My Vipassana Experience

I recently completed the Vipassana 10 day course in Shelburne Falls, Massachusetts and wanted to share my experience with those who may be considering it. Before going, I had heard Vipassana described as everything from “a life-changing experience” to “some new age bullshit”. I am quite new to meditation. Beyond yoga classes with some meditative activities and the occasional guided meditation from apps like Calm, Headspace and others, I had not had much understanding of how to create a meditative atmosphere or practice meditation properly. The underlying philosophy of meditation has also been a mystery to me in the past, and I previously wrote it off as “woo woo”, and undeserving of my rational proclivities. Despite this background, I can honestly say that for me, the decision to attend Vipassana was one of the best I have ever made.

The major points of concern I had prior to going were logistical. I had somehow imagined the meditation center as a monastery or sorts, with cold showers, raw food and no beds…particularly since this was a completely donation-based operation. This was not the case at all. The Vipassana Meditation Center in Shelburne Falls, Massachusetts is a beautiful location in the Berkshires. I was on the men's side. We had private rooms with bathrooms for most people, walking trails amidst beautiful natural surroundings, reasonably good vegetarian food and best of all, an extremely passionate group of volunteers. What I realized about 3 days in, however, was that none of this mattered. Vipassana could have been 10 days of gloomy isolation in a dungeon or 10 days of being coddled at Ritz Carlton. It simply did not matter. The focus of this time was almost entirely on the mind, and specifically the mind’s responsiveness to bodily sensations – good or bad. Every day began with a Tibetan gong at 4am. There are one hour guided meditations three times every day. There is also an evening discourse on video by S.N. Goenka who is a very funny and eloquent speaker. For 30 minutes each day, the teacher is also available for questions. While there are small alterations to this schedule on a couple of days, this is essentially the daily timetable.

My overall approach to Vipassana was sincere. In sacrificing 10 days away from work and family, getting maximum benefit from the experience and putting forth an earnest effort was of utmost importance. Scheduling this period is probably the most difficult part for most people but as I learned, the time spent here was extraordinarily valuable. In retrospect I am glad to have taken it seriously.

In terms of sequence, the first 3 days of meditation are designed to help build the faculties necessary to practice the Vipassana meditation technique properly. We were shown how to build a very acute sense of awareness; sensitive to subtle bodily sensations. This allowed me to elevate my perceptiveness to mind and body in the present moment. On day 4, we began “Vipassana Day”. The Vipassana meditation technique is focused completely on body perception. While on the outset is seemed like many other guided meditation techniques I have previously tried, the level of detail with which one goes about observing the body was unique here. An important element of Vipassana practice is called “The Sitting of Strong Determination”. This requires keeping the eyes closed and sit completely still for one hour with absolutely no movement. This means observing every itch, every point of pain or pleasure, and simply not react to it. I won’t lie; this was difficult! As the days passed however, I improved and the benefits of this acute sense of self-awareness became more apparent. By the sixth day, I had developed a routine. Eventually, I found a comfortable seating position and due to an environment that encouraged meditation at all times, was able to focus for 3-5 minutes without interfering thoughts (for me, an achievement). I began noticing some interesting changes in my perception of the world around me.

Forcing myself to be present in the moment and not reacting to interruptions, bodily or environmental, led to three key personal insights. It is important to note that these are only my personal experiences and I obviously make no claim that others will identify with them.

First, a pragmatic understanding of my true self became much clearer. I experienced firsthand a realization of my two selves: the self that thinks and reacts in a rather undisciplined way, and the self that exists in medium of simple, untainted love and compassion. At risk of sounding too esoteric (and because many others have articulated this realization more eloquently), I will distill it to this: My “self” who reacts to the world is not my true self. While I had always known this intellectually, my constantly changing environment and lack of mental discipline had never allowed to actually experience it. I experienced this sensation at Vipassana; and it was much more powerful and all-encompassing than I had ever imagined. This sensation was also fleeting and simultaneously so attractive that I found myself wanting to bring it back. This wanting however, allowed my thinking self to take over and immediately lose it. Because of how powerful and pleasurable this sensation is, it took discipline to simply not react to it at an intellectual level.

