Author: Haim Deutsch

How do you influence a team that seems stuck, unmotivated, and divided? Sometimes, the most powerful tools aren’t metrics or strategies—they’re dreams.
Let me share a story of how guided imagination turned a fractured team into a unified force of success.

The Story: Last month, I faced a challenge while mentoring a development group in a security company. This team, composed of excellent professionals, was struggling with motivation and team spirit. To complicate matters, they were divided across two locations due to varying security clearance levels. The lower-clearance team members were barred from entering high-security facilities, and those with high-clearance resisted working in the less secure office. The physical separation mirrored their emotional disconnection.

From the start, I believed that bringing them physically together would dramatically improve their dynamics. But the resistance to this idea was strong. Some team members outright rejected the notion, and tensions were high. I knew a conventional approach wouldn’t work.

During one retrospective, I decided to take a different route. I led them through a guided imagination session.

I began by asking everyone to close their eyes, take a deep breath, and imagine their ideal team. I guided them step by step, turning this into an introspective journey. They visualized what it would feel like to work in harmony, to support each other, and to achieve their goals as a united team. I anchored this vision deeply, asking them to internalize the experience.

When they opened their eyes, I asked them to describe what they saw and felt. To my surprise, these usually reserved individuals became remarkably expressive. They eagerly shared their visions and even drew representations of their imagined ideal team. The “working together” motif emerged as a dominant theme in every description.

The Turning Point: Fast forward one sprint. The team was preparing for a critical stabilization sprint ahead of a major product release. They faced daunting challenges, including complex and critical bugs. Before they began, I reminded them of their own ideal team representation. I tapped into the anchors we had set during the guided session, emphasizing the “working together” theme they had envisioned.

Then came the breakthrough: they proposed sitting together in a low-security-level open space, just for the duration of this sprint. What started as an unlikely idea became a two-week bug-hackathon. The result? Nothing short of remarkable.

The Outcome: At the retrospective following the sprint, the results were clear. The team had resolved complex bugs, delivered a successful release, and, most importantly, rediscovered the joy of working together. They broke through their own resistance and expressed a newfound willingness to continue collaborating closely.

The Lesson: This experience reinforced for me the transformative power of imagination. A single guided visualization shifted mindsets and redefined a team’s dynamics. It proved that when you anchor a dream in people’s minds, they can achieve incredible things.

Love your team, and remember: leave room for the Dream Fairy—perhaps with some Hanukkah donuts.

 

Have you ever faced a moment where you had to decide—act decisively or hold back? That split-second choice can define outcomes and create lasting change.

Let me share the mindset that enables me to bring about instant shifts during retrospectives, turning delicate moments into transformative breakthroughs.

It was (as my wife likes to remind me) 40 kilos ago. I was a teenager in Paris, a city under the shadow of neo-Nazis and violent anti-Semitism. Synagogues were bombed, lives were shattered, and fear permeated the air. But fear didn’t define us.

A group of us decided we would not cower. Proudly wearing our kippahs, we walked the streets with courage, but we were not unprepared.

We trained relentlessly—12 hours a week under the guidance of Paris’s best martial arts senseis. Our training wasn’t just theoretical; it was practical.

It played out in the streets, defending Jewish kids from bullies, confronting those who attacked the elderly, and standing up against hatred scrawled on walls.
A street fight isn’t a Hong Kong movie.
It’s not Bruce Lee.
You have about 20 seconds to break your opponent’s will to ensure they don’t come back to harm you—or anyone else.

One lesson I learned, which has stayed with me throughout my life, is this: you never have to fight.
But if you decide to fight, make sure you won’t have to do it again.
Leave no doubt, no room for a second round.
This principle has transcended the streets and found its place in my professional life, particularly during retrospectives.

Retrospectives are like choosing whether to fight.
You don’t always have to address every delicate or complex situation.
Sometimes, it’s better to hold back, not raise the issue in front of the group, and instead handle it one-on-one.
That’s legitimate and often wise.
But other times, there’s an opportunity to fix a systemic issue once and for all. After all, retrospectives exist to improve the ecosystem, refine processes, and empower teams and their members.

When you choose to address a sensitive issue in a retrospective, it can be like cleaning a wound—it’s painful, but it’s necessary for healing.
These moments can become powerful, emotional sessions that leave a lasting impact and can easily spiral out of control if you’re not properly prepared.
In fact, I often advise participants of such sessions to wait an hour before driving home because of the emotional intensity.

