a career counselor and I'm not on the employee side of What To Do At Work. I work with managers and upper management to help them create organizations and departments in which employees are engaged and happy and productive. But the other side of that is that I get to hear from a lot of employees what their managers are doing wrong. (And they're doing so very many things wrong.)

[Side note: My 13-year-old is at his dad's house today and he just texted me that he just watched the movie Office Space for the first time. I wanted to text back "Today you are a man" but thought that might confuse him. Later we can talk about how the movie is really not that different from the daily lived experience of a majority of people working in offices in the United States and the rest of the world. And why my whole mission is helping people not be Lumbergh.] 

Even a few months ago, when people were telling me about the random and disheartening things their managers did, they had a pervasive sense of sadness. Of realizing that there wasn't anything they could do about it and they'd have to just suck it up if they wanted to stay and be able to pay their mortgages. People were being put on Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs) because their employers had reduced the number of jobs to reallocate roles so people were being asked to do too many things in ways that they couldn't possibly succeed at, and then were being penalized for not being magical. Of course, when you're on a PIP you're scared and demoralized, so you're not going to work any better (even if you are working harder), so there's nothing useful or good about a PIP for anyone in the equation except from a documentation perspective that shifts all the risk from the organization to the individual. PIPs are all the negatives of capitalism without any of the positives, basically.

[Another side note: Every time I see "PIP" I think of Pip in Great Expectations, which makes me think of that scene in the old version of the movie in which Miss Havisham catches on fire in her wedding dress. My high school freshman English teacher, Mr. Oehlers, rewound and showed us that bursting-into-flames scene half a dozen times. (We loved it.) Little did I know then that it was the perfect metaphor for what happens when an organization gets so entrenched in structures and appearances that they stay mired in the past and can't make good use of the real live people in front of them: flames.]

But now, people are getting mad about being treated poorly and are realizing that a PIP often means more about the organization's problems than it does about them, and they're poking their heads up and looking around and realizing that they are marketable workers. With skills and knowledge and flexibility and perspective. And that they can find a job that uses those skills and isn't going to be as demoralizing as where they are now. So they're looking, and not caring if they get fired while they look.

I was giving a recommendation for a friend to a potential employer last week. I knew my friend had been impressed with the organization during the interview process, so I figured I could be honest and go a little deeper with the company rep who called me. He and I ended up talking about two of the traits I think are most impressive about my friend--her sense of perspective and her loyalty to people and process. I knew he'd get it because those traits are values of the organization he hires for, and he did, and told me he was happy to hear it because it's hard to know those things just from four or five interviews with a person. She got the job, and it was absolutely no choice to leave her current job, which sees her as an interchangeable cog with nothing special to offer. Her current job thought (until the moment she gave notice) that she was lucky to be there, even though they ran an organization that couldn't deliver on the basics of being decent people, let alone put in the thought work about what kind of organization they are and what that means for their management or workflow process. They are never going to be able to keep good employees, because they don't know or care who they are or who they employ.

When my friend and I were talking about how she spends her time in her last week at her old company, I said, "What are they going to do, fire you?" And then I had virtually identical conversations with two other people I know about how they can act while looking for an organization that values them so they can leave organizations that devalue them on the daily.

When I hear (or hear myself saying) something once, fine. Twice, I notice. Three times--there's something going on and I should pay attention. And this is three times in two days of recognizing that being fired isn't a threat anymore.

So, employers, managers, bosses, team leaders, anyone who needs people to help you do what you're doing: You need to go a little deeper. Put in the deep work it's going to require to see your people for who they are and what they actually have to offer your organization. Think about who you are as an organization and what you can be. Who do you need to fit that mission? (And if it's not a mission, maybe you need to move on, too. Life's too short to do work for bad systems.) Are those people sitting right in front of you, slowly withering or trying to get out?

If you have the wrong people working for you, fire them in a human, decent way that honors both of you. They will move on to something that fits them. (And maybe you know what that thing is and can help them make a connection.) And you now have the ability to hire the right person who fits in with your organization and your mission.