Second, I saw that the material world is not all it is cracked up to be. In daily life, I am bombarded with things that appeal to my thinking self. These are all distractions from the true experience of the incredible world around me, and getting lost in such thoughts is an addiction of sorts. During one of the teacher’s question and answer sessions, I asked him how to rid myself of this constant interference from my thinking mind. I explained that the pleasure I derived from thinking about the material desires was greater than the challenging task of maintaining focus on the present moment. It was an incessant psychological battle. The teacher’s response was expected. He told me that this addiction is common to all people (including himself) and overcoming it takes many years of continued commitment to the discipline of meditation. While the euphoria of experiencing the world through the true self was a light at the end of this tunnel, it was nonetheless, a sobering realization and one that made me quite emotional for a couple of days.

Third, I briefly experienced how true love is a one way street. It is giving without expectation of return in its most authentic and sincere form. This was something that again, I knew intellectually but had the opportunity to experience firsthand at Vipassana. I speculate the reason for this is because my true self (the one that isn’t clouded by thoughts) doesn’t know anything but love and compassion for others. Service to others and unconditional giving to others is its raison d'être. It’s kind of stupid in this way. The fact that it can’t rationalize is both frustrating and simultaneously beautiful. Listening to this non-thinking self requires faith in its ability to make good decisions; and enough rationality to determine which decisions it is capable of making and which it simply isn’t equipped for. At this point, I feel that this ability to differentiate between the proper decision-making process for various situations is what wisdom is.

Many of these experiences for me were quite profound. It was amazing to experience them firsthand, but unfortunately they take continued practice and significant time to recreate in daily life. The hassles of daily life limit the type of consistent focus and environment to bring back these sensations. Meditation is like exercise: It takes consistent practice and hard work to realize its benefits. But without deliberate dedication, one will remain victim to the vagaries of life in the modern world. It is important to note that there are no religious elements to the Vipassana meditation technique. There is however, an underlying philosophy that provides the context for its practice. For example, the nightly discourses by S.N. Goenka allude to reincarnation, karma and other Buddhist principles. He also repeatedly mentions that adopting these beliefs is by no means a prerequisite to success in Vipassana.

In conclusion, Vipassana was a powerful and deeply fulfilling experience for me. I have every intention of going back as a student or to serve, and am working to make mediation a part of my daily morning ritual. I hope this account of my experience is helpful for those considering taking the 10 day course, and highly recommend it to those willing to work hard and put in the effort to succeed.

Best Wishes,

Metaphor

When audiences grasp ideas, they do so with minimal effort if they can relate the communication with a past experience, and with greater effort without it. With past experiences that can be related to new communications, a relationship is born (but not necessarily a logical one). Ideas have often been powerfully communicated through nostalgia for example; as in the case of the re-introduction of the VW Beetle. And the Pavlov's dog response is a widely known phenomenon in psychology.

Complex phenomena such as gravity are easy to conceptualize but difficult to understand empirically. To truly understand gravity, an understanding of quantum mechanics and relativity is inevitable. On the other hand, simple ideas such as; the color Mauve for example, are relatively easy to understand empirically (with a little understanding of light wavelengths) but difficult to conceptualize unless the audience has had a past experience with it. Ideas that are difficult to conceptualize are also difficult to communicate easily since past experience is a significant aid. So if we are trying to communicate meaning, an important consideration is the past experience of our audience. Without it, we will have to expend a lot more effort to communicate an idea effectively.

Given this, what is the power of metaphor in branding? In trying to convey belief systems and emotional elements through brand, metaphor has been shown to be a powerful ally. Strong brands express the heart of a brand's offer, combining functional and emotional cues allowing its audience to interpret the company's culture, attitude, personality and benefits. With such a complex formula of communication elements, evoking a past experience in the audience is paramount. A deep understanding of the brand however, is not. I point this out because I have seen many brand managers make the mistake of explaining a brand (to support understanding), but fail to inbue it with the simplistic elements that would allow one to conceptualize it through imagination.

Consider the brand "Kayak". First off, the name is unexpected. It gives the listener reason to pause and ask for more. There is an element of intrigue in metaphorical names. Kayak? It's an on line travel booking site that can move you along, help things flow, streamline your travel plans, get you on your way, keep things afloat, stay above water, etc. etc. This type of naming strategy provides more than a mere moniker because it evokes thoughts, feelings, and images from past experience. The same holds true for great brand names such as Amazon; an endless source of diverse products. Jaguar; a luxurious car with speed, responsiveness and agility. Even John Deere, a legacy name, plays off the animal vs. the surname (“Nothing runs like a Deere.”)

These are powerful brands because they don't explain much at all, but rather use common sources of metaphor to invoke a relatively complex array of thoughts and emotions.

