Sometimes the act of searching for something and not finding it is more damaging to you than just not having it. Maybe you’re looking for a raise from a boss, an apology from a friend, affection from a partner, understanding from a parent. And maybe you just aren’t going to get it.

The best thing you can do is stop looking for it. Constant attempts to find what simply isn’t there will do more damage to you than a quick realization that you’re barking up the wrong tree, followed by a pivot to a new strategy for reaching your goals. You can’t make something be there by wanting it, but you sure can make yourself miserable.

Don’t allow the most important parts of your contentment to be dependent on the actions of others. Don’t drink that poison.

Arcades still rule. A hundred years from now, it might be a thing you hear about on whatever the equivalent of a “weird history podcast” is, but my kids get as much joy from them now as I did then. And the games are way better.

Find pockets of fun. They’re all over!

There’s an old axiom in business that says that whenever you want something, you can get it “good, fast, cheap – pick two.” And there’s a corollary to that which says sometimes you don’t even get two.

And of course, each of those things is on a spectrum. Something can be the cheapest option but still not cheap enough to be in your budget or give you a positive ROI on your problem.

So for each solution, do a quick check – which is cheapest, which is best, and which is fastest? And for each one, then ask: “How cheap is cheapest? How good is best? How fast is fastest?”

Sometimes the best solution is just the one that gets you out of a bad situation the fastest. If you can’t solve a problem, maybe you can swap it out for one you can. “Out of the frying pan, into the fire” can be a good thing if you have a bucket of water – wouldn’t help with the pan, but might put out the fire.

The point is, don’t always try to optimize. Just try to move. Out of the frying pan, if you have to.

Give to get. It’s a simple concept, but hard to remember when you most need to “get” something.

If you need kindness today, remember that you have an infinite capacity to give kindness within you. Start with a small act or gesture toward someone. Keep it going. Soon, you’ll receive kindness yourself – maybe not from the people you were kind to! In fact, maybe it will just come from yourself, as the acts you perform allow you to take some pressure off your own shoulders.

Or maybe one small act of kindness starts a great reaction and you end up with a new friend.

Whatever you feel like you’re needing, give it. It may seem strange to think “I need money, so I should give it,” but consider – you don’t need money, you need something else. Finding out what that is and giving some of it in a different way can be a boon.

Whatever you need today, I sincerely hope you get it.

What’s the difference between assigning a task and outlining an objective?

Here’s a task: “Go to the grocery store on the corner and get linguine, bell peppers, zucchini, olive oil, basil, and parmesan cheese.“

Here’s an objective: “We’d like to eat a delicious Italian meal tonight, with a maximum budget of $100, between the hours of 5:30 and 7:30.“

What’s the difference? Think about giving someone the task versus the objective. The goal is the same – at least, as you understand it. You want to eat a tasty Italian meal tonight. But will it happen?

If you give your dining partner the objective instead of the task, they have context. That enables them to actively drive toward the goal. Without that context, plenty can go wrong. If they get to the store and they’re out of linguine, your partner doesn’t know what to do. They have to call you and relay the problem, then you have to get actively involved. You have to listen to them detail all the other things that are available, or you have to give unclear instructions like “then just get anything instead.”

What if the grocery store is closed for renovations? Where should they go? Without context, maybe they end up buying bulk items from a superstore, which doesn’t fit your specific need at all. Or perhaps they buy frozen varieties that won’t be ready by this evening. The point is that every minor speed bump either requires them to call you back in for more input and effort, wasting valuable time and energy, or causes them to make likely (and predictable!) mistakes.

Even if they do everything exactly as you asked, they may miss other opportunities. On the way to the grocery store, there’s a new Italian restaurant that just opened. Eager for customers, they’re running a special tonight from 5 to 8, get a full Italian dinner for only $60! The partner who had the task walks right on by, while the partner who had the objective makes a reservation for 5:30.

If you’re not going to give an objective, you might as well simply do it yourself. Assigning tasks without context might work for very basic tasks or things the other person already knows how to do well, but it’s a very poor way to create new initiatives or projects.

So why then do so many managers and leaders tell people what to do, instead of sharing what they’re trying to accomplish?

Generally, three reasons drive this behavior: Lack of Clarity, Lack of Trust, and Need for Control.

Lack of Clarity happens because leaders are often bogged down in day-to-day tasks and don’t give themselves the time to think strategically. They also might not get much clarity from their own leaders, who simply assign them task after task. Many people, leaders included, rush from one to-do list item to another without understanding the context at all, or what they’re trying to achieve. Do this instead: Ask yourself, “What will the result be if this series of tasks is completed successfully?” Be SMART about this question – in other words, make sure your answer is Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound. If you can’t identify those features of the “result,” then chances are you’re chasing a bad goal and don’t even realize it. Once you do have the answers to all of those things, then you have clarity about your objective! Now you can just give the objective to the person who will be taking the bulk of the actions, and they’ll have what they need to use the full power of their mind on the task, coming back to you only as truly needed, which will be rare. Of course, that brings us to…

Lack of Trust, which is what happens when a leader can’t let go of the idea that the people under their charge couldn’t possibly accomplish these things without constant micromanagement. If you don’t trust your team or your partner to deliver on creative solutions and fulfill objectives, then it can be hard to give them. Of course, this is a vicious cycle. If you never trust a partner to “make a nice dinner,” then they never learn what you mean by that. So of course, they never can. As a leader, you need to give your people space to try this, and even to fail. If you don’t, then you simply can’t scale, can’t ever escape the constant need to pull every lever yourself. You might as well go grocery shopping and cook dinner yourself, because you’ll end up doing 80% of it anyway.

