The 80/20 Librarian: Focusing on the 20% that matters

I attended a meeting recently and heard the acronym GELMO used. This stands for Good Enough Let’s Move On. There are variations of this saying that you can check out online, but I like GELMO the best thus far.

When enough time in a meeting has been spent analyzing a situation and a reasonably sound plan is in place to take action, it is important to then take next steps. In essence, action rather than continual discussion which entails going over the same ground once again, is what is required. Saying GELMO is a way to break through getting bogged down on one particular meeting agenda item. You can then move on to cover other topics.

Before saying GELMO, be sure that

• The one wanting to say GELMO is fully familiar with the situation at hand
• Those impacted stakeholders that wish to comment on the situation have done so or at least had a chance to do so
• All questions, that need to be addressed, have been answered so all information is available to make a decision on next steps
• The pros/cons of potential action plans (or options) have been addressed and the team generally knows which plan (or option) is best used to move forward
• There is an opportunity cost to not saying GELMO, namely that the discussion will potentially go in a continual loop if GELMO is not said. GELMO will signal the need to move on to other discussion topics so time can be spent addressing other matters.

I was given the wonderful opportunity to share some thoughts for a section of the The Crab, which is the Digital Magazine for the Maryland Library Association, regarding Emerging Adults.

You will find the article on Page 46 of the Fall 2023 issue.

I liked reading the following excerpt from Gregory Boyle’s book Barking to the Choir on page 26. One point worth reflecting on is thinking of ways to give library customers positive feedback. To make it in the book, this positive comment must have been very encouraging for Hector. What are some ways libraries might celebrate their customers in 2023 and beyond?

“Hector has his four young kids for the weekend and takes them to the Central Library on a Saturday morning. The kiddie floor is a little crazy, so he takes a couple of books and leads his crew to the adult section, which is nearly empty. They plant themselves in a corner on plush, spacious leather chairs, the kids’ little legs barely reaching the ends of the chair’s cushions. Hector, both a recovering gang member and heroin addict, begins to read in a hushed tone. But he notices the librarian, a gentleman in his thirties standing behind a desk, giving him what he thinks is the hairy eyeball. Hector feels a flush of self-consciousness. Maybe I shouldn’t be here, he thinks to himself, feeling judged. He finishes the two books, corrals his gaggle of four, and makes for the door. But the librarian waves him over. Hector, readies himself to be chewed out for reading to kids in the adult area. He situates his kids at a distance, in case what the librarian says takes everybody south for a second. But the librarian only looks kindly at Hector, smiles, and says simply, “Good job.””

Reading through Gregory Boyle’s The Whole Language, I really like’s Boyle’s insights on the importance of Culture and Community. Have you ever seen business cards emphasizing leadership in Culture and Community? In what ways can Culture and Community be explicitly identified as a priority that merits a leadership role in organizations?

On Page 51 Boyle writes, “Jose Arellano and Steve Avalos oversee the Case Managers and Navigators (at Homeboy Industries). Their business cards say that they are in charge of “Culture and Community.” Often, in nonprofits, we dedicate ourselves to a certain amount of strategizing on our processes and structure. All very necessary. But strategy, process, and structure must be at the service of culture and community, not the other way around. Because culture is about holiness and wholeness. Culture eats strategy for breakfast; processes for lunch; and structures for dinner.”

I started reading Zen and the Art of Saving the Planet by Thich Nhat Hanh, shortly after the author’s death.

Most enriching for me was Sister True Dedication (T.D.)’s essay on taking ten breaths without thinking, found on pages 62 through 64. Sister T.D. had to train to engage in this simple life changing practice. As part of the training, when a thought emerged, she had to go back to starting the count (to ten) at zero.

It took Sister T.D. more than two months to do the breathing mediation correctly.

When mental despair came upon her one evening and thinking as well as walking didn’t work, “through the storm an inner voice came from somewhere deep inside, “Who are you to know what to do if you can’t even take ten mindful breaths!””

After an hour of repeated failures came ten breaths without thinking. Sister T.D. felt relieved and vividly present. “To my surprise, the whole landscape of my perception had changed. The situation looked and felt completely different-and all the possible solutions were there clear as day.”

What would our daily lives be like if we could all take ten breaths without thinking?

Many people look at the top priority of their day as directly related to what they can do that is most effective and productive given time urgency. This is an excellent way to plan.

Recently, I have wondered if the top priority of the day might be re-framed differently or adjusted to allow for another way of thinking.

One question that keeps returning to me is; what is one thing that I can do to help someone today?

A little bit of action can go a long way. There might be something positive you can do for someone that only takes five to ten minutes at most, but might make a world of difference to them.

So, why not consider one thing that may help someone today as a consideration for the day’s top priority?

I’m finding that if one sets their mind to it, you can take a simple amount of gratitude and extend it into infinity.

For example, let us look at a standard method of daily transportation that is often taken for granted; the car. The example below uses the car, but this exercise can be used for other transportation methods such as a bus, train, boat, plane, etc.