Sustainability in Growth Markets

Is an analytical culture necessary to support environmental sustainability efforts in growth markets?

Today, the Earth’s ecological footprint is 23% over capacity.* The growing gap between human demands on the environment and our planet’s ability to meet them necessitates that organizations monitor, and measure their carbon footprint. This is particularly true in high growth countries, where currently, growth is still measured in purely financial terms that do not account for the cost of environmental degradation. After reviewing the national agendas of over 30 growth markets, only 5 (ANZ, China, Austria, and Philippines) cited environmental issues among their top priorities. For growth markets to prioritize sustainability, they must monitor and manage their environmental impact in a way that directly correlates it with profitability. Sustainable practices will only become attractive to growing organizations in these countries if they contain cost cutting or revenue enhancing incentives. But for the relationship between sustainability and profitability to become clearer, sustainable business practices must be just as measurable as the financial gains they produce. If one thing is apparent from the absence of sustainability as a priority item in most of these countries, it is that the limitations of our planet's natural resources have yet to be given the importance they deserve.

To comprehensively measure an organization’s carbon footprint, analytics must be applied across the company’s value chain; extending beyond its operations to those of its suppliers, customers, and even its disposal practices. Existing product life-cycle management software (PLM) is only a partial solution because business leaders use it as a one dimensional “measuring stick”; rarely using it to influence decisions that extend beyond organizational boundaries.

Such all-encompassing carbon footprint measurements require an analytical culture. The pervasive use of analytics throughout a value chain enables a carbon footprint measurement comprehensive enough to correlate with long-term financial performance. Nowhere in the world are such implementations more important than in growth market countries, where the growth in demand for natural resources is expected to increase the fastest.

Consonance

In music, consonance refers to a set of notes that are considered stable enough to be played simultaneously in a chord. Dissonance is when notes are unstable together and don't sound quite as pleasant. Strumming a guitar or playing piano keys shows us that some note combinations just "work" while others seem to sound all wrong together. For example, the notes C and G are in the same key (C major)...meaning they sound "good" together. Here are their frequencies, numerically and visually:

C – 261.6 Hz
G – 392.0 Hz

Look closely at this graph. I have put red lines in this picture, to show the repeating pattern. Is the presence of this pattern the reason why C and G sound "good" to us? Secondly, the ratio of G to C is 3/2 (261.6 Hz / 392Hz). This means that every 3rd wave of G matches up with every 2nd wave of C. This phenomenon is commonly addressed in music theory and is explored is much more detail here.

While we could delve into the musical and mathematical explanations of this, I am much more interested in consonance as a phenomenon in nature. Where else might we observe it? If in music, one of the characteristics that allows notes to sound "right" together is a repeating pattern, would it be stretch to say that repeating patterns are naturally attractive to humans in completely different contexts? To push the idea further, would it be a stretch to say that the ability to recognize and understand patterns is a fundamental characteristic of human intelligence? The Mensa workout quiz tests for this, for example.

If musical consonance is any indication of the importance of patterns, it may be useful to find examples of consonance in different aspects of our world. In order to find these examples however, we would no longer be able to focus on discrete events, but would instead have to observe the connections between disparate pieces of information to identify unexpected relationships. Like music, such systems would no longer be viewed as linear, cause and effect events but rather systemic associations - just like systemic associations between repeating patterns in musical notes, and their resulting effect on pleasant sounds.

As a businessman committed to sustainable enterprise, I have to wonder if it is possible to manage an organization by using systemic interrelationships as its guiding principles. Would it be better to view a problem or inefficiency in a business as systemic issue that can be solved more effectively by identifying its patterns and influencing its related components? Many business managers today are comparatively reactionary; focusing on problems as discrete issues with "band-aid" fixes. Rather than use such an approach, business leaders would strive for "harmony" across departments in their company; the same way that musicians strive for harmony across notes and chord progressions. Modern ecologists have to apply a similar principle in their jobs. To balance natural ecosystems, they must view them as dynamic, interrelated communities of different species. In the horrible catastrophe that took place in the Gulf of Mexico recently, top leaders in marine ecology have accounted not only for immediate impacts on the ocean's health, but have also accounted for patterns from previous natural disasters in a unique bio-remediation-based approach to this one. This is yet another example of how identifying systemic interrelationships can help us solve problems more effectively.

