Australia is currently over-endowed with politicians when it deperately needs statesmen.

The world is hiding from the inevitable - either Iran will access the technology it is striving to achieve, and use it as its rhetoric has flagged; or more pragmatic countries will stop them before or after it happens.

One of these two scenarios is inevitable - and the world will be responsible for allowing it to happen.

Regardless of which side of Australian politics you support, it is hard to deny the appalling state of our democracy. Granted, this deplorable situation is arguably the fault of our "Hung Parliament" status, yet without that condition, we see a serious deterioration of democratic principles.

Firstly we have a government that indisputably promises outcomes that it can't or won't deliver, because the delivery of those outcomes jeopardises its hold on power. Even when it passes legislation, it struggles to implement that legislation in a painless, efficient and effective manner.

The constituency has lost faith in the government because of its back-flips and apparent inability to implement effectively.

Secondly, we have an opposition that is akin to a marauding pack of hungry, power-obsessed, salivating kill-dogs. They encircle their prey and wait for any excuse to attack the weakest as it totters from the pack - mauling it without consideration, compassion or fact.

If one observes these rightist, doctrinaire Neanderthals, one can't help but be petrified at the prospects of these people taking power.

As it stands at the moment, who knows how far from an election, it appears that not only will these people take power, but will take it with ease and with a large majority. That means that they will be able to legislate what-ever their inhumane and unevolved hearts desire.

Looking from a constituent's perspective - one can't help but be appalled as one observes the antics of both parties.

Thirdly, you have the media. They too have corrupted the principles of a free and unconstrained press that should be at the foundation of a true democracy. A democracy where the constituency is given fact upon which it deliberates and then chooses its leaders and thus its government. How effective can this process be when fact is denied and self-serving interest is promoted. Media's beying for this government to fall is so blatant that it is sickening.

The media defends itself by claiming as its duty (much like the Opposition) to hold the government to account. True, but that is not what it is doing. It is presenting selective choice of elements of a situation as "fact", and upon those "facts", it provides opinion - which coincidentally, happens to serve the media (or at least the owners and supporters of the media.)

Good social order requires a government with a balanced, centrist perspective (of what-ever hue) that sees as its reason d'etre, the betterment of all members of society. In order for that to occur, society needs a equally balanced, fair and reasonable media. Australia currently fails on all counts.

My conclusions are these:

1. Australia will soon enter a repressive and backward political era in which repressive and discriminatory legislation will be enacted - particularly targeting migrants, the poor and unemployed and the disabled. Education will also suffer.

2. As a result of the inevitable moves to suppress labour and grant "business" huge concessions, industrial unrest will reach an all-time high.

3. Economic performance will in fact deteriorate as a result of social unrest and mistrust of both government and business governance.

4. The corporate sector, aided by lax and "blind" regulatory proceesses, will use the opportunity to extract unreasonable benefits and priveleges - thus fueling labour frustration. The new government will have no appetite for constraining the excesses of the corporate sector and we will see the re-emergence of the conditions that saw the recent GFC.

Ultimately, the Australian constituency will get what it votes for - and will deserve whatever it gets - a punishment for being so short-sighted and blatantly stupid.

I would much prefer a less that perfect government trying to do the right thing, than a morally bankrupt government doing everything perfectly.

Some people go through life dealing with each day as it presents itself. They don’t plan their lives. Some go further and believe that it is an insult to their God to have a “personal” plan when their God has a plan for them and their lives.

This view must be respected even if you may not share it.

However, regardless of your view about planning your life, one fact is inescapable for all of us: from this very second to the day you die, there is only a finite amount of time left for each of us. Some of us have more time and some of us have less – but finite it is nevertheless.

When we ask people “what do you want to do with the time you have left,” most reply, in one form or another that they just want to “be happy”.

If you were to ask your friends what would make them happy, it is likely that each would have a different definition of happiness. Some want to retire, some want security, some want to write a book, some want to help their children or parents, some want to help others and so on.

To add a little complexity to this, even if two of your friends answered “I want to be secure,” it is probable that their definition of what “security” is differs between them. For one, security may be having a good job while for another it may mean having an independent income and not relying on a job.

