Work Matters

Category: Reflection

  • Essentialism; It Will Make You Think and Might Even Make You Less Crazy

    Greg's Cover
    Greg McKeown's publisher sent me an advanced copy of his book Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less.  I said I would look at for a possible blurb (I don't do advanced praise for a lot of books, in part, because I now insist on reading the whole thing before I do — and it takes time).  I was ready to NOT be impressed, as there are frankly lots of books out there about the power of simplicity.  But Greg goes beyond what I have seen from any other book with a similar message (although I am a big fan of Matt May's The Laws of Subtraction as well, but that is a different book as it has many short essays, but still has a unified writing and great writing and editing — in fact Matt's book and Greg's would be a good pair to read together).  

    Through Greg's great message, his lovely spare writing style, and by gently leading the reader through his philosophy he shows you what it "disciplined" approach means, looks like, and how to "be it" not just know how to define it  (I loved "the perks of being unavailable," "win big by cutting your losses," and " "select: the power of extreme criteria" in particular).

     

    I was especially interested once I got into the book because one of the major themes of Scaling Up Excellence is that, as although much research shows that we we human beings get dumber, loss will powers, and do each task less well as cognitive load increases, the necessary practices, structures, and rituals that organizations use often make it difficult or impossible for people to perform well (especially as organizations and programs expand).  We do touch on some simlar themes to Greg (we are both big advocates of sleep and taking  breaks!), but we focus more on approaches for redesigning jobs, teams, and organizations, and our focus zeros in on scaling.  

    Essentialism is a quick and efficient read, as you would expect given the title, but you learn a lot, and there is something about the book that led me to believe that, despite my general inability to use the word "no" more often than I should for my own good, that this book will help.  Although I couldn't quite resist reading the book, doing the blurb, and writing this little post! 

    My blurb:

    “Essentialism is a powerful antidote to the current craziness that plagues our organizations and our lives.  Read Greg McKeown’s words slowly, stop and think about how to apply them to your life – you will do less, do it better, and begin to feel the insanity start to slip away.” 

  • New Research: Thinking About Your Mortality Makes You A Better Person

    A pointer to this from Australian Chris Barry came in my email this morning.  Here is what Ken Vail and his co-authors found:

    Contemplating death doesn't necessarily lead to morose despondency, fear, aggression or other negative behaviors, as previous research has suggested. Following a review of dozens of studies, University of Missouri researchers found that thoughts of mortality can lead to decreased militaristic attitudes, better health decisions, increased altruism and helpfulness, and reduced divorce rates.

    Some of the specific effects were quite interesting — everything from being more peaceful and cooperative to exercising more and quitting smoking. I especially liked this study described in the summary in ScienceDaily:

    Even subconscious awareness of death can more influenced behavior. In one experiment, passers-by who had recently overheard conversations mentioning the value of helping were more likely to help strangers if they were walking within sight of cemeteries.

    The researchers suggest one reason for such effects (based on something called terror management theory) is that  "people deal with their awareness of mortality by upholding cultural beliefs and seeking to become part of something larger and more enduring than themselves, such as nations or religions." 

    So that is my happy thought for the day: Think about your death, it is good for you and those around you!

    P.S. Here is the source: "When Death is Good for Life: Considering the Positive Trajectories of Terror Management," published online on April 5, 2012, in Personality and Social Psychology Review. 

  • The Narcissistic Personality Quiz

    I sent out a tweet the other day about a study showing that men who score high on a narcissism test appear to experience more stress than those who score low (but not narcissistic women).  Stress was measured by "cortisol levels,"   a hormone that  "signals the level of activation of the body’s key stress response system, the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis." 

    You can see a report about study here.  I thought the most interesting part was the link to the 40 item Narcissistic Personality Quiz, which is based on the measure in this paper: Raskin, R. & Terry, H