I hope that none of this sounds too far-fetched. As we speak, the worlds largest companies are mobilizing themselves to utilize more computing power. They will be using this computing power to analyze vast data sets to identify patterns and systemic associations across systems. Can we learn something by observing patterns in one system, that we can apply to the business world or to sustainable enterprise? I believe we can.

Clarity through Altruism

"The world is our kaleidoscope, and the varying combinations of colors it presents to us at every succeeding moment are the exquisitely adjusted pictures of our ever-moving thoughts."
-James Allen

Boston seems like a village after a month in New York City but a booming urban metropolis after a month in Colorado. Why is this? A 65 degree day in November feels much warmer than a 65 degree day in July. Why? While circumstances certainly play a role in awareness, how would one distinguish between truth and illusion amidst varying circumstances? How do we know if our inner interpretation of the world is in accord with reality? I would like to propose that traditionally altruistic attributes of empathy and compassion, that are not ordinarily associated with the business world, can improve a company's perception of the market landscape. That the clarity with which a company perceives the market, improves as the company's guiding principles incorporate these altruistic elements.

Empathy may alleviate some of the challenges associated with perceptual difference. It helps a company identify with the thoughts, feelings, and attitudes of another person; customers or not. It helps us experience the world through their skin and reason through subjective issues with another value system. In order to truly empathize with another person, we would have to trust that their perspective is pure; untainted by superficial ideas and trivialities. Trusting another person enough to "know" that their lens will provide more clarity than distortion, seems to be a matter of judgment. But is it unreasonable to propose that empathizing with anyone provides insight into reality beyond what we experience on our own? I guess the only way to tell for sure would be to reassess the accuracy of our own perceptions after empathizing with another person. If the result on our own perception is positive, it may be safe to assume that we now have a more accurate interpretation of reality than before. If however, the result is negative, empathizing with this other person might ultimately have been distorting. A distortion here, however, must be carefully considered before it is discarded; resulting ultimately in more clarity. Accordingly, any empathetic thought or action either causes us to experience reality from another perspective, or forces us to consider the accuracy of that perspective by reassessing our view of reality.

Secondly, is compassion a result of empathizing with others? When seeing another person in pain, I would think that most people (including myself) would want to help them end their suffering. Fundamentally, why would we do this? Could it be because we can relate to another person's suffering on some level and would not want to experience such pain ourselves? The experience of feeling another person's plight is uncomfortable for most individuals and ending that discomfort would most likely involve ending the other person's pain. If it is a pain that we have never felt before, experiencing it vicariously would expand our perception of reality. Thus, if this empathy results in compassion, and compassion expands our perception of reality, it seems likely to bring about more clarity.

So if compassion is the result of empathy, and empathy helps us reconcile differences in perception, it would follow that compassionate people would have a more accurate view of reality than those who are indifferent to another person's disposition. Those benevolent few among us would not only be good Samaritans, they would reap the benefits of improved perception. It is interesting to note that compassion is viewed as an altruistic endeavor in modern consumerist societies. The compassionate qualities of kindness and generosity are antithetical to the selfish and egocentric outlines of the business world. However, if we consider the idea that compassionate ideals improve perception, the selfish paradigms that propel business today might consider reassessing the wisdom of their values.

And who knows? Altruism might ultimately even have a permanent place in the business world.

Virtualization

In today's enterprise-level data centers, virtualization is the term that describes the abstraction of tangible computer resources. It is essentially the separation of physical computing equipment (processors and hard-drives) from the applications that rely on them. A "virtual" application allows a piece of software compiled for a specific computer to run unmodified on different computers and operating systems. Even multiple operating systems can safely coexist on one physical machine. In an economic contraction such as the one we're currently experiencing in the U.S., the virtualization of computing resources is becoming increasingly important to organizations. Because of virtualization technology's ability to reduce costs and decrease reliance on physical hardware, a company's IT infrastructure doesn't rely as much on new servers and storage devices. Instead, it uses existing hardware to increase productivity. While such productivity gains are an obvious and near-term advantage in virtualization, the technology has considerable implications if we consider how the computing landscape will fundamentally change with the separation of physical resources from applications.

Consider first, that business innovation has accelerated in recent years with the emergence of faster technology deployment, more integration between disparate systems, and the rapid surge of world-class human talent into the high-tech industry. Because virtualization reduces the need for organizations to ramp-up expensive physical resources in order to deploy new technology, the adoption and use of new applications is much faster. As these new applications are integrated into a company's business processes, business capabilities are enhanced and overall efficiency increases. With the resulting improvements in productivity and collaboration, the business case for virtualization extends beyond cost savings and into organizational effectiveness.