But know that it's the employee's market again. You decide who you hire, but if you can't deliver on giving them a real reason to come in every morning that honors who they are, they'll leave. The threat of being fired isn't even remotely enough to keep them there, because they can find something else.


If you want to talk to me, lmk at magda at tilmorgroup dot com.

Let's solve a lot of problems

From now through December 25 I'll be offering a referral bounty for Flash Consulting: For every two paid Flash Consults you refer to me, I'll give you a Flash Consult for free to use or give away.

"What's a Flash Consult?" I will solve your problem for $250 in around 24 hours. Business, personal, work-related, parenting, life-work-relationship-kids balance, or any kind of mix of those things. I can't answer anything technology or vehicle-related, but almost anything else I can solve for you. (If I can't, I'll figure out who to refer you to.) It's all described here. Scroll about halfway down to read the testimonials. And I keep a blog about some cases I've worked on here, with a little about how I do it.

This is perfect for anyone who wishes they had help making some kind of decision, or for small business owners who've hit a wall on a topic but don't want to hire a long-term consultant. Hand me the problem and I solve it for you and then leave all the implementation to you. (I hate implementation, and you don't want to pay me to implement when you can do it anyway as soon as we've worked through what to do in what order.)

Basically, if there's something you've been up at night going around and around about, pay me $250 to hold on to it and solve it for you.

I don't tell anyone if you work with me, and you can do this totally anonymously, too. (We'll figure out a way for you to pay me without revealing your name.) 

Back to the special offer:

You spread the word about my Flash Consulting, and tell your people to drop your name and email address when they hire me. When two people who hire me tell me you referred them, I email you to tell you you have a free Flash Consult with me. You should use your free one within a year, if possible. If you're going to give it to someone else, tell me their email address and when you want me to give it to them, and I'll email them a certificate for a free consult.

(I won't tell you who it was that hired me through your referral, though, because privacy.)

You can also see where this is going if you want to give these as gifts--buy two and get one free. So if you have three siblings with problems, you can pay me for two and tell me their three emails addresses and I'll send certificates to all three of them. Nothing says "I love you" at the holidays like solving someone's problem for them.

Why am I doing this? Because Flash Consults are still the most fun thing I get to do professionally, and because I'm staring at hours and hours in the car driving kids around in the next few months and I do my best unraveling of problems in the car. So I'm trying to manipulate my schedule into working for me while at the same time giving you a reward for referring me to friends and associates, and removing your stress from trying to outfox your problem on your own. So everyone wins.

How does this happen? You send the website to anyone you know who has a problem they're working on or a decision to make, or who owns a small business and is dealing with something outside their area of expertise, and tell them that when they email me to start the process they should give me their name and email. Then I take over and ask them where it hurts (that is actually the first question in the process), and then we solve some problems.

Questions? Lmk at magda @ flashcons dot com

A potentially incendiary post about pumpkin spice

The pumpkin spice craze of a few years ago has faded into pumpkin spice fatigue and loathing, and I'm begging everyone to make sure your ire is placed fairly.

"Pumpkin spice" is a gross combination of fake pumpkin flavor and chemically-reproduced spice flavors, and it makes things that shouldn't taste like pumpkin pie taste artificial like almost pumpkin pie. This is what you should hate.

What you should not hate is the spice traditionally used to season pumpkin pie and sold mixed together as Pumpkin Pie Spice: cinnamon, ginger, nutmeg, and allspice. This spice combination makes everything taste like the good things about autumn: a chill in the air, wearing sweaters, beautifully-colored leaves, running outside in comfort, and football season.

Note that you can put Pumpkin Pie Spice in things not containing pumpkin. I made a recipe for spiced cookies using cinnamon, ginger, nutmeg, and allspice, and they're warm and autumnal and delicious.  You should try them (or get your kids to make them for you, because they're easy). Also delightful: bake a sweet potato in the oven, then split open and put on a little butter and a few shakes of Pumpkin Pie Spice.

Real, actual cinnamon, ginger, nutmeg, and allspice have never done anything bad to you.

