Hi and welcome to this week’s ‘question of the week’. The word that will be covered in today’s question is ‘complacency’.
Question: Should complacent individuals accept change?
The term complacency is defined as a feeling of self-satisfaction where one tends to stop looking at threats and dangers. It puts an individual in a false sense of security. For instance, a person that keeps winning in tennis may become complacent, thinking that he or she has a winning training schedule and technique, and thus not training as hard as other competitors. The result is then a heavier upset when he or she loses.
The question looks at how winning individuals cope with losing. Confidence is built in how a person acts and behaves, and its successes may create a resistance to change. A successful CEO may not want to leave a company because he or she thinks its success will continue to come from him or her, even when the business environment is changing constantly over time. This is found not just in business, but also in sports. A star football player, basketball player, or motor sport racer starts by training hard and creating a reputation. However, once the reputation is made, he or she then thinks that the successes will continue. This can be especially seen in athletes returning from retirement, where the successes haven’t carried on due to changes in, for instance, techniques and training in the sport.
As such, individuals should be alert of their complacency, not think that their successes will last, and that they should continuously improve. Complacent individuals should also realize that their success is only temporary, and that times will change.
In short: Complacency, which is achieving self-satisfaction without being aware of threats and dangers, should be recognized and be a warning for the need to exert more effort. Success should be seen as only temporary, and that change is inevitable.
Have any opinions or questions about this answer? Then please leave a comment!
Hello and welcome to this week’s ‘question of the week’! The word that will be covered is ‘frivolous’, which is found in the following question:
Question: Should frivolous suggestions be ignored?
Frivolous is defined as something that is seen as not important, not serious, or lacking merit. A frivolous suggestion would thus not be taken seriously, and would most likely be ignored by the reader. For instance, suggesting to the weather channel that they use different colors based on the temperature forecast may be seen as frivolous compared to suggesting the inclusion of wind speeds. But does it mean that these suggestions should be ignored?
It depends on the situation. If there are a lot of suggestions and only a limited amount of time to think through each suggestion, then a lot would be classified as frivolous. These frivolous suggestions may then either be stored for future use, or ignored if they continuously come. It must be said though that any idea may spark a success, thus even frivolous suggestions can create value despite not showing it at first. Thus, reading a suggestion twice, albeit a frivolous one, may be a better approach than ignoring it right away.
In short: A frivolous suggestion means one that is seen as not important, not serious, or lacking merit. However, any idea may create a success over time, thus reading a frivolous suggestion twice may be better than ignoring it right away.
Have any opinions or questions about this answer? Then please leave a comment!
Hi and welcome to the first ‘question of the week’ entry of 2011! Hoping that the New Year will bring in a lot of new knowledge and vocabulary!
The phrase that will be covered this week is “austerity measures”, which will be used in the following question:
Question: What are austerity measures?
Austerity measures are a way for governments to reduce their debts through cutting expenditures and increasing tax revenues. These debts come from money being borrowed from other countries, the world bank, the International Monetary Fund, or other financial institutions. If a government were not able to pay back its debts, then the lender would be less willing to lend money. As such, austerity measures are taken in order to regain the trust and willingness of lenders to lend.
An example of this is the Greek government, which during 2010 underwent a debt crisis. Member countries of the European Union provided funds for Greek to battle the crisis, however on condition that Greece implements austerity measures. These measures included a pay freeze, layoffs, pension plan changes, increase in taxes, and a focus on privatization. Other countries, such as England, Ireland, and Portugal have also implemented austerity measures to minimize its debts.
In short: austerity measures are a means for a government to minimize its debts and gain back trust in its lenders.
Have any opinions or questions about this answer? Then please leave a comment!