The key is preparation.
You can’t improvise.
Just as martial arts require hours of training to perfect a single movement, handling tough discussions requires practice and readiness.
Stand in front of a mirror, rehearse, anticipate every reaction, and ensure you have total control of the situation.
When you’re prepared, you can decide: will you shoot or not?

And if you decide to shoot, don’t hesitate,
When you have to shoot… shoot, don’t talk!

 

Imagine if you could unlock your team’s true potential—not by commanding every move or letting them run wild, but by finding the perfect balance between guidance and independence.
This is the secret to empowering teams to reach new heights. Let’s dive into how you can master this delicate balance and inspire transformative success.

How do you unlock the full potential of a team? Is it through complete freedom or by enforcing strict control?
The answer lies in finding a delicate balance. Let me show you how embracing both autonomy and structure can lead to transformative success.

Or, what a sandwich can teach us about project management.

I have a deep love for coaching, guiding teams, and supporting organizations. There is nothing quite like the satisfaction of seeing individuals and teams make significant, transformative progress. I enjoy the amazing results, but I also love the journey—the process of change itself.

Almost every time I run a training or coach a team, when discussing the importance of empowering self-organizing teams, I face the same passionate objections:

“Since when do we not need a manager?” “Who will make the decisions?” “Development isn’t a democracy!” “We’re not in a kibbutz, and kibbutzim have proven they don’t work!” “You can’t break the rules!”

And so on.

Usually, I sit back and enjoy the emotional outburst. Firstly, because it means I’ve awakened those who were previously disengaged. And secondly, because it shows that people are open to receiving new insights.

This is the moment when I start with a personal story:

“We have five kids within a four-year age range—three births between my beloved wife and me.
Early on, my amazing wife invented her own version of Agile. As always, necessity was the mother of invention.
In our case, it was the need to have breakfast delivered to her in bed—preferably with a croissant.
But how could we achieve that while also getting the kids ready for school: organizing their supplies, clothes, and, of course, their sandwiches?

Thus, the first self-organizing team of the Deutsch Family Inc. was born. From first grade, our children learned that they were responsible for three key ‘features’: preparing their school supplies, choosing their clothes, and making their sandwiches.

It was a huge success. The kids prepared their supplies just as well as I could (I was never good at figuring out which notebook was needed for Hebrew and whether it should be a folder or a book for mathematics—that whole domain is a kind of voodoo for me). When it came to clothing, yes, sometimes they wore T-shirts in winter or sweatshirts in summer, but after a few retrospectives, they dramatically improved their decision-making.

The biggest drama was around the sandwiches. We had to deal with social protests—kids complaining that they had to make their own sandwiches while all their friends’ parents did it for them. We didn’t negotiate and prepared for a prolonged struggle. But a few days later, the kids came home beaming, saying that all their friends were jealous. Their friends’ parents decided what to spread on the bread, while at Deutsch Family Inc., the team was free to choose whatever they wanted.

So what’s better—democracy or autocracy?

Business isn’t a democracy, and we’re not in a kibbutz. On the other hand, autocracy stifles creativity and limits a team’s ability to make breakthroughs.
So what’s the answer?

The truth is, it’s neither pure democracy nor autocracy. Our kids had the freedom—and the responsibility—that came with, choosing what to put on their sandwiches.
However, they could only choose from what was available in the house.
If there was no Nutella or anything else they wanted, but only cottage cheese or hummus, that’s what they used.
They decided between cottage cheese and hummus, but it was us, the parents, who set the framework within which they had that freedom.

Our children are now in their 20s and still haven’t discovered the secret of our ‘Manifluence’ (manipulative influence—a term I invented, which I’ll discuss in a future article).
They were free to put whatever they wanted in their sandwich, but only using what we as parents decided would be available at home.

If you reveal them the secret, I k..l you! See, you’re warned.

And that’s how it works with school sandwiches—and with team management.

We give our teams full autonomy, empowering them, giving them responsibility, and helping them reach their full potential. In doing so, we also free ourselves from the need for micromanagement. But all of this happens within a framework we, as Scrum Masters, Product Owners, or managers, define. We define the features, present the product backlog, set priorities, and outline the overall plan. This is what I want—it’s up to you, the team, to decide how to achieve it. You are free to choose and explore the best path forward. I am here to support, guide, and explain, but ultimately, you are responsible for the ‘how’ within the ‘what’ that I have defined.