You also should not outright hate pumpkin the fruit. Of course you don't have to like it or want to eat it, because you're an adult and you don't have to like or want to eat anything. You're the boss of you. But in its actual real pumpkin form there's nothing to hate or resent about it because it's just a fruit. You can say, "No, thank you" and wait for apple. Or you can eat it and enjoy its squash-like sweetness and creaminess.

If you do like pumpkin, one way to love it is to put some canned pumpkin in the blender with a little milk (cow or coconut), some powdered ginger, vanilla extract, sweetener, and ice cubes.

How did we go so far off the rails with this "pumpkin spice" thing if it all just started with an innocent fruit and four luscious spices? Well, capitalism, basically. The fact that actual pumpkin spiced with Pumpkin Pie Spices also tastes good with coffee left an opening for the military industrial complex to mess with us by fabricating artificial pumpkin flavor to put into coffee.

Blech. Come on, now.

If you want something that gives you the same warm, autumnal serotonin hit as pumpkin spice coffee but without that gross taste that makes you have to scrape your tongue off the roof of your mouth, there are a couple of options:

1. Put Pumpkin Pie Spice in with your coffee grounds when you brew coffee. You'll get the deliciousness of the spices, without the grossness of the fake pumpkin flavor.

2. Make my Pumpkin Spice Latte Coffee Cake.  This is one of my favorite recipes I've ever concocted--it's a moist and delicious coffeecake with real pumpkin, with a thin layer of coffee cheesecake on top.

3. Drink a cup of coffee while eating a piece of pumpkin pie.

This shouldn't be traumatic.

tl;dr version: Just say yes to cinnamon/ginger/nutmeg/allspice with or without actual pumpkin. Just say no to artificial pumpkin and artificial spices.

Dear Jeff Bezos, I can solve your problem for you. Love, Magda

I'm not going to rehash the whole thing, but I am going to say that nothing in the original NYT article about how management happens is a surprise to anyone who knows anyone who knows anyone who's worked for Amazon.

The way to have a well-functioning organization is to create an environment in which workers can trust their managers and managers can trust their people.

If you create an actively hostile workplace in which no one can trust even basic declarative statements, your company is not going to get the best work out of people. And your product is going to suck. Ask Microsoft. Or ask Ford, and then look at how they turned it around by requiring trust.

It's not complicated to create an environment of trust in an organization. It is a process, but a fulfillment company should be all over process. 

Call me. I can teach you all RISWS and the larger theoretical framework behind RISWS, and within 18 months you'll be someplace people stay because they love it so much.



Agile methodology, parenting, and managing people: some thoughts

This is going to be another one of those "everything's connected" posts that people either love or hate, so enter at your own risk.

I think ALL THE TIME about how to free up people to do their best work and get into the flow state. It's basically my whole parenting method: Facilitate and support my kids in experiencing a lot of things and then creating and maintaining their own boundaries so they can do what brings meaning to them. And it's what I think good management should be, too: Facilitate and support your people in developing their strengths and maintaining boundaries so they can do what brings meaning to them.

And I think a lot of the time about processes and systems. I am a problem solver even when I try to turn off my brain, and the way I solve problems is by looking for the moving parts. You can't tell what's a moving part if all you have is chaos. You have to have a system or process in place so that you know what are the set pieces and what are the variables. Then, at the next level of problem solving, you look at all the data of the variables and recognize patterns, and then the anomaly is where you start looking for a solution to your problem. So the more processes and systems I'm familiar with, the better.

Which is all a long way to explain why I was research agile software development methodology. I don't write software, but I've worked for software companies and am familiar with the constructs of traditional software development, and I wanted to find out how agile is different. So I popped on over to and started reading. And then I felt one of those classic "OMG, you like peanut butter?? I like peanut butter, too!" moments of recognition.

Let's roll back a little to talk about my process of developing the RISWS method of managing people, that gives managers a continual data stream of information on their employees so they can help them develop their strengths and remove barriers to engagement and productivity. I came from the basic assumption that it makes more sense to take the people you have and help them do their best and keep them engaged than it does to focus rigidly on roles and try to force people into them at all costs. And a lot of that is changing mindsets so that people are allowed to trust each other and focus on working together instead of on defending territory and roles. RISWS is a process that you follow to deal with the individualities of people and with the individualities of their problems and competencies. It's a cycle that creates continual progress and continuous improvement and trust-building.

