Tag Archives: Effectiveness

Which One Is the Real You?

Powerful Mind Part 20 
Created July 21, 2023 

Welcome to this week’s Bill Harvey Blog.

Read Powerful Mind 19

There can be a feeling of having lost one’s bearings when you’ve interrupted your ongoing persona, the consistent automatic System 1 process of carrying forward your own personal (necessarily somewhat infantile and childlike) coping patterns installed early in your life, without enough System 2 chipping in its own ideas back then.

At least before your new renaissance, it was easy to get through the day, and now that you are reconsidering everything in a new light, you may be stumped in the moment how to react.

Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman established these two constructs, System 1 and System 2. In System 1 the gut (controlled by the cerebellum) makes low-attention snap decisions, often based on precedent, engaging what Jung called the feelings and intuitions, what Freud called the subconscious, and which current psychology often refers to as the implicit mind. In System 2, the conscious mind (controlled by the frontal cortex) is employing focused attention to dissect options and make a decision, corresponding to what Jung and many others called thinking, reason, or the intellect, and current psychology refers to as explicit thought.

In our theory, we further divide System 1 into Flow state, Observer state, and Emergency Oversimplification Procedure (EOP). Flow state happens automatically and one’s actions flow effortlessly as if doing themselves. This is high effectiveness System 1. Observer state can emerge within System 1 until it evokes System 2 Observer state, which occurs as soon as the Observing self begins to interpret what it observes. All three of these states, which vary enormously in their effectiveness, can therefore occur within System 1. And all three effectiveness states can also occur within System 2.

What this means on a practical level is that one needs to quickly discriminate between the things that one does automatically that work well, and those which do not work well. If you are reacting automatically and things are going smoothly and you feel no sense of dilemma or negativity, it is probably Flow state. If you have an impulse to do something which is habitual but something inside tickles you with a subtle fleeting warning hunch and you are paying enough attention to catch it and hold back the impulse at least momentarily, you are probably in Observer state.

It is normal when you are shifting out of consistency with your past accumulated coping habits, and you are being real with positivity and constructiveness, there will be times when you wonder how to be real when you don’t really know the true you. You have memories of taking strong sides with one thing or another and you are now a bit unmoored from those presumed certainties, which is a good thing when you are reconsidering everything. But for a while you could find yourself without a clear enough concept of what you stand for, what you’re here for, what purpose you are called to serve in this life. All of that wondering and uncertainty is a good thing. Something to welcome in with gratitude. It means you have grown up from the practices automatically formed back when you knew ever so little. You are ready to redefine your compass and where you are going. We will talk much more about this when we get to Key #5, however here in the midst of installing Key #3, the process starts of rediscovering your dream destiny.

The real you is the way you were awed and inspired by things when you were very young, and there were certain types of things that you loved doing, which are evidence of your true mission in this life, the gifts that you have to bring to the world. Letting your memories go back as far as you can and looking for the most positive memories is a very pleasant way of getting the job done. Clues from your positive experiences will tell you who is the real you, what your heart desires for you to spend the rest of your life doing.

It’s normal once you’ve recaptured some of the essence of your calling that two things will happen that seem part of the good stuff but are actually relapses to EOP:

    1. You envision your success at doing your thing, and the trappings of success become more important to you than the joy of carrying out your métier. This is merely a more clandestine way of still being trapped in attachment to external outcomes, wealth, fame, respect, an overflow of aspirants for your affections, power, control, security, status, social acceptance. Remember: The joy of the mission is enough in itself to make your life a happy one that adds to the happiness of others, even if there is scant evidence of your having significant external effects.
    2. You perceive that the new life you wish to make for yourself competes for time with the things that you have been doing which are tangential or irrelevant or even at odds with the life you want to now live. This strikes you as a frustrating dilemma, bringing you down into EOP. Remember: You may not notice you are in EOP so make sure to recall  that a sense of dilemma is a clear indication of EOP. You want to set that aside and consider things from a detached viewpoint that is not dependent on external things, i.e. you want to slip back into the Observer state.