And the only real question that remains is… hummus or cottage cheese?

 

Imagine a team so motivated that they take on challenges without being asked—solving complex problems creatively and efficiently.
Imagine leaders who foster this level of autonomy, trusting their teams to take ownership.
This is the true power of self-organizing teams, and it can lead to incredible results.

Let me share with you two real tales that demonstrate how autonomy and trust can achieve the impossible.

One of the cornerstones of biology is the Latin phrase: “Omne vivum ex vivo”—all life comes from life, a rebuttal to the concept of spontaneous generation. Here’s proof that hyper-productivity in development doesn’t strictly adhere to cellular biology, but instead stems from something much more profound—something I have witnessed repeatedly in exceptional Agile teams.

Last week, a Scrum Master I mentor approached me, concerned. He was worried that his team was becoming increasingly autonomous—organizing and operating on its own. He acknowledged that Agile theory supports team autonomy, but then he said, “But Haim, be serious, you and your Agile methods… there’s no way we can manage development like this in the company!”

“Excellent!” I told him, “Agile and I are overjoyed. You are incredibly lucky. You might not realize it, but fostering true team autonomy is one of the hardest things to achieve. It can take months, years, and sometimes… it just never happens at all. So celebrate it—enjoy it!”

Still, I could sense his lingering concern. So I told him these two compelling stories about teams that self-organized for the benefit of the company.

Eric Schmidt, former Chairman and CEO of Google, shares that when they first launched AdWords, Larry Page, co-founder of Google, conducted a search for “Kawasaki H1B.” Unfortunately, the search results returned numerous ads for lawyers offering immigration services to secure the H1-B visa, completely unrelated to the motorcycle Larry was searching for. Larry continued with another search, this time for “cave paintings,” and again received irrelevant results—ads from galleries selling paintings, with no connection to caves.

These results worried Larry. If searches did not return accurate results, AdWords ads would receive fewer clicks.

A traditional manager would have convened an emergency executive meeting, assigned a task force to analyze the problem, and set up a special team to work tirelessly until the issue was resolved.

But what did Larry do?

Larry printed out the search result pages, marked the poor results with arrows, and wrote: “This is a bad result.” He then hung these pages in the office kitchen.

Three days later, Larry received an email from five developers—not even part of the AdWords development team—who saw the pages, understood the problem, and attached their analysis of the bug and suggestions for a solution. Larry decided to implement their suggestion, which continues to influence Google search results to this day.

What happened here? A group of talented people, connected to each other and aligned with the company’s interests, took it upon themselves to solve a problem. No one explicitly asked them, no one demanded it, criticized, or managed them. They saw a need, they saw a challenge, and in a fully autonomous way, they solved the problem as quickly and effectively as possible. Incredible!

Think this can only happen at Google? Well, think again…

The same happened to me at Elbit Systems in the previous century. I was a young and promising team leader. Even then, I resisted any form of authority, so naturally, I led my team in a non-traditional way, instinctively striving to build a responsible, autonomous, self-organizing team.

One day, I received a frantic call from the head manager, informing me that we needed to translate the core code of a classified system from PL/I to C. I knew it was going to be a huge challenge given the time constraints—we would need to plan the project, create the design, validate the new architecture, code, and test the entire system. In essence, it looked like two years’ worth of work. And we had just a few months for the release.

So, what did we do?

During our break (Happy Hour), I simply presented the challenge to my team: “Obviously, we can’t do this in the conventional way, but I know you and your capabilities, and I know that this challenge will push you to find creative solutions.”

I conveyed this message on a Thursday afternoon. After a long weekend, on Monday, two of my team members, Sharon and Oren, came to me. Oren said, “We have good news and bad news. The good news is that over the weekend, we thought of a solution for translating the code from PL/I to C and wrote software to translate the code automatically. The bad news is that it only achieves 80% accuracy, and we’ll need to translate the rest manually!”

“Fantastic!” I told them. “I’d love to see the code you developed!”

I didn’t demand deadlines, I didn’t assign tasks, nor did I dictate how to do it. Just responsible, challenged people who rolled up their sleeves, dedicated their time, and came up with a quick and effective solution. The project was completed successfully, well ahead of schedule.