So when I started reading about how agile development uses the Scrum project management structure to get continual data and create an improvement cycle, I thought these two methods (Scrum and RISWS)  were really similar at the core, although radically different in the actual process. Both are focused on working in the middle of the process and making constant improvements. Both realize that a long process without feedback can lead to disaster. Both prioritize new information and decisionmaking that celebrates information instead of assumptions.

Agile is "iterative and incremental," which is what managing people using RISWS is, too. No manager has to be perfect. Anyone promoted into a manager role can learn. Teams and their leaders learn together and improve together. Honest feedback--and then acting on that feedback!-- is crucial.

And both of these methods seem a lot like parenting preschoolers. You can wait for your kid to do something wrong (and preschoolers are always doing something wrong) and then punish them for it once it goes too far. Or you can keep a consistent eye out and set up regular processes, so as soon as things start to deviate you can step in to offer guidance and correction (in the "let me help you make it better" meaning of correction, not the hot saucing meaning of correction) so the child gets help succeeding until they can do it on their own. Agile and RISWS are the same thing: watch carefully, help, don't penalize.

The other thing I think is really similar about relationship-focused parenting, agile, and RISWS is that they're threats to traditional power structures because they focus on people and relationships and they trust people and relationships instead of trusting rules and penalizing people. So even though they make so much more sense than the more traditional, control-based, oppositional methods of parenting, product development, and managing people, they can be tough to institute because they require that the people in power take their hands off the wheel and trust these relationship-based processes.

Trust people. It's a timeless but still-threatening concept. In a lot of areas.

Some thoughts on managing and parenting while my kids are still gone

Today is day 20 of 21 of my kids being on their annual three week roadtrip with their dad, so I've been thinking a lot more for the past few weeks about managing adults in the workplace than about facilitating kids' development at home*.

You know how you always think your boss knows what's going on with your job so if they don't fix things that are bad you assume it's because they're deliberately not fixing them to spite you? And how if you're a manager you don't know what's really going on with your people because no one wants to complain and be seen as a whiner? So then everyone resents everyone? I developed a process for managers called Reporting/Interpreting/Solving Workflow Solutions (RISWS). It gives managers and team leaders a consistent flow of data that tells them what's actually going on with their people, so they can fix things or give their people the power to fix them, and everyone can be engaged and happy and just do their jobs.

I've been working on RISWS with managers in the last year and have been getting good results, and just started a group through the process as part of a grant-funded study of the process. (I'm excited about it! The study leader is writing about it here:

It's no secret that a lot of the way I show managers how to work with employees is related to the way I try to work with my kids. Employees are just people, and kids are just people, and managers and parents are just people. And all people want the same things: to matter, to be good at things, to be heard, to be valuable.

It's a huge mistake--in my mind--to try to make your kids fit a checklist of well-roundedness instead of paying close attention to what they love and are good at, and encouraging them to run to those things. The same thing with employees--hiring someone and then trying to force them into a box you've created instead of looking at what's fantastic about them is going to end up making everyone frustrated at work, and creating less value for the organization. If we're being completely frank,it makes zero sense to pay good money for a salary and then not get the best out of an employee. People can sit at home being mediocre and frustrated on their own time. 

I had a meeting at my older son's school yesterday about class placement for next year, and it forced me to focus on who my son is and what he's good at, instead of choosing classes by what I think he should be good at. It's not easy, this parenting the child you have instead of the child you think you have. I'm a lot better at listening quietly and observing carefully than I was before, and releasing my preconceptions about what brings meaning. One of my RISWS clients had a similar moment of realizing she was releasing a lot of unnecessary tension at work by admitting that one of her team members was really good at something that wasn't strictly in the job description but could be useful for their team.

I realize that it's a luxury to have the time and space and complimentary work area to be able to really think about parenting strategy for a big chunk of time. I miss my kids horribly during this three weeks, but being able to think about strategy and tactics and mission without being consumed by their immediate needs has been good. And a lot of managers are so busy putting out fires that they never really get to strategize about their team or team members.