From the Observer state you can creatively solve the issues about how do you phase in your new life as the real you, and dial down the EOP life you have been living. This is a practical matter because we need money to live in the world as it is today and has been for all of recorded history (which goes back a very short time distance). If you yearn to spend your days doing X, you’ll have to start by using evenings and weekends for X, and it will take some time to begin to be able to make money in a new way, so again, the only way to win is to be independent of any dependencies on external outcomes, and simply enjoy the happiness of doing more of what you really want to do, even if it never gets anywhere in terms of public acclaim. This will be the beginnings of your becoming established in the real you.

Details to follow in the subsequent posts.

Love to all,

Which Motivators Drive Our Most Frequent Choices?

Volume 4, Issue 16
June 26, 2014

Lessons from my day job

One of the benefits of my day job as a media researcher is that I gain valuable insight into what sorts of things I should create in the future to carry the messages of the Institute to as many people as are ready for it. My day job also enables me to do my ultimate passion work, which is to improve human effectiveness and thus happiness and/or fulfillment for the greatest number of people. The following post illustrates the synergy between my day job and my ultimate passion work.

The year: 1997. My company Next Century Media is working with John Hendrick’s innovative Discovery network and John Malone’s dominant cable operator TCI, installing addressable optimizer Opti*Mark into the National Digital Tech Center (NDTC) in Denver, for inclusion in the uplinking of dozens of TV networks to cable systems. This will make all the cable commercials potentially addressable to the set-top box (STB), will measure the STB, and offer program recommendations to subscribers on command.

The reasoning behind the program recommender is both to increase natural delight and also to give subscribers a cogent reason to feel better about their behaviors being tracked, albeit anonymously.

A technology favored at that time for recommendation engines — and still used today — is the collaborative filtering technique (CFT). It’s not the Netflix method of slicing down programs/movies into 78,000 tiny sliver genres, like Humphrey Bogart WWII movies of the 40s, and then counting the incidence of these subgenre choices within each subscriber’s individual record to make recommendations of other properties in the subgenre cluster that have not been watched yet through Netflix. CFT is the familiar “people who have bought this book also bought this other book”. NCM did not want to use CFT although it was ready to go off the shelf and cheap, not to mention accepted.

NCM wanted a method that would yield insight about people’s preferences, not just the facts of their observed choices.

Also, CFT takes a while to build a database and cannot give recommendations for a new show until there is some history of who watched it and who didn’t. With the importance of new shows to TV ad planners and programmers there was no way to live with CFT’s delay. So NCM created a keyword-driven system (today like so many other things called Bayesian). We compiled 1500 or so different words that are used to describe TV programs, ads and movies — screen content. Some of this came from work I had done consulting for the launches of cable networks, some had been from movie work I did with studios, and some was the result of many researchers pooling their knowledge.

One day the late Gerry Despain, who led the dozen software developers working on this, came to me and said he wanted to drop over 1200 of the keywords. I was aghast because test viewers were thanking us more than 9 to 1 in favor of the recommendations the system was producing. He said, “You don’t understand. I just want to drop the ones that do not predict set-top box data.” I saw that he was right and approved the efficiency move.

Later it gradually dawned on me the utter enormity of what had just transpired. We had stumbled on 250-300 words that DO predict the choices people make as to what to watch and what not to watch. Nowadays, in finally having the time to continue that line of development, we are calling those golden terms DrivertagsTM (DtagsTM for short) because the modern screenworld name for such descriptors is “metatags” — and because these 250-300 metatags are the first we know of that actually do appear to describe inner motivational states that predict real world behavior. Specifically, what we choose to watch on screens.

This would be merely a very important discovery in one group of businesses in the private sector. However, if we zoom out, we see that today’s civilization on Earth is in the process of becoming totally dominated by screen content. This is the latest evolution of the information acceleration process we call Acceleritis™, which my theory attributes to the advent of written language.

The primary devices with screens on which there is content, used by most of us in civilization today, are the computer, TV set, tablet, and mobile phone. People with enough money (or enough credit) are making sure they have at least one of each. Monied households with large families are accumulating screens perhaps faster than anyone in the household can count or cares to. Moreover, by any researcher’s count, the average person now spends more than half their waking hours with eyes on these screens.