Second, the architecture of an organization becomes more flexible as a result of virtualized applications. Businesses which experience "spikes" in IT requirements (ticketing agencies during big concerts, toy stores at Christmas, health-care data centers during flu season, weather centers during hurricanes, etc.) no longer need to design their IT architecture around their maximum computing requirements. With more reliance on virtualization, IT infrastructure can be made more resilient and handle demand spikes. Businesses can continue to operate without worry of exhausting their IT resources due to limitations in physical infrastructure.

Third, and most fundamentally, consider that the core of a business process no longer relies on a machine, but rather a piece of intellectual capital. What does this do to the business world in which we operate? Would the increased "liquidity" of intellectual resources in this cloud of processing power and data storage be bound by the same rules of supply and demand as all other economically driven processes? While it may sound rather far-fetched, I would like to propose that if a company's intellectual capital IS its product, and that intellectual capital is no longer bound by resource constraints in the physical realm, the traditional axiom of supply and demand is no longer applicable. If companies were able to break free from this fundamental productivity contraint simply by shifting their products to those of a more intangible nature, the business landscape would be changed forever.

Business productivity that relies on physical materials tends to be linear in relation to infrastructural investments. The increased data liquidity that virtualization enables changes the way that data centers and consequently businesses, architect themselves for the future. In addition to aforementioned gains in productivity and technology deployment, the fluid and highly cooperative nature of virtualized environments will inevitably lead to symbiotic relationships between different business applications...an evolution of sorts. It is interesting to note that we have already observed such transformations in biological systems...but that's another blog post.

Market Correction

What exactly is a market correction? What is it that the market is correcting when this happens? Today, one might argue that assets have been overvalued, and the irresponsible trading of financial derivatives resulting from these overvalued assets have led us to the current market correction. So what the market is actually correcting is the fact that it is trading on value that may not actually exist. So I guess the next natural question would be: What is considered to be value that does exist? Merriam Webster defines value as "a fair return or equivalent in goods for something exchanged". If we apply this definition of value to asset values in the financial context, we would have to define the value of financial derivatives as the equivalent in goods or services for an asset that a particular derivative represents. In applying this to an example then: I get a loan from a bank to buy a house for $1m. The bank takes my loan and chops it up into 10, $100K pieces with a higher future value since I am going to pay the bank interest on this loan, and whoever buys it from the bank wants to make an investment in its future value. These 10 pieces (or mortgage-backed securities) are traded in the stock market with other such (future-value based) financial instruments. If I ultimately default on my loan and do not pay the bank, the bank would then no longer have the financial value necessary to fulfill its obligations on the securities it has traded. In this scenario, when did the bank determine value? Was it when they chopped up my loan and sold it, or was it when they determined whether or not I was credit-worthy enough to get a $1m loan? If they didn't think I could pay the loan, they probably would never have given it to me in the first place. However, since they wanted my business because I was willing to pay them interest, they took a "risk" on me. So the value here must lie in the risk right? The less risk that the bank would have to take on me (determined by my credit-worthiness), the more valuable my business would be to them. Conversely, the more of a risk they would have to take on me, the less valuable my business would be to the bank. Isn't this all so simple?

So I ask again. What is a market correction? What is being "corrected"? Is it the value that the bank places on risk? If so, someone is not doing a very good job at evaluating my credit-worthiness. In order to accurately value the risk of giving me a loan, the bank would have to be able to predict the future; whether or not I would be likely to default on my loan. According to current methodologies on determining credit-worthiness, the best indicator of the future, is the past. Given my credit history (and probably liquidity and other such metrics), the bank would likely be led to conclude that I have excellent credit worthiness and thus, am a low risk candidate for the loan. However, how good are we at predicting the future based on the past? Has this methodology (of basing future predictions on past events) succeeded throughout history with enough frequency that we would base an entire market system on it?

The truth is that predicting the future is not possible. We can reduce our risks with these predictions by leveraging knowledge from the past but by placing a monetary value on that reduction of risk, we are creating a market system that will always be plagued by market corrections and other such crises. After all, what one person thinks the future holds is likely to be very different than what another does. Further, the criteria that one person uses to predict the future may not necessarily be the past, but rather something very VERY different. Spiritual guidance even. I have a theory here: People who base their life purpose on spiritual guidance are more credit worthy than those who don't. Don't believe me? I'll bet you a million dollars I'm right.