I wish I could give everyone this kind of risk-free space. Parents to think about how to interact with their children to help them self-actualize, and managers to think about how to interact with their employees to help them stay in the flow state as much as possible. If some time and space drifts past you, grab it and let yourself use it to just think for awhile. It's an investment in yourself, but also in the people you spend your time with.


* You know what's super-easy? Being a fantastic parent by text. My older one's been texting me throughout this road trip and I am KILLING IT when all I have to do is offer sage advice in written form. If only there was a way to do the first three years by text, this parenting gig would be fantastic.

The big Reddit mistake from an organizational and management perspective

When Ellen Pao came in to Reddit I didn't have a lot of hope for her in the position, but I thought maybe the hail Mary could work. I mean, Ford had a hundred years of dysfunction and toxicity, but Alan Mulally was still able to turn that ship and allow the employees to create something new and healthier, and Ford's in great shape now. So maybe it could happen for Reddit, too. But then it turned out that Reddit didn't know how to do anything but eat its young, and now Pao's gone and it's evident that the site itself is rotting from the inside out and if I were one of the investors I'd be calling my tax accountant now about taking a write-off.

Whoever gets to write this case study for business schools to use is getting a peach of a story. This is basically the worst-case scenario in a lot of ways, and that starts with the mistaken idea people had that Reddit was in any way a disruptor.

There was nothing new about Reddit. We wrote slam books in junior high back when it was still called junior high and not middle school. My high school friends used to run dial-up bulletin boards from modems in their bedrooms in 1989. I was all over Urban Baby when my first child was a baby and I felt alone and isolated and unhappy and needed the adrenaline hit of arguing with strangers on the internet about arcane details of baby care and NYC playground politics.

Reddit was just Urban Baby for 23-year-old white men. Instead of organic pacifiers, BPPs, and what-your-i-banker-husband-is-really-doing-when-he's-working-late, it was details about FPSes, sports, and why-don't-girls-want-to-fuck-me. And because people were anonymous, they said some horrible things (along with a lot of really, really funny things).

It gave you a place to say things you knew you were an asshole for saying.

But being an asshole and getting away with it only works when something's underground. As soon as it starts to become legit, and starts getting money and infrastructure and non-developer paid staff, a decision has to be made. If you make the decision you have to create and enforce community standards, and if you don't (or aren't willing to) make the decision you're legitimizing violence.

So. Reddit made a decision, which we now know about because of the comments Yishan Wong made after Pao was ousted, to go toward legitimacy. But they were going to do it in a stealth way from behind the scenes, deciding on and enforcing standards and basically using quantitative game theory to decide what to allow as a sacrifice in order to be able to save the good stuff. Interesting, right? And, like, an actual strategy. So far so good.

The problem is that they made another decision that may not have seemed as important, but that actually created the current problem that's killed them: They let their unpaid, volunteer mods stay unpaid, volunteer mods. 

Anyone who's ever worked with volunteers know that they're the gift that eats. You can get so much done with them, they save your resources for other things, and they can get so good at doing their jobs that they need little supervision, but they can also get so embedded that if they decide to go off mission--or decide to enforce what they perceive the mission to be--your entire organization can implode. And they're very hard to control, because you can't ever discipline them, because they're doing you a favor. And you either can't or have decided not to pay people to do that work. So you're stuck.

(The management at Reddit knew that awhile ago--at least Wong did--but the general public didn't really figure that out until Victoria Taylor was fired and all the mods shut down the AMAs and everyone was clutching their pearls about it.)

From a management perspective, volunteer mods are bad, bad news. When they're embedded in your product so deeply (and in some subreddits they basically ARE the product), this is the management equivalent of the big Cascadia tectonic plate earthquake we all wish we didn't know was coming. 

