MONTGOMERY VILLAGE, Md., November 12, 2012 — We have all heard the old cliché that “the only constant is change.” This has become truer in the last 50 years. The inevitable changes in technology, geo politics, social perception, and other areas are found in our history.
Some decades ago when I was still working for the Federal Government, I saw that my agency was offering a short course in “Change Management.” Reading the description of the mini course, I was intrigued at what could be new about this apparently obvious subject.
The person teaching the course was an African American woman in her mid thirties. When I saw her I almost got up and left: What could such a young person teach me about a subject that was such a common part of life? I was a veteran in most life-teaching subjects. In retrospect that was my first lesson in change management.
After a few minutes in the class I started to learn things that I had never considered important to my life. In the words of the young woman, if you refuse to change with the times, you may just end up like a pupa that never evolved into a butterfly. The message was clear, if you decide to keep your mind closed to new ideas, your life would not progress to what it could be.
At the time, I was dealing with an almost impossible situation in my office. After my boss had asked me to do something that I believed was unethical and I had refused, I was relegated to a very secondary position. I was evaluating whether I should forego any future as a federal worker and find something outside. It was no secret to me that this was what my boss wanted.
The course changed my future. I decided that I could do little to influence my management and instead turned to what has been my answer in such critical times: accept what I couldn’t change and take steps to find an alternative that would prepare me for the future. I took immediate action to learn about computers and to my surprise in a relatively short time, the same boss had to approach me to help solve a problem that no one else in the office could address. From then until this boss left to achieve a higher level of incompetence, there was a détente and my life was a lot better.
So how can this be applied to one’s day-to-day life? Does this mean that one has to disregard principles that are the basis to our life and morality? The answer is in many ways no.
What is needed is for each one of us to evaluate our paradigm, figure out if it works in the world and if it works for us. After we devise a plan of action, if appropriate, we need to know how that would work in regards to our fundamental beliefs and rules of conduct. If in fact we find it impossible to change, then we at least should realize that we are limiting ourselves. For many this could be a satisfactory decision and probably less painful than realized.
Since we are still analyzing the results of the last election, maybe it is time for the leadership of the Republican Party to evaluate their paradigm. Could it be that if they had taken different positions with regards to Hispanic/Latinos, the less fortunate and women issues, Mr. Romney would be running the country on January 20, 2013?
Mario Salazar, the 21st Century Pacifist, is a bleeding heart liberal, agnostic, exercise fanatic, Redskin fan, technophile, civil engineer, combat infantry veteran, jewelry maker, amateur computer programmer, Environmental engineer, Colombian-born, free thinker, and, not surprisingly, pacifist. You can find his articles - ranging from politics to cooking a mean brisket - in 21st Century Pacifist <http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/21st-century-pacifist/> at The Washington Times Communities. Follow Mario on Twitter @chibcharus #TWTC and Facebook at Mario Salazar.
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.