We can self-reflect using the sample template below:

Getting into the car and starting it, we can thank the makers of the car.

Pulling out of the parking space, we can thank the people that taught and trained the makers of the car.

Proceeding down the road, we can thank the suppliers who provided the supplies for the car.

Why not also express thankfulness for those that made the car available for purchase?

Hearing everything running smoothly we can give thanks for the mechanics that keep the car running.

Let’s not forget to thank those that made the resources available to keep the car going.

Turning on the radio to listen to music, we can be thankful for those that made this function available in the car.

Now we will be taking the gratitude further than the car.

We can thank the musicians playing the music that we hear coming from the car’s radio.

Then we can thank those that trained and taught the musicians.

Then we can thank those that invented the instruments the musicians play.

Then we can thank those that made and supplied the instruments.

Keep going with this thought process and see how much gratitude you can show.

I’d like to start off the new calendar year with this saying by Lao-Tzu

Be content with what you have;

Rejoice in the way things are.

When you realize there is nothing lacking,

The whole world belongs to you.

Ken Burns now has a PBS documentary on the life of Muhammad Ali.

For some time, I’ve been reflecting on Ali’s innovative prowess as an athlete. The recent PBS program has prompted me to blog a question that keeps returning to me.

In keeping with the direction some of my previous musings have gone in, I am wondering if Ali’s Rope-A-Dope is an example of Wu Wei?

Years ago, I found myself listening to an important historical analysis from Great By Choice by Jim Collins and Morten T. Hansen. Given some of the important lessons imprinted in my memory I thought I would put this on the blog. For those reading the book, pages 13 to 18 and 60 to 62 are where to focus.

In the fall of 1911 two explorers and their teams engaged in a race to be the first to reach the South Pole. Both groups were of the same age range, started the journey within days of each other, and had similar experience.

However, the outcomes were drastically different. One group, led by Norway’s Roald Amundsen, not only got to the South Pole first; but also arrived back to base camp with everyone intact. The other group, led by Britain’s Robert Falcon Scott, arrived to the South Pole over a month behind Amundsen’s team. Sadly, Robert Falcon Scott and his team perished on the way back to base camp.

What are some of the reasons that Collins and Hansen provide to distinguish how one explorer succeeded so spectacularly and the other failed so tragically?

For me there are two reasons that resonate with me from the book.

• Preparation and Attention to Detail: Amundsen not only trained his body, but also learned as much as he could from practical experience as to what would work on such an expedition. Collins and Hansen go into a key set of detail as to what Amundsen learned when he spent time with the Eskimo community. Important findings included using dogs to pull sleds, not rushing body movement thereby “avoiding excessive sweat that could turn to ice in sub-zero temperatures” (page 15) , and wearing the right type of clothing that could protect the body while also assisting in allowing sweat to evaporate.

In regards to transportation, Scott chose to use ponies and “motor sledges” that were not fully tested in extreme South Pole conditions (page 16). The result? As Collins and Hansen write, “the motor-sledge engines cracked within the first few days, the ponies failed early, and his team slogged through most of the journey by “man-hauling,” harnessing themselves to sleds, trudging across the snow, and pulling the sleds behind them.”

In the matter of supplies, Amundsen prepared for catastrophe with three tons of supplies for five men (page 16). Scott allotted one ton of supplies for 17 men (page 16).

What is the difference in the supply numbers? “In his final push for the South Pole from 82 degrees, Amundsen carried enough extra supplies to miss every single depot and still have enough left over to go another hundred miles (page 16).”

Additionally, marking the journey with signs was important so that the explorers could know where to locate supplies and how to get back to base.

The difference between Amundsen and Scott is telling. “When setting supply depots, Amundsen not only flagged a primary depot, he placed 20 black pennants (easy to see against the white snow) in precise increments for miles on either side, giving himself a target more than ten kilometers wide in case he got slightly off course coming back in a storm. To accelerate segments of his return journey, he marked his path every quarter of a mile with packing-case remnants and every eight miles with black flags hoisted upon bamboo poles. Scott, in contrast, put a single flag on his primary depot and left no markings on his path, leaving him exposed to catastrophe if he even went a bit off course (page 16).”

Collins and Hansen also write that Amundsen had four altitude measuring thermometers, in the event of accidents, whereas Scott only brought one; which broke (page 16).

• Consistent Effective Advancement Towards the Goal: Amundsen and his crew developed a way to travel a precise set of miles each day on their journey whatever the weather brought. Collins and Hansen list the daily mileage as 15.5 miles a day (page 62). The authors also write that even when a member of Amundsen team would urge the group to cover more ground quickly by going 25 miles a day, Amundsen refused. Why? “They needed to rest and sleep so as to continually replenish their energy (page 61).”

Scott’s group had a haphazard approach that largely depended on what the weather brought. “Scott would sometimes drive his team to exhaustion on good days and then sit in his tent and complain about the weather on bad days (page 61).”