Each person therefore has their own, legitimate and sincere definition of happiness to which they are entitled.

Furthermore, while one person may have “helping others” as an element of their vision, it may rank differently for another person with the same vision-element.
Because each of our visions is subjective and personal, there is no single solution, or “silver bullet” that will deliver it for us. There is no course we should attend that will guarantee that if we attend, we will secure our vision. There is no job that will do this; no society, belief system, religion, or other magic solution. Certainly, some of these “strategies” may assist but they don’t guarantee success.
If being a doctor is your definition of happiness, then successfully completing a suitable medical training course is a necessary step to achieving the standard required. But because happiness is very rarely uni-dimensional, being a doctor, per se, is unlikely to deliver your complete vision of happiness.

Even when we are reasonably clear or even profoundly clear about what our personal vision is, clarity and determination sometimes aren’t enough to guarantee fulfilment of the vision and therefore of happiness.

Whether we want to admit it or not, many people strive all their lives to achieve their dreams only to die before they are attained. If they struggle hard all their lives and sacrifice for their dream, then how meaningful has their journey been if they haven’t “enjoyed” the journey and haven’t achieved their desired outcome. How many people have they affected through their sacrifice in pursuit of their own vision without having attained that vision?

As wonderful as your vision might be, it is important to choose, when choice is possible, a path or journey that is both fulfilling and meaningful. Sometimes that’s not possible: sometimes you have to accept a lousy opportunity because you have to put food on the table for your family. But where you do have a choice, and all other things being almost equal, choose the path that will give you greater meaning and fulfilment because, in the end, and because unforseen things happen, this memory may be your only legacy of the time you devoted to that option.

That’s a fairly depressing and cynical view, but unfortunately, all too real for many people. But accepting an unpleasant option does not need to be all bad. If you accept an unpleasant option (or remain in an unpleasant context – eg. family, social group, work), you have two ways of regarding it.
You can see this unpleasant option as “this is all there is” and create for yourself a fairly depressing view of your own destiny.

Or you can say that this is a necessary stepping stone until you are able to launch into another more beneficial context that will take you more directly toward your destiny.  You can even go one step further and argue that by taking this lousy job to put food on the table of your family, it has removed your concern about putting food on the table and leaves you freer to focus on building strategies, connections and tools to propel you to where you really want to be.

Some people have a personal vision which they strive for over many years and fail to achieve. This failure might be caused by a range of circumstances including a lack of skills, lack of opportunity, lack of connections, lack of money, poor planning, not knowing how to plan, and so on.

Let’s be frank: not all visions will be fulfilled and many will fail. Some visions, because they are subjective, personal and in some cases unrealistic, are destined to fail. A 90 year old wanting to become an astronaut is unlikely to succeed. It doesn’t mean that the 90 year old doesn’t or shouldn’t have the dream to become an astronaut, but that the way things are at this point in time, a 90 year old becoming an astronauts is not possible. Yet stranger things have happened.

Many of us, when faced with failure to achieve our dream, react in predictable ways. Some change their strategies and have another go. Some become more determined and fight harder for their dream. Some give up. And some change their dream to something they can achieve – they compromise or water-down that which will make them happy and settle for “second or third-best”.

The last response, a compromise of one’s vision, is unfortunate. Just because you don’t have the skills doesn’t mean that someone else with those skills won’t help you. In my book "Living on Purpose" I discuss how to bring the skills you need, but don’t have (or have enough of) to bring your vision to fruition.

Many of us develop our dreams and visions early in life. Some say for example, “When I retire I would love to travel for 6 months a year,” or “I would like to visit the Amazon,” or “I would like to climb Mt Everest,” or “I would like to live in the country and raise cattle.” All of these are elements of visions of happiness.

However, what happens to many of us is that “life happens to us.” The person who wanted to travel for 6 months when he retired found that he didn’t have the money to fulfil his dream. For the person who wanted to visit the Amazon, found that because he developed a skin condition, he couldn’t be in the heat for prolonged periods and couldn’t make the trip. For the person who wanted to climb Mt Everest when he was 25, found that at 50, he had absolutely no desire to put himself through the ordeal of a climb – and he had put on 30 pounds since, thus making the ordeal that much more difficult even if he wanted to do the climb. For the person who wanted to live on a farm found that at 55, living on the farm would take him too far from his children and grand-children – none of which were a consideration when he originally formulated his vision.