This management problem is why I'm writing about Reddit, btw. I'm not on Reddit. (I have a couple of friends who are Redditors, and they're normal, educated, intelligent, kind people  who aren't particularly traumatized by what's going on.) I did my time on Urban Baby and Baby Center and I ran a FB group for Ask Moxie that self-destructed (I left right around the time Wong left Reddit), and I don't have any desire to go into the bowels of another venue for arguing with strangers.

But I am passionate about helping managers figure out what's going on with their people and how they can help everyone do really great things. And I think that could have happened (inasmuch as arguing with strangers on the internet ever does really great things) with Reddit. Except for the volunteers.

The mods didn't seem to know that there was any kind of strategy to allow certain things but not others. They were attracted to the site because it was basically a place where it was cool to be a neckbeard. And because they assumed the founders of the site were neckbeards, too, who wanted them to have a place that was safe to say the kinds of things that showed they weren't fit to interact with people except on the internet.

ETA: One of my aforementioned Redditor friends pointed out to me after reading this piece that many of the mods--and all of the mods of the happy subreddits--are normal people, not angry neckbeard MRAs, and I'm lumping them in with those bros here. I don't mean to, and I want to mention that there are a lot of great people on Reddit, including mods. There's still a huge problem with those good mods being unpaid, though--they work so hard that it can't help but become very personal for them and they take so much pride in their contributions (modding is REALLY hard) that it's never going to be easy to make decisions that are product or user or business decisions without big hurt feelings. It's utterly reasonable, which is exactly why volunteer labor is incredibly tricky and dangerous.

And those volunteers and commenters were embedded in the site, the way the paid staff weren't. The paid staff could leave or be cut loose--Wong, Pao, Victoria Taylor are all gone. But those mods were still there, suspending the AMAs and flexing their power every day. So now the "community" really is in charge, and they're upholding values that aren't what the founders--or most adults--have any interest in. This is like that LL Cool J movie in which they're studying the sharks in that underwater lab, and then the sharks take over and trap them. The mods and Redditors are the sharks.

So, what is there to do? Well, back when I was on an amazing team a few years ago we used to joke around that if the product failed we'd just go home, sleep for the weekend, and then come back and create a new product. I don't think that's the worst idea in the world: Shut off the Reddit servers and sell the URL to a porn site, then all the paid Reddit employees take a week off and then come back the next Monday to start up the next thing. But if they're going to do that they have to figure out how to manage their company and manage their employees to maintain boundaries and not confuse the users and product, and not let the control get away from them.

Hint: Hire more parents. We're practiced in this healthy boundary stuff.

And that's my takeaway. Not the not-shocking not-news that a bunch of undateable whiteboys on the internet are threatened by a woman who can read, and not the demise of another bulletin board site that was misunderstood by the huge corporation that bought it before it was ready to be bought, and not the fact that moving all the employees on-site is antithetical to good management practice for the way humans work now. None of that. Instead, the takeaway is that boundaries and understanding where the risk and control rests are always the most important things for any company, and your front line on that is allowing your managers to actually manage well and with authority. Even if it means paying people.

Imposter Syndrome, beginner's luck, or lack of process

A few weeks ago, my dear friend Shannon Reed and I were joking around about writing a book to help people deal with being suddenly famous. (I think it was a joke, although now that I think of it, we did come up with a pretty solid outline of chapters.) At the time, Shannon had been in the New Yorker twice in a month, as well as McSweeney's and Buzzfeed and a bunch of other places, and suddenly she was being noticed, even though she's been writing and publishing for years.

When her first New Yorker piece came out, I checked in with her, and she said she thought maybe she had a little Imposter Syndrome, but then discarded that idea. I discarded it as well, because if anyone can write funny things, it's Shannon. (She texted me through my entire two-year divorce process and my overwhelming memories of what I'm sure were a horrible and gruesome period are of her making me laugh.) But she was still all weirded out by the sudden fame, which was also confusing because she doesn't care about being famous herself, but she does want her work to be famous, and it felt like people were conflating those two things. And we compared stories of weird things people had said to us because they thought we were famous. And we made up our fake book, about how to keep your head on straight during what could be utterly temporary fame and how to process all the mismatched feelings and the expectations that didn't match reality.