A year later, I moved to another group where I found out they had faced a similar challenge—translating code from PL/I to C. They outsourced the translation to a company in the United States, which contractually promised to deliver the translated code in six months. Two years later, the code still wouldn’t compile!

So tell me, dear Leader, is having a responsible, self-organizing, autonomous team a good or a bad thing?

 

“Haim, you have to save us!”

These were the exact words I heard last month from Arik, the VP of R&D at a successful multinational company.

“It’s a catastrophe. The Berezina. The end of any agility we’ve put in place. Our main client, who accounts for 70% of our income, is renewing their agreement with us but is demanding we use team velocity metrics to measure productivity and progress.”

“So, what’s the problem?” I asked.

“The problem is critical. How can we ensure that our velocity keeps increasing?”

“I understand your concern, and I have a solution for you. But you need to trust me completely. Are you in?”

“Wow, Haim, that’s a big ask. If it works, you’ll be rewarded, but if it fails, both our heads will be on the chopping block!”

We closed the deal.The main use of metrics is often seen as measuring people’s productivity or quality. However, the most important use of metrics is to influence behavior

“Okay, my solution is simple: accept the agreement and go with velocity measurement.”

“But what if… are you sure?”

“Go with it. Trust me!”

. Metrics guide people to focus on specific skills or areas of need. Remember: you are what you measure. This is akin to the principle of autoregulation in biology—systems modify their behavior to meet the standards by which they are measured.

If you measure programmers by the number of lines of code they write, they’ll write a lot of code, regardless of its quality. If you measure construction workers by the solidity of a building, they may build the strongest walls but fewer buildings overall. Similarly, if you measure a physician by the number of patients seen, they may spend less time with each patient. And if you measure teams by velocity, you’ll always see an increase in velocity, but it won’t necessarily reflect real productivity or value.

On the other hand, metrics can be a powerful tool to drive improvement. Want teams to enhance their capabilities? Don’t try to convince them—just measure the capability you want them to develop, and they will find ways to improve. Metrics can be a transformative force for change, but they must be used thoughtfully, or you risk unintended consequences.

And what happened with Arik and his big client? My head is still firmly on my shoulders, and the client quickly discovered what you already know: you are what you measure.

Be smart.

Imagine if simply believing in someone could elevate their potential beyond what they thought possible.

This is the essence of the Pygmalion effect—a powerful reminder that our expectations can shape reality. Whether it’s a teacher inspiring students or a leader guiding a team, the power of belief can be the catalyst for exceptional results.

In Ovid’s book, Pygmalion is a Greek sculptor who creates an exquisite sculpture of a woman.

Pygmalion falls in love with his creation, and during Aphrodite’s festival, he asks the goddess to grant him a woman as beautiful as his sculpture. Upon returning home, he kisses the statue and feels warmth on its lips—the marble has come to life. Pygmalion marries the woman, and they have a son. In modern times, this tale echoes what some call the “Pinocchio Effect,” where a creation comes to life in response to a heartfelt wish.

The Pygmalion effect, as described by Prof. Robert Rosenthal, refers to the power of expectations on outcomes: higher expectations often lead to higher performance.

Rosenthal conducted two key experiments in 1963. In the first, he worked with Lenore Jacobson in a California school. At the beginning of the year, all the pupils took a General Ability Test. Some students were then randomly labeled as “academic bloomers.” Teachers were led to believe these students would excel, and by the end of the year, those students showed significant improvements in IQ compared to their peers. The teachers’ belief in these students’ potential led to better outcomes.

In the second experiment, Rosenthal gave rats to two groups of students, telling the first group that their rats were genetically enhanced for cognitive skills, while the second group received “normal” rats. In reality, none of the rats were genetically modified. However, the first group’s belief in their rats’ abilities led to better performance in navigating mazes.

In the organizational context, this means leaders wield significant power to uplift their teams simply by believing in them and fostering a culture of trust. Encouraging creativity, embracing failure as part of the learning process, and fostering an experimental mindset all contribute to better outcomes. The successes of innovations like Gmail and AdSense are rooted in environments where experimentation was encouraged. This aligns with the ideas from Leading Through Chaos, which emphasize the importance of guiding teams effectively through uncertainty.