The point of this is that some of us will die before we achieve our dream, some will fail, some will be unable or unwilling to live the vision we set ourselves many years before. Therefore, for our own sakes, we should realise that a vision may change – and that is OK. Provided we are prepared to review our vision and change our strategies to suit, then we will continue to have a vision that remains meaningful to us – and will avoid years of effort for an irrelevant vision. The only thing that we owe ourselves is to make our lives as meaningful as we can so that when we reflect in years to come, we will have no regrets. If that means changing our “definition of happiness” then that’s OK.
In life we are each confronted with multiple options: options that relate to family, work, career, education, friends, leisure, travel, housing, entertainment, and so. These options by themselves are often not very difficult. We choose what makes us feel good or what serves us best at the time and which, based on our context at that time, seem like the right choices.

The difficulty is that most significant choices have implications. As an example, you are offered a wonderful job opportunity. It is in your area of interest, pays good money and is in your skill set. You need to sign a binding three year contract. The job sounds too good to be true.

The job when considered in the context of these details alone sounds like a reasonable opportunity. Most people would accept it.

But what if your vision was to travel to Africa within the next 12 months to help under-privileged children? In this context, and all other things being equal, this job is not one that would contribute to your vision, but would detract from it.

Not every choice you need to contemplate will have such important ramifications – but many will. How much more difficult does it become when your vision isn’t uni-dimensional, but may have three, four or ten elements to it. If you are aware of these elements of your vision, you are then able to carefully contemplate the issues and make an informed decision knowing all the ramifications. How much harder is it to guarantee a good outcome when you aren’t fully aware of, or ignore, the elements of your vision?

Therefore not having a personal vision can make life both easier and harder at the same time.
Easier, because without your personal vision acting as the benchmark for choice; choices become easier. One chooses that which satisfies one’s immediate needs and desires.

Harder, because decisions made, and ramifications lived, are harder to undo much later.

Having a personal vision enables better choices to be made in the short-term in your own best interest (even though they may be difficult). These better choices compliment your longer term dreams and personal vision.

Earlier I mentioned that the time we have on earth is finite. Many of us work hard all our lives to accumulate the resources (or make available the time) we need to live our dreams. The dilemma that we face is the inequitable proportion of hard work to vision fulfilment.

As an example, someone may work from the age of say, 20 to 65 working hard to save money for an unstressed retirement, travel or some other dream. Average life span is around 72 – 80 depending on where you live and your gender. The proportion of hard work to pleasure is grossly in favour of hard work. About forty five years of hard work, to 7 to 15 years pleasure – if you’re lucky and healthy. This is entirely understandable particularly in our Western society. We are expected to work hard during our lives to create our own “prize” (enjoyment or dream fulfilment).

The other aspect of our lives that society imposes on us is the belief that since our definitions of happiness, our personal visions, are uniquely ours, we can’t rely on or expect others to help us. Certainly our family and friends will encourage us to “live our dreams” but we are really expected to make it happen for ourselves if we really want it. Other won’t help because there’s “nothing in it for them” it is argued.

Some reject this notion and offer alternate ways for others to help you achieve your dream. There is no additional prize (i.e. no extra time to enjoy the prize) by “doing it” alone. In fact, “doing it” alone lengthens the time it will take to deliver your vision thus decreasing the time you will have to enjoy it.

Bottom Line

• We each have a limited time on earth: therefore right now is the earliest possible time we can start to determine our tomorrow.
• We are each different.
• We have options and choices.
• Accept that you can determine your destiny.
• Your self-worth should be generated by the respect and love you have for yourself – and not from others. Change your personal reference point from others to yourself. At the end of the day, no one will be there to give you a bundle of money as a reward for being seen as worthwhile by others.
• Peers, parents, family, school, and employers are all realities and will not disappear. However, your feeling of self-worth must triumph over the external influences that may make you feel less than you should.
• Make your current situation a stepping stone and not a destination.
• We all have difficulty in separating head and heart: therefore allow your heart to shape your vision, but allow your head to choose the path to it.
• We are all affected, more or less, by fear of failure and loss.
• The thinking that got you to where you are today may not be the thinking that will take you to where you want to be to deliver you happiness.
• The future does not have to resemble the past.
• You must enjoy the journey, since some journeys are so long that some of us won’t survive to reach our “vision destination”. If you haven’t enjoyed the journey and not reached your vision destination, then what were life’s sacrifices for?
• Work with the realities of life: family, economy and society to achieve your vision – rather than working against the tide.
• Learn to differentiate between the enablers (means) and the outcomes you are pursuing.
• Be prepared to allow others to help you achieve your vision. Which will it be – your pride or your happiness?