Then a couple of days ago I read this post by The Blogess about why she doesn't promote good causes people ask her to promote, and I nodded my head through the whole thing. People email me all the time to ask me to promote things, everything from blogging for depression awareness (every blog post I do has depression at the heart of it because I'm a person with depression, so) to clean water to raising money for a sick child to Kickstarting some new gadget that will improve parents' lives to promoting some app that does something amazing. And the obvious answer is that you (The Blogess, me, anyone else who has even a little bit of fame or influence or whatever the current preferred term for internet recognizability is)  can't promote any of it because you can't promote all of it. And you don't have a process to prioritize and sort through and then express to the people whose things don't make the cut why they didn't without being hurtful. If we were actual huge outlets with a bunch of staff to develop those processes, we could, but we're just us, so we can't.

Then, today my friend Carolyn Raship, who I admire immensely because of the way she rushes headlong into her own talent and into creative life, posted this post from Alicia Liu, "You don't have imposter syndrome." It is absolutely worth the read, and you should click over there now and read it and then come back here. There are diagrams. (I love diagrams.)

Liu has two key insights in her post:

1. It's not Imposter Syndrome if you're feeling uncomfortable because you actually don't know how to do something. That's just being a beginner, or not knowing something you still have to learn. Of course you feel weird when you don't know something you're supposed to know.

2. Calling that feeling of discomfort with not knowing something you need to know "Imposter Syndrome" pathologizes the process of learning.

YES. YES. YES. I'll have what she's having.

And as I was reading Liu's post, it hit me that what many of us (especially women) feel as Imposter Syndrome ISN'T ABOUT OUR CONTENT KNOWLEDGE. It's about PROCESS, or, rather, lack of process or unfamiliarity with process. 

Shannon knows she's a good enough writer to be in the New Yorker and to have one of the most-read humor pieces on Buzzfeed--she doesn't doubt her talent (or effort). Her discomfort was with the effects of being a stellar writer. She doesn't have a process yet for dealing with increased demands, weird communications, requests, etc. I didn't have a process for people recognizing me on the street and telling me I helped them survive their kids' first few years and I felt like a fake, but now I do have a process for dealing with that, so I don't feel like a fake anymore. The Blogess wrote that post to explain to everyone that she didn't promote things, and writing that post was creating a process, so I'm hoping she doesn't feel discomfort around those requests anymore. Even the example Liu gave about the ubertroll responding to her question about man pages wasn't actually about her not knowing the content yet, it was about her not knowing the process that includes codebros mocking people and either getting around or ignoring them.

My takeaway from all of this is that even when you know your shit inside and outside, up and down, because of the natural progression of more and more people finding out that you are really good at what you do, you will be put into more situations involving new or missing processes. And that will be uncomfortable for you. So when you feel that discomfort, you don't have to wonder if you think you''re really good at what you do. Instead, acknowledge that you're doing something new and of course you don't know how to do it yet and of course you'll learn it and come up with a process to deal with it, just like you'd learn something new having to do with your actual content area.


Vent here safely for Mother's Day

If you need to vent, vent here. Any topic: being a mother, not being a mother, having a complicated relationship with your mother, missing your mother, never knowing your mother, hating the commercialism and competition of the day, being alone on Mother's Day, etc.

No Misery Poker: all pain is valid. If you have a kind word for someone else, share it, but don't feel bad if you don't have extra for anyone else.


A few weeks ago I wrote in my email* that it was the time of the school year here in North America in which the seams were starting to show. Kids were really fatigued with schoolwork, they were starting to get sick of each other, expectations were running high, and if there were any kinds of problems or tensions they were going to come to the surface.

After that I got a lot of "I thought it was just my kids!" responses from people. It feels like everyone else is blithely pushing through while your kids are just barely holding it together. Pants that are suddenly too small, missing homework, scuffles with friends, more tears than usual.

Here's a little reminder for you: There's nothing that weird or unusual or scattered about you. Other people may look more together than you do in some areas, but no one's on top of everything all the time. And no one is riding calm emotional seas all the time, either. 