However, there is also the Golem effect—the opposite of the Pygmalion effect. When leaders lack trust in their teams, it leads to poor performance, a narrow mindset, and stifled creativity. Leaders must recognize and combat these negative dynamics to create an inspiring environment that empowers teams. True team autonomy and creativity are achieved through the Pygmalion effect, where trust and belief unlock the potential for greatness.

As Winston Churchill said, “Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.”

Taking on one more project can push you over the edge. Game theory says skipping one might be your win. How do you decide?

 

It felt like an Ephraim Kishon’s story

Four years ago, October 29, 2020, COVID Pandemy

The phone rings. My sister-in-law, Jocelyn, is up to make Aliyah and come to settle in Israel, She is calling me on WhatsApp from New York.

“Haim, I’m stuck. They won’t let me come to Israel—it’s hopeless.”
“What? Why? I thought everything was ready for your move!”
“Well, it’s not. The Israeli consulate in New York is refusing to grant me an entry visa. We’re stuck. We’ve already sold the apartment! Our move-out date is December 15… We’ll be on the street! If COVID isn’t over by then, I don’t know what we’ll do.”

Joce is my wife’s older sister.

After living in Israel for eleven years, she took a teaching position in communications at New York University. There, she married to Willy. Now that Willy has retired, they made the big decision to move to Israel. Willy would be a new immigrant, but here they were, stuck at the last hurdle—a consulate official refusing Joce’s entry visa. I could almost sense the absurdity of a story straight out of Kishon.

“But why won’t they give you a visa if you have an Israeli ID and your husband is a new immigrant?”
“Because he’s not yet an Israeli citizen, and I, while holding an Israeli ID, am technically classified as a permanent resident.”
“And…”
“And due to COVID, I haven’t been in Israel for 180 days in 2020 as required by law. They don’t know how to classify me, so they’re refusing me an entry visa. My husband Willy can fly, but I can’t.”

It was a situation straight out of a Kishon story, wasn’t it?

Stay tuned.

I call the Population and Immigration Authority to ask how to help. They tell me that if she wants their help, she has to be physically present in Israel; otherwise, the consulate decides.

I refuse to accept this answer. I call again and get the same response: “The consulate official makes the decision.” I call a third time, a fourth time.

On the fifth call, I request an appointment to discuss the visa without detailing the issue—I need to crack this situation.

In such situations, people usually get frustrated, blame others, and give up.

But I knew this was a test, a crossroads: either it was Game Over, where I would give up and tell Joce there was nothing more to do, or I would make a clear, unwavering decision to go all in.

The goal was simple: to free Willy (and Joyce) and move to the Next Level in the game. But I knew from experience that success would only come from being fully focused on one outcome: obtaining the signed entry visa, in hand or inbox.

The day of my appointment with the Population Authority arrives, and I come armed with all the necessary documents—copies of family members’ ID cards, proof of Willy’s status as a new immigrant, and more. The conversation with Li, the clerk, is surreal:

“Joce can come to Israel once her husband is an Israeli citizen.”
“So, it’s all set?”
“No. Willy is not Israeli; he’s classified as a new immigrant. For the consulate to approve, he has to be Israeli.”
“Let’s change his status then.”
“That’s not possible; he must be physically present in Israel to do that.”
“Willy is elderly, doesn’t speak Hebrew, and cannot come alone—he needs Joce with him.”
“Fine. She can come with him once she has an entry visa in hand.”
“Let me clarify: for Joyce to come, Willy must be Israeli; for Willy to become Israeli, he must come to Israel; to come to Israel, Joce must come with him! But this is a self-sustaining vicious cycle with no way out!”
“Exactly. You’ve described it perfectly,” Li smiles at me. Kishon must be turning in his grave.

But I was in familiar territory—breaking vicious cycles is my specialty.

If I could help tech companies turn destructive cycles into constructive ones, I could work my magic for Joyce.

Step 1: Identify the Link in the Chain to Break
I thought about how I could apply my professional skills here.
“Listen, Li, her whole family lives in Israel; you have to help. We need a way to allow the wife of a new immigrant, who has not yet become Israeli, to accompany him. How can I help you make this happen?”
“I need proof they genuinely intend to settle in Israel, not just escape COVID in New York.”