So let go of the Need for Control. You thought you were going to get a home-cooked Italian meal, and instead you ate at a delicious restaurant. You got everything you wanted – the food, the time, the budget. But you aren’t happy. Why? Because it’s not what you envisioned. You need to let go of the need to control the outcome, and instead set parameters. If you wanted a home-cooked meal, you could say that! You can set the objective however you want, and it’s important to be honest about what you really want. Many leaders assign tasks because they either don’t know what they truly want, or can’t articulate it well, or don’t want to admit it.

If you give yourself the space and time to think strategically, it will be easier to determine what you really want and what really matters. (Hint: It’s far fewer of the details than you think now!) Then, you can define those objectives in a SMART way. When they objective is met, check it against what you set as the goal. If the goal is met and you’re happy, success! If the goal met all the criteria that you set and you still aren’t happy, then it’s time to acknowledge that what needs to change is how you communicate!

Ask yourself why you aren’t happy. Be as specific as you can, remembering that your objection should also have to do with your objectives. Is your objection Specific, Measurable (and thus improvable), Achievable (you weren’t asking the impossible?), Relevant to the true objective, and has a Time-bound solution? If so, then the only thing that needs to change is that you needed to communicate that part of the objective better. But if not – and this is more likely – then you simply need to move away from the negative emotion that comes from a good outcome that you didn’t steer.

Replace it with the positive emotion that comes from watching a garden grow. That’s what you want, after all. A team of people who can pursue objectives and thus propel initiatives forward. It’s the difference between trying to get an army of wind-up toys to march across the floor versus toys with their own batteries. There’s only so much winding you can do.

If you want to truly elevate your leadership, this is the essential component. You need to be able to define and communicate an objective to someone. This is an amazing skill for life in general – not just office management. It’s the secret to getting what you want and building rapport with the people who deliver it. It’s a force multiplier for all your goals. And it’s the biggest stress reliever and productivity hack you’ll probably ever encounter.

It’s just objectively good.

If you only know about something because of the news, then that thing isn’t important enough for you to stress over.

This is a kind of magic for children: take two delicious things and mix them. It feels so decadent, even if you just take half of each one. Dip a candy bar in marshmallow fluff. Put maple syrup on ice cream.

There is a joy in combining two things you already like. I don’t want that much sugar in my own body, but I’ll put potato chips on a sandwich. Or, you know, watch a great movie with a great friend, or read a great book while enjoying a beautiful day.

Put two joyous things together and it creates a whole new one. New wonders around every corner.

I dislike sarcasm. I try to be sincere in my words, and I don’t like dismissing the feelings of others. I’ve noticed that people who are especially sarcastic by default also tend to hear sarcasm when none is present, causing them to doubt even the most sincere expressions.

Don’t drink your own poison, is what I’m saying. Let the world be good to you when it will.

Not all progress is forward. The second edition of a book may fix a few grammatical errors. It also may edit out a favorite line that’s no longer in line with a publisher’s sensibilities. The newer model of a car may have more features, but be less reliable mechanically.

People change things for lots of reasons, and at least one of those reasons is “because I want to continue to have a job.” Just keep that in mind – the old version isn’t automatically better, and neither is the new version. Some things just compete against themselves.

I often see people agonizing over “who to trust,” trying to figure out if they can speak freely to a coworker, count on a business partner, and so on. They try to solve it as if it were based on the person, and that’s where they go wrong.

The question should be: why do you need to trust this person?

If you have some juicy workplace gossip and you’re wondering if the person who sits next to you is trustworthy enough for you to share it – then don’t. You’re not getting anything out of that trust, and you’re putting a lot at risk. The situation does not inspire trust.

In general, trusting someone should be based on that – the situation and need. If someone’s about to go into a combat zone with you, then you should know if they’re trustworthy. Because even if they aren’t, you’re still going into the fight. Your behavior should adjust based on whether you think you have your back covered or not.

Trusting someone is often a good way to get them to trust you. So if you’re trying to build a long-term relationship of any kind with someone then yes, you should start with some trust.

But trust isn’t for every random person you meet on the street. Trust is a burden you place on someone, a favor you’re asking them, a requested modification in their behavior. I don’t make it a habit of asking favors from every stranger I meet. Trust is worth more than a dollar, and if you wouldn’t ask a random person for a dollar then you shouldn’t ask them to modifier their behavior to be trustworthy, either.

People will show you who they are. When they do, you can put the trustworthy ones into situations where the trust is helpful – go into dangerous situations with them, build wonderful things with them. When you’re looking to do those things, remember who already “gave you the dollar” when you didn’t ask.