It is impossible to determine a universal rule for "what goes into" a board report and "how much detail" is provided.

Communications to the board, much like all communications, involve three core elements: the specific understanding of the recipient; the nature of the material; and the context of the sender.

If the board is unfamiliar with the content, then more information is required sufficient to give them the ability and confidence to resolve/adjudicate the issue.

If the material is "unusual" (e.g. an acquisition when the directors have never made one, or a new plant when the directors have never embarked on such a project, or off-shoring when all the previous activity had been on-shore), then it is reasonable to expect greater detail. Similarly, if there is a significant financial or risk dimension , then you should reasonably expect directors to want to fully understand the issues and that may require more information.

If the board has little "confidence" in the author or sponsor of a proposal (e.g. may be recently promoted, recently hired, etc), then the author of the report may need to convice the reader that there is a mastery of the issues. Where the author/sponsor is long-experienced and well known to the board, then such length may not be required.

To suggest a universal right or wrong way to write a board paper, and what to put in it is somewhat naive.

Over the last thirty years I have consulted to literally hundreds of organisations. Apart from organisational efficiency and effectiveness issues, the dominant request I get is “how can we achieve our objectives more effectively?”

When I ask the client what those objectives are, I am no longer surprised to find that often they aren’t at all clear about what they are trying to achieve. Often they are confused by the strategies they have chosen, the tools they have adopted or the route that their competitors have taken, and are focussed on emulating them or beating them.

Strategies and tools such as “Sustained Competitive Advantage”, “World’s Best Practice”, “Total Quality Management” (TQM), and so on, are all well and good but not when they actually detract from the organisation’s core objectives and the fundamental interests of its shareholders. How much more difficult is it then, when the organisation isn’t really clear about what it is trying to achieve – to choose the appropriate tools and strategies?

I inevitably counsel the client to firstly clarify what organisational outcomes will satisfy their shareholders and then it will be easier to determine the suitable strategies and tools to “get them there”.

So what has this got to do with personal destiny and living on purpose?

Over the same thirty years I have also counselled thousands of individuals. They come to me for a range of issues related to work, finance, and personal fulfilment.

The most common statements made to me include:
“I’m not happy.”
“I don’t know what I want, but I do know that what I’m doing now isn’t it.”
“I’m not doing (enough of) what I think I’m meant to be doing with my life.”
“My life’s not going anywhere.”
“Time is running out for me and I’m scared.”
“Is this all there is?”

In other words, whatever it is that makes me happy – I don’t have it, or I’m not doing or experiencing it.

We have all heard these statements. Some of us have actually lived them.


My advice to these individuals is surprisingly similar to my corporate clients: know what you want to achieve in your life and then build the strategies and tasks that will take you to that ambition.

After all, you are your own sole “shareholder”. Most of those near and dear to you are certainly stakeholders in your life but they don’t “own” you. Yet we often allow our own lives to be dictated by others without considering our own happiness – done of course with the best, most noble and well-meaning intentions.

We all understand why this happens. We love our families and are happy (and obligated) to make sacrifices to ensure their happiness, security and nurturing. We are loyal to our boss or our organisation (or our employees) and work hard to ensure  success – we are prepared to make personal sacrifices in the short term in order to secure the longer term benefits.

Many of us are really and sincerely pleased when we make others happy or successful.

This admirable preparedness to sacrifice oneself for others is noble, honourable and valuable and should never be belittled or ignored. Without it society would not evolve.