Step 2: Remove the Weak Link
“I’ll get you proof that they sold their home in the U.S. and bought a home in Israel two years ago, and that Joce is registered for rabbinical studies in Ra’anana. Will that be enough?”
“I hope so. Send me all those documents today. I’ll complete a special application form and forward it to the committee in Jerusalem, which meets early next week. We should know more then.”
“Li, are you really willing to help resolve this embarrassing situation and get Joyce and Will to Israel?”
“Yes, absolutely. I’m with you on this,” Li shouted back, “we’ll get them here.”

Step 3: Turn the Vicious Cycle into a Virtuous One
Ahead of the committee meeting, Li called to ask if Joce and Willy had flight tickets and six months of COVID medical insurance coverage. For me, this was an opportunity to turn the vicious cycle into a success story. That day, I returned with flight tickets for December 29 and a signed insurance contract covering them both.

Five days later, I received Joce’s entry visa by email.

Wednesday, December 30, 2020, 1:30 PM
Willy and Joce land at Ben Gurion Airport.

It was either Game Over or Next Level—I chose Next Level.
And the reward for reaching Next Level? A new game, with fresh challenges and new growth.

Think back to the original Planet of the Apes movie in 1968. Imagine the challenge of making a film where apes talk and behave like humans—all without computer graphics. Every day, 253 actors spent 4-5 hours in prosthetic makeup to become chimps and gorillas, the two distinct types of apes in the film.

What’s fascinating is what happened off-camera. At lunch, the actors divided themselves, with chimps on one side of the dining area and gorillas on the other. In no time, it became Us vs. Them: chimps vs. gorillas. And remember, they were all humans!

Why did this happen? Humans automatically categorize each other. Every time we meet someone new, we subconsciously decide if they’re “one of us” or “one of them,” a process that takes just 50 milliseconds.

Now, imagine this happening in your organization. Two scenarios:

1. Teams working together on the same project: development teams with hardware, architecture, DevOps, QA, etc.
2. Teams distributed globally, across different continents, cultures, and possibly companies.

How quickly can this Us vs. Them mindset take hold? And how does it affect project success and company morale? Fortunately, here are five keys to help bring everyone together as one team:

1. Split the Teams (When Possible)

Sometimes, the best solution is the simplest. If you don’t need these teams to work directly together, consider designing the project in a way that allows each team to work on a distinct component. If they can each develop a sub-product independently, you’ve minimized the issue by removing the source of friction.

2. Set Common Goals and Shared Success

Think about the movie again—everyone’s common goal was to make the film. Imagine if, instead, they had the shared objective of setting the table and eating lunch without damaging their makeup. This reframes the goal, making it something that includes everyone equally. Similarly, give your teams goals that encourage mutual effort and success.

3. Reframe with “Container” Thinking

What if the director had told the ape actors and human crew they all had to eat together, each group tasked with protecting the others’ makeup? You’d quickly see apes on one side and humans on the other. This is “container reframing”—creating a larger “us” by focusing on a shared challenge. In the workplace, you can reframe by aligning teams on larger objectives, like project milestones or company achievements, fostering a unified “team pride.”

4. Increase Diversity

Adding diversity turns differences into the norm, building a cohesive tribe rather than divided groups. The first brainstorming session in a diverse team often reveals new perspectives that lead to innovative solutions. In one company we mentored, we had Israeli and German teams working on the same project—two cultures with stark differences. To add to the mix, we included a Ukrainian team. The result? Their sessions became richer, with diverse perspectives enriching collaboration.

5. Enforce Communication

Imagine that chimps and gorillas in the desert filming location had to share the same tent, with no excuses. They’d either clash or learn to live together, eventually forming a single entity. This happened to me in the army: a fellow soldier missed his shift, forcing me to pull two back-to-back night shifts. Furious, I confronted him, leading to a scuffle. Our sergeant handcuffed us together for three days. Thirty years later, we’re still best friends.

In the workplace, enforced communication has similar effects. Install webcams in distributed locations, require joint decision-making, or create ambassador exchanges where team members spend time in other locations. At McAfee, we did just that with teams from India and Israel. After six years of Us vs. Them dynamics, four ambassador exchanges transformed them into one unified team with their own shared culture.

Not every approach will work for every team, but give them a try.

As my combat instructor used to say, “Don’t try to stop the waves—surf them!”

…and then he’d deflect my kick and hit me square in the face.