"The source
of what people do and what they don't do is that people's
actions
are in a naturally, necessarily directly connected
dance
with the way
the circumstances
on which and in which they are
performingoccur
(show up)
for them."
...
"Self-efficacy refers to an individual's belief in his or her capacity
to execute behaviors necessary to produce specific
performance
attainments."
An old friend once introduced me to a group as a "motivational
speaker". "Thank You" I said, bowing to the compliment, "but please
don't call me that - it's not who I am.".
The truth is I'm not motivated to
be in action.
At best (drawing a bead on
what's so)
I do what I do, and I don't do what I don't do. That's verifiable - and
stand-alone. Being motivated's really got nothing to do with it.
Neither do I need a reason to
be in action.
I also don't need a reason to notbe in action.
Indeed, I don't need a reason to need a reason. Thus I'm not
motivated to
be in action,
and I don't need a reason to
be in action
in order to
be in action.
What I'm inquiring into here / what I'm discovering here, is: what
does get me
into action
from not
being in action
ie what is it that gets me
being in action,
discounting being motivated to
be in action
and / or needing a reason to
be in action?
One way of looking at this is: it really is "none of the above". Rather
it's:
actionhappens ... or ... it doesn't.
That may be too
Zen
for some
unsophisticated palates,
in which case let's see if we can assign
a source
to
being in action
/ let's look at assigning
cause in the
matter
of
being in action
- and if so, we'll be able to cut "the
Zen
of it" some slack (for the time being at least).
I would characterize such
a source
as self-efficacy. And what I mean when I say self-efficacy
doesn't fit well with the classic definition of self-efficacy which
suggests a steadfast belief in ourselves to motivate us to
act powerfully. But I myself don't require a belief in myself to act. I
act ... or ... I don't act. Belief's got nothing to do with it (for the
record, I don't believe in belief - which in and of itself is a subject
for another conversation on another occasion). There's also this: the
classic deployment of "self-efficacy" is as a noun, whereas the power
of its
causal act
really starts with "to self-efficate" which is my new
verb.
This then is the
American Psychological Association's
classic definition of "self-efficacy":
<quote>
Definition
self-efficacy
noun
an individual's belief in his or her capacity to execute behaviors
necessary to produce specific
performance
attainments
<unquote>
Interimly, while it's useful to consider self-efficacy (the noun) as a
concomitant of belief (ie self-efficacy as "believing in myself"), I
take issue with this approach inasmuch as I still have to account for
taking action
once I've become a convert ie once I'm a believer in myself.
Self-efficacy (the noun) doesn't account for
taking action
whereas "to self-efficate" (the verb) does.
With that said, here's my entry for "self-efficacy / self-efficate" in
the Laurence Platt Dictionary.
Try it on for size. It's:
<quote>
Definition
self-efficacy
noun
from the verb
self-efficate
to boldly step up to
dance
in a naturally, necessarily directly connected way with
all the circumstances
which occur
(show up)
on which and in which an individual is
performing
so that all executed behaviors produce optimal
performanceunder all
circumstances
<unquote>
Ultimately, self-efficacy (a noun) is my belief I can do it, and "to
self-efficate" (a new
Laurence Platt Dictionary
verb) is to just do it (as Nike may have said).