However, there must always be a balance in life between self and others. Skilfully managed, one should be able to satisfy both needs: on one hand you as your only “shareholder”; and on the other, the needs of all your “stakeholders”.

Pursuing your own fulfilment does not mean that others need to suffer or be exploited. However, when others don’t understand that you too deserve the right to be happy, then maybe those other people need to be as conciliatory as you have been in supporting them.

This applies across many relationships: parents to children; employer to employee and friend to friend. When the satisfactory accommodation of both parties is not possible, then sometimes the parties need to separate – for both their sakes. Anyone who has had to endure a long period in an unpleasant relationship or situation will attest to this. In the short term, there might be discomfort or distress, but in the long term there will be understanding and greater contentment.

My book "Living on Purpose" (http://www.lulu.com/shop/jack-jacoby/living-on-purpose/paperback/product-6550288.html) has been built on the experience of thirty years of helping individuals explore their own needs and wants and in helping define their own visions of happiness – whatever those visions may be for them.

This book has four key objectives.

Firstly: to help readers identify the elements of a vision of happiness that dwells within them.

Secondly: to help define those happiness elements into tangible and realistic dimensions that are meaningful.

Thirdly: to provide the reader with methods to help convert their visions into reality.

Fourthly: to provide the reader with the self-confidence and tools to pursue that which will make them happy – a right that is inalienable and one which only few exercise.

A journey of this type, a journey into your own heart and mind, is an intensely private one.

For some people, this will be a journey of discovery and awe. For others it will be painful and confronting – not because of anything that might be said within this book, but because they may, if they are honest, confront a new reality. The reality may be that they are currently doing things that they really don’t enjoy, and to achieve their own happiness, they may need to change their current state. That might be uncomfortable or painful for themselves or for others dear to them. It doesn’t need to be so, but it might be so.

There will also be some who embark on this journey, discover what makes them happy, determine what they need to do to make it a reality, and then choose not to do it. That is their choice and they have a perfect right to it.  However, having uncovered the “prize”, they will always know that it had escaped them because they chose not to pursue it. Some will be quite comfortable with this, while for others, it will create a permanent and gnawing tension. This too is their choice.

This book can’t make anybody do anything – it can only help those that choose to act.

Throughout this book, there is room for those on the journey to record their feelings and motivations at the time these feeling occur to them: feelings and motivations that influence the nature and character of their dreams and hence their journey toward them.

This is important.

As we progress through our lives, we change as our circumstances change. What makes us happy at one time in our lives may not be the same thing that makes us happy at other times. As an example, a working parent in a demanding job may be stressed when a child becomes ill and the parent hasn’t the time to devote to the child’s needs. Happiness in that context might be having sufficient time to devote to the child without being stressed about being absent from the job. However for most people, as the child grows into adulthood, this need changes and eventually disappears.

The same might occur with an aging parent and the desire to spend time with them before it is too late. Their ultimate death changes the way the caring child may define happiness.

Having read a travel book or a novel might motivate you to visit a far-away or exotic place. Seeing that place might be your dream and your definition of happiness. But then you read or hear about the cruelty of the government and its barbaric practices: and your desire to visit has changed. Your definition of happiness has changed.

When we are young, happiness might be spending time with our friends, while when we are older; happiness may be having some time alone.

Happiness is absolutely subjective – there is no right or wrong definition of happiness. We are each entitled to our own definition of happiness, providing it doesn’t harm anyone and it is legal and ethical.

Therefore, this book allows you to record your definitions, feeling and fears at the time you develop your vision. Some time in the future when you review your vision (as we all need to do from time to time) you will understand what motivated you to define happiness the way you did. If those circumstances have changed, you can feel completely comfortable in changing your definition of happiness and the tasks you have embarked upon to make it real. Knowing what you were thinking when you chose to pursue a particular outcome enables you to change that outcome when circumstances change without feeling guilty for forsaking the outcome.

It can become a destructive obsession if we fixate on something in our lives long after it carries real meaning for us. Like the dysfunctional business, we can err by chasing the enabler instead of the outcome. Outcomes change as we grow and mature and our needs, perceptions and values evolve. Were this not so, our lives would be stagnant.

