It occurred to me the other day that the expectation of consistency in all aspects of our life may have lead to a collective state of cognitive dissonance, which, depending on how well we recognize this state in ourselves, could contribute to surprising (to ourselves and others) behavior, depression, obsession, over-disciplined and regimented lifestyle, or other swings to extremes of some fashion.

People are full of contradictions. We compartmentalize - neat in one aspect, sloppy in another; perceptive in some situations, strikingly blind in others; rational about some decisions, irrational in all else; and so on. Yet the expectations from our family, co-workers, friends, and employers may be that our "principles" or whatever we publically declare ourselves to be should guide us like rails through all situations, no matter what. We may have these same expectations of ourselves, further deepening the dissonance between who we are, and who we and the world think we ought to be.

Expecting consistency implies the understanding of all inputs that affect the output (six sigma, anyone?). That is a tall order; "know thyself" is at best a life-long quest, and without that knowledge, why should we expect unfailing consistency? Every minute brings new context to events and circumstances, and with every action we learn something new about ourselves. The pressure to stick to our past personae and proclamations is unfair to our present and future selves, and reduces us simply to the sum of past experiences and labels; authentic evolution becomes more difficult. Expecting all-encompassing consistency from ourselves and others is a sure path to disappointment and frustration.

Become aware of your own inconsistencies, when they happen next; it might be a thought, an action, a reaction, or a feeling. That inconsistency is like the solar flare, leaving the confines of your self-accepted boundaries and letting you glimpse into what is really making you tick; the train went off the rails for a reason, and if you pay attention you may learn something that otherwise would have gone unnoticed or suppressed.

Once recognized, perhaps the inconsistency can be understood and reshaped instead as an expected, and desired, element of some other trait or characteristic previously undiscovered.

Easier said than done, of course :).

In case you're wondering, i've purposefully kept clear of providing details about what prompted this article. I was afraid that too many specifics would define my meaning too narrowly and preclude some folks from applying ideas expressed here to their own situation, which may be different from mine as night is from apples.

I've had an email exchange with an IBM technical support representative about a FileNET issue we've been working on for a few weeks. The exchange has been going on something like this (names have been changed to protect the guilty, for some reason):

• Me: "Jack, i'm interested in learning about your best practices in patch management, so we can figure out how to stay current with patches and at the same time not spend a lot of time on patch management."
• Jack: "Here's a link to IBM support site [link omitted]"
• Me: "Thanks for the link, Jack. I was more interested in best practices, recommendations, et cetera."
• Jack: "We tell customers to install fix packs"
• Me: "Thanks. I looked at the link you provided for the RSS feed, and i get an error message when i try to subscribe. can you help?"
• Jack: "I have nothing to do with that. Try web support"
• Jack: "Try this help file for RSS readers [link omitted]"
• Me: "Thanks, Jack. I've been using RSS for years now. I'd like to investigate a better way of staying up-to-date with patch announcements and so on. What would you suggest?"
• Jack: "Contact your Account Manager."
• Me: "Do you know who that is?"
• Jack: "Contact your Sales Rep."

At this point, i've given up. Are we playing 20 questions here, or what?!

I know he's a tech guy. I know i'm not asking him about SQL or CLI commands. I also know that he's pretty high-up on the tech guy totem pole, and i know that when he's involved, something's usually broken, which means that customer satisfaction is an issue. Wouldn't you think that from a CSat perspective he'd have a better idea of how to handle this situation? Something that offers perhaps even an illusion that he cares about our production environment and is invested in reduced down-time for his company's software platform?

Here's how this entire exchange could have been shortened to 2 emails and turned to an actionable, positive next step:

• Me: "Jack, i'm interested in learning about your best practices in patch management, so we can figure out how to stay current with patches and at the same time not spend a lot of time on patch management."
• Jack: "Ilya, we don't have anything specific about that. You can try the IBM Tech support RSS feed, and i'll put you in touch with your Account Manager so you can provide your feeback to her and see if we can come up with a good way to get your systems patched and current."

I hope i remember this for next time i'm in Jack's shoes...