“The best team won.” This is the overriding view of sports commentators, professional and amateur, throughout Australia after the British team retained The Ashes. Magnanimity in defeat is a quality that comes naturally to some and it is striking that it comes so easily in Australia (where coverage of their defeat has included fulsome praise for the British team) and to Australians (who seem to have a sunnier outlook than many Brits) even in the face of adversity.  Sometimes it seems as if we, as a nation, find it hard to hide disappointment or acknowledge another country’s success against our own.

Finding a positive side, at home, at work and at leisure, can also seem impossible - yet doing so can help us get through difficulties with ease.

At work, decisions are made that contradict the wishes of many leaving some feel short-changed and, perhaps, a few feeling they can’t put up with their jobs any more. At home, disagreements over small things can turn minor issues into events that have enormous implications – perhaps splitting up relationships, severing contacts, changing lives. In down time in between, staying in control enough to cope with change can lead to an over-zealous approach to exercise, a compulsion to shop or clean, or a withdrawal from society.

Managing emotional reactions, improving performance and building resilience, can however be learned – with guidance from a professional.

Meanwhile, as a new year begins, many of us make new year’s resolutions that are founded more in hope than in experience - and that are bound to be unattainable.

Setting realistic goals – moving at an achievable pace, one step at a time – is more likely to lead to success, whatever the overall aim. Yet many of us reach first for the final outcome – the equivalent of winning The Ashes – forgetting that there are several steps – each Test – to go through before the outcome is known.

Professional therapeutic support can help you work out which steps to take, and how to pace them, to achieve your new year’s resolution so you can face 2011 with as much of a positive outlook as Australians have towards the future of their cricket achievements.

With England riding high in The Ashes, a collective sense of pride seems to be sweeping through the nation. Even people whose knowledge of cricket extends no further than knowing it is played in whites on village greens have been caught up in following our team’s success, even if only in passing. At the same time we learned the disappointing news that Britain had failed to be chosen to host the football world cup in 2018.

Both events offer lessons about building pride and commitment at work.

With The Ashes, sports commentators convey the news enthusiastically on every medium – television, radio, print, the Internet – praising individual cricketers’ achievements and the team’s approach. There is no doubt that the team is pulling together and praise is being given to all as well as to each team player separately.

With the world cup announcement, all three leaders (prime minister David Cameron, HRH Prince William, David Beckham) spoke separately, but similarly, about the decision – praising the team who had put together an exemplary bid, criticising no one for their efforts. The overall message was everyone had done more than their bit; no one person was to blame; everyone was in this together.

These leadership approaches – giving praise where praise is due, shouldering the responsibility when things go wrong, communicating clearly to team members and beyond – specifically to build morale, commitment, loyalty, dedication and pride are typical in sport. They are less typical in organisations and businesses – though they are needed there just as much.

When morale is low, commitment, loyalty, dedication and pride plummet; absenteeism increases. Productivity and profits fall which puts jobs at risk, further depressing morale. Meanwhile, managers may be forced to focus on short-term targets, leaving staff to manage on their own, often in a communication vacuum.

This is when businesses need to adopt tactics used routinely in the sporting world – using experts (the equivalent of a team coach) not only to help devise ways of rebuilding individual morale and a collective team spirit but also to provide the hands-on effort needed to work with the team’s members and communicate with staff. We regularly act as team coach for the businesses we work with, rebuilding morale so staff and managers find it easier to work at peak performance.

Today is Stress Awareness Day and MIND (a leading mental health charity) has just released research showing that millions of people take sickies to cope with stress at work – and that they lie to their bosses about the reasons for those sickies. I suspect that most of us have been in this position at some stage during our working life.

Taking a day off might help to some degree – giving you a chance to wind down, or up, or both, whichever is right for you – but it doesn’t solve the problem for the long term. The same pressures will continue; it takes corporate, not individual, action to change the level of stress at work.

For many organisations, facing up to the fact that stress is an issue can be hugely counter-cultural and intimidating. It is often the case that the people creating stress for others are under stress themselves – and they can be as reluctant to be honest about this to their bosses, as their staff are about being honest to them. The merry-go-round of stress goes merrily round with people at every level unable to stop and get off.

It doesn’t have to be like this. While a certain degree of stress is good for each of us – it drives us on, inspires us, encourages achievement, helps us aim high – an unmanageable level of stress can adversely affect individual and corporate morale and performance. At the very least, it increases the number of sickies we take.