This manual is therefore a tool to assist a very personal and intimate journey and is intended only for your own use. Because of this, you should be totally honest with yourself throughout this journey. After all, if you deceive yourself here, what likelihood is there that the outcomes will really help you to your target of happiness?

This book is unashamedly about defining your “destiny” and then bringing it to fruition. For many of you it will be about reengineering your life in a way that enables you to live most of your days on earth happy, or at least happier.

It is unrealistic to think however, that we will successfully engineer out of our lives all the things we don’t enjoy: the bills, the unpleasant duties, the drudge and monotony and the frustration. It would be great if we could, and some of us do, but most of us will still have some of these elements in our lives. This program intends to increase the “happy time” compared to the “non-happy time” in our lives.

For some people the concept of “reengineering one’s life” is anathema to their belief system as they believe in living each day as their God brings it to them. We have no objection to this as they, we suspect, are living their own definition of happiness. They will not find much use for this book, but then, they probably wouldn’t be reading it in the first place.

For those that believe that ultimately, we are responsible for our own lives; then this book will be a valuable step-by-step tool for defining and then delivering that which makes them happy.

The program makes an important distinction between itself and other programs that focus on “enablers” (e.g. get rich or get rich quick programs). There are many (some very valuable) programs that help people sell property, network, market products, and so on. These programs argue that by being successful in doing what they are helping you to do, you will accumulate skills or resources that will enable you to live your dream. Some even “implant” in you the dream that they believe is worthy of working for. Limousines, travel, big homes are typical examples of the “model” of success they impart to their adherents.

These programs normally focus on one tool or technique (e.g. networking) to provide the enabler (e.g. money) that will deliver the dream they have given you. That’s OK if you share the dream and are comfortable with the enabler (their program) and the tool.

The problem with these programs is that most disregard the complexity of happiness. It is very rare that one single thing or outcome will provide total happiness.

Being wealthy may bring resources. But if your wealth has cost you a home life, your marriage, your friends, your values, and sometimes your freedom; then is it wealth alone that makes you happy?

Having plenty of time to help others may bring you happiness. But if that “endless” time was brought about because you became unemployed, then is that the sort of “available time” that you would define as “happiness”?

Writing a book (or learning an instrument, or developing a skill) may make you very happy. But if the book is lousy and no one reads it, the music is shocking and no one likes it; then are these the “happiness” outcomes you really meant?

People may be happy with a certain aspect of their lives. They may be happy with their career or family or sporting achievements or other interests and pursuits. But total and overwhelming happiness probably has multiple dimensions. Because we are a fairly complex species, it is likely that having a great and successful career, will not guarantee happiness in family, marriage, social circles etc. Having a wonderful, strong and happy family life doesn’t guarantee happiness at work, and so on.

Most people need multiple things to go right and be right for true happiness.

The program outlined in the book identifies all the elements that are meaningful for your happiness as determined by you. It helps you prioritise them and understand what it is about them that is meaningful. It then helps you achieve them. This is one of the things that is different about this program’s approach. It focuses on you and your happiness. It also recognises that as you grow and experience, so will your definition of happiness.

"Activist Investors" is not the same as "Active Investors". The former generally act for all shareholders while the latter, generally act in their own interests. The two are often confused.

As long as directors and managers "proxy" ownership of the corporation away from shareholders and to themselves (but leave the cost and risk of ownership with legitimate shareholders) then it is reasonable to expect those shareholders to agitiate against the board and management. It has been long demonstrated that both directors and managers act in their own self interest.

Sloppy board papers may indicate incompetence or recklessness. However it may indicate a number of other things also.

1. The paper may have been written by someone whose first language isn't English (or the language of the board). This may obscure the validity of what they are writing.

2. The writer may have a disability - I know many brilliant entrepreneurs who are profoundly dyslexic (one of whom is now being offered in excess of $1.5 billion for his business which he built from scratch. They generally don't have the ability to write board papers (from a spelling and grammatical perspective).

3. It may provide insights into the approval process within the business and identify deficiencies in the oversight process.

4. It may also possibly identify aspects of corporate culture that are dysfunctional - such as people deliberately letting material get to the board knowing that the writer will be severley treated or regarded (i.e. malicious saboutage).

I've seen all of these instances in my client organisations.