The Human Effectiveness Institute (THEI) will be working with ScreenSavants, the private sector startup licensing NCM’s IP in this area, to make applications of learning to our Mission of increasing human effectiveness. We’ll be studying how specific DTags identify viewers more prone to Observer state or Flow state. We’ll be networking with interested academics including people who are working in nearby inquiries such as explaining the attraction of viewers to specific characters, deriving psychological insight from natural language utterances, linking screen content to higher values, semantic mapping, and all forms of related psycholinguistics. One reason for doing this is simply to understand — pure science. The other is for practical application to the mission of THEI, improving human effectiveness. We’ll report our progress here.

For a first example, consider the following graph. What does it mean?
graph on DriverTags

The easiest way to explain a graph is to explain what one datapoint means. In the upper left you’ll see “Situation #2”. That is a particular DTag — and 9 out of 10 top-rated situation comedies have that DTag. None of the cancelled sitcoms have that DTag. Now look at the lower left and you’ll see “Value #50” — 8 out of 10 cancelled sitcoms have that DTag, but only 1 of the top 10 rated sitcoms has it.

If I were investing $2.5 million per average new TV series pilot I would love to know which DTags are vital to success and which drive failure. That is the business reason for all this.

For psychology, given that the biggest use of time in our civilization is screen usage, discovering the motivators of this preponderant activity yields considerable new insight into what motivates people in our culture today. That’s the science reason for it.

The attachment of DTags to TV shows happened long before the analysis of ratings and cancellations. The same DTags that worked in 1997 are still working in 2014. On the inside we haven’t changed so much.

This is the kind of science I personally get to do that is part of my passion work. I’m a very lucky guy.

The gratitude attitude and admission that the Universe may indeed be sentient are the causes I attribute to such great luck. Hope you are very lucky too!

All my best,


Follow my regular blog contribution at Jack Myers Media Network: “In Terms of ROI.” It is in the free section of the website at  Bill Harvey at MediaBizBloggers.com.

My new book, You Are The Universe: Imagine That is now available. Read an excerpt and watch my videos where I talk about the book.

Doing Is Just One Way of Being

Volume 3, Issue 17

Effectiveness peaks in Flow state when the mind/body duality collapses and everything is One — the Zone. One of the obstacles to this condition is the predisposition that one must always be doing something.

This “Doing” hidden assumption has deep roots: the Work Ethic and industriousness virtue we were taught, the sense that while others are suffering one’s duty is to never stop searching for solutions, the inforush that has been accelerating since the cave paintings (which I call Acceleritis), the caffeine culture, the systemically out of whack mounting economic pressure, the TO-DO List that is never done, the admiration we feel for people bouncing with energy. Although the situation has been pandemic for millennia, it is so pronounced in Manhattan that New Yorkers traveling anywhere else sense everybody else as too laid back.

The first serious recorded psychology on the planet (the Vedas), which was set down some 3500 years ago, not long after the beginnings of Acceleritis, noticed this tendency as one of the three qualities of being, Rajas, the addiction to action (vs. Tamas, the addiction to rest, and Sattva, the addiction to knowing). The Vedas called these the three qualities of existence rather than using the negative term “addictions”, which is the author’s own perspective. This perspective sees anything deviating from pure observation, as a motivational drive, which only in the extreme literally becomes an addiction.

The good thing behind the Doing state of mind, beside often good intentions, is that there is a wellspring of creativity bursting to be channeled outward into something. One might be extremely grateful finding this creative drive inside. The point of this post is that the channeling of this drive is a science and an art to study and, yes, at certain times, control.

Being able to hold back the impulse to Doing confers the Observer state. The Observer state is the access portico into the Flow state, and it is easier to willfully switch into Observer state than it is to flip oneself by act of will into Flow state directly. Catching oneself assuming that one ought to be doing something, and arresting that assumption, is one of the easiest ways to get into the Observer state. Here is an exercise. More on this in our next post. 

Best to all,


PS — New York tri-state area theater lovers, if you can, go see “The Outgoing Tide” at Ellenville NY’s Shadowland Theater. One of the most moving experiences on or off Broadway. Ends run in just a few days, June 16.

Follow my regular blog contribution at Jack Myers Media Network: In Terms of ROI. It is in the free section of the website at  Bill Harvey at MediaBizBloggers.com.