More and more organisations realise that they need policies to manage stress in the workplace. Some policies might be relatively easy to introduce (reducing noise, for example) but others require greater corporate effort (training leaders to recognise stress in themselves and others, and how to minimise or overcome it). Getting outside help, including to formulate and implement those policies, is one way for business leaders to reduce their own stress (delegating is an important stress-reliever) as well as the stress their staff feel – so everyone can concentrate on their own, and the business’s, success.

How did you cope on Stress Awareness Day? 

Two inquests are currently dominating the news – reminding us that traumas leave an unpredictable legacy. It is impossible to know exactly how people will be affected by a trauma – and it is impossible to know exactly when its effects might emerge.

In the case of the 7/7 bombings in London in 2005, the inquest highlighted resentments and misunderstandings between specialists – ambulance, police and firefighting staff all had expectations of each other that went unfulfilled, leaving them all feeling blamed for others’ shortcomings. And it made those specialists relive their experiences – bringing some to tears in the witness stand.

As for the death of barrister Mark Saunders, killed in a siege in May 2008, a specialist firearms police officer is accused of playing a game with the evidence he gave at the inquest in September 2009.

What both these situations show is that it is important not just to support people’s mental and emotional health years after they have experienced a trauma; it is also important to help them develop resilience before they experience a trauma including by recognising when they might be vulnerable to pressures and stress, how those vulnerabilities might emerge, and when and how to seek help.

While it might not have been possible to predict a random bombing, it is possible to predict that community leaders such as the police, firefighters, paramedics and ambulance staff will face traumas of some sort – and that they will react differently to them. With specialists such as firearms officers, it is possible to predict that some will behave oddly before, during or after a trauma, perhaps as a way of managing their anxieties, the overwhelming nature of their responsibilities, or the difficult decisions they had to make while under pressure.

It is not for us to pass judgement on the way the people involved in these two high-profile cases behaved during their traumas or afterwards – or to imply whether they are innocent or guilty. What we can say is that the way they behaved is entirely predictable, in an unpredictable kind of way, and that organisations can help their staff face, manage and recover from a trauma – if they take professional advice, including from mental health specialists, to develop policies that help their people build resilience and learn how to manage stress or anxiety caused by anticipating or experiencing trauma.

Barack Obama, Margaret Thatcher, Nelson Mandela, Anita Roddick, Bill Clinton, Oprah Winfrey, Hilary Clinton, Tony Blair, Mother Teresa, Karren Brady, Carla Bruni Sarkozy, Diana Princess of Wales – and many more great and good – have all been described as charismatic: having charm, magnetism and extraordinary persuasive powers.

And it is the words “great and good” that matter most. You can be great and have charisma; but not all charismatic people are also good. Think of the undeniably charismatic Adolf Hitler.

New research from Denmark shows that charismatic people have a subtle effect on others – which is what helps them win hearts and minds. Leave aside the fact that the study involved Christians; their faith is not relevant; it is useful as it provides a neat example of how people behave.

In a neuro-scientific study conducted by Aarhus University, people in two groups (one of devoted Christians who believed in healing through prayer, and one non-religious who did not believe in that possibility) were asked to listen to three speakers. The speakers were described as a Christian, a non-Christian and a Christian known for his healing powers. Participants were told which they were listening to, in turn. In reality, all three were ordinary Christians.

Participants’ brains were studied for their reactions to the speakers as the speakers spoke. Afterwards, they were asked to rate each speaker’s charisma. Devoted Christians gave the Christian known for his healing powers a much higher charisma rating. Among non-Christians, there was only a slight difference in their charisma ratings for that speaker.

The brain analysis revealed that the people who rated the Christian with healing powers most highly had deactivated a part of their brain, switching off their scepticism and making them more susceptible to influence. This is a general reaction when with people we trust – we do it with doctors, for example – but it is boosted when we are in the presence of people with presence: we lower our guard, become more trusting, believe more than disbelieve. The study noted that this is also what happens to the brain during hypnosis – which explains why people expect high levels of trust from hypnotherapists.

People who abuse their charisma – leaders of cults, for example – are often described as having a hold over people. And they do – because of the way our brains react to their extraordinary persuasive powers. But, used responsibly, charisma is a valuable tool. It can get you noticed - helping you win not just friends but also arguments; and it helps you influence people. And that all adds up to improved self-esteem and self-belief - leading to greater success.

Lucky you if you were born with charisma.  If you weren’t, you can acquire it. And if you’ve been drawn towards someone who has abused their charisma, hypnotherapy can help you recover.