I don't think any of us are trying to deliberately deceive other people into thinking we're doing really well when we're presenting a calm, happy face in the middle of disarray. I think we make an effort to look calm as a way of trying to stay calm. The unintended effect is that other people are comparing their realities to our aspirations without our even trying to put that on them.

Remember in Lost when Jack said he'd give himself ten seconds to freak out and then he'd get it together? Maybe we should let other people see that ten seconds, and then rally again to stay calm. I'll go first:

Every year I freak out that no one will come to my son's birthday party, which is always on Mother's Day weekend, and I just got some positive responses to the invitation and burst into tears. I think I'm carrying around more "odd kid out" baggage than I like to recognize.

Now you. (Here or on FB with your friends, or on Twitter with the hashtag #moxie10seconds or wherever.)

We can do it.

* I send an email out every few weeks, to people who subscribe over there on the right side of the page. It's basically whatever topics I'm thinking about, and is usually a mix of finding your way as a person with children, some business nerdery (I had some deep thoughts about negotiations and value last week), and integrating work and life into something that feels like fun. I usually link to posts from my worklife blog on LinkedIn, too.

If you have a baby or toddler, there may be some question I can answer for you in the Moxietopics.

And if you have a bigger problem, this might be your sign that it's time for a Flash Consult.


MoxieTopics: 19-month Olds, 3.5-year-olds, and Toddler Essentials Bundle

Check out the MoxieTopics on dealing with 18-month-olds (it outlines the big themes your kid is going through and what's going to cascade over onto you) and helping your 3.5-year-old (and using this chaos to figure out how to help your kid deal with their emotions for the rest of their life).

And check out the Toddler Essentials Bundle, which gives you the five toddler-crucial topics for a discount by getting them all together.

42 is The Answer


I'm 42 today!

And I'm really excited about it. Remember how scared I was of turning 40? I agonized about it for weeks. I'm radically more excited about turning 42, and am looking forward to this whole year.

I woke up yesterday with an idea of how I want to commemorate it, and this is either going to be awesome or really stupid*:

Ask me any question and for $42 I'll answer it.

I know a lot of you have one nagging question that's preventing you from moving forward somehow, and you're stuck on answering it yourself. It's not a big process question that's worth a $250 Flash Consult, but I could answer it for you in ten minutes and you'd be able to move ahead. Anything from "how do I do this?" to confirmation that you're on the right track with something about your kid or career or a friendship, to helping clarify some value, to figuring out why you're upset about something you can't put your finger on and how to move past that. (I can also answer factual questions, or tell you where to start if I don't know the answer.) 

All my usual Flash Consult disclaimers appl: I'm not a doctor, lawyer, or therapist, and nothing I say is professional or licensed advice. Any action you take based on anything I tell you is your own responsibility. I won't tell anyone you worked with me (but there's no legal protection if anything legal happens). I only need as many details as are important to the question, so you don't have to tell me your name, location, etc. if it doesn't matter.

I don't know anything about cars, technology, or potty training, so don't ask me about those things. I reserve the right to reject a question I can't answer or that's too big for this format (and I'll return your money, obvs, if I can't answer it).

I'm accepting $42 questions now through Sunday night (March 1) at midnight. How quickly I answer depends on how many I have in the queue. I'll send you the answer by email, unless you'd rather have a video answer. If you have more than one $42 question, send me $42 more than once and I'll answer them in the order I receive them.

To ask a $42 question:

PayPal $42 to magdamedia @ and in the Message to Sender tell me the question and the email address I should send the answer to. (If it's a gift, tell me that and the email address of the person who has the question and I'll email them to get the question.)


Send me a Square Cash transfer of $42 to magda @ and in the message area tell me the question and the email address I should send the answer to. (If it's a gift, tell me that and the email address of the person who has the question and I'll email them to get the question.)


So far this $42 question project has been fun and a little bit surprising. We'll see what happens as the day rolls on and more people decide to hand me their question to deal with!


* I'm leaning toward awesome. I told the people on my email list about this yesterday, and the first few questions I got in were asking "How do I do this?" on a variety of topics, and I LOVE that kind of question. So I think this is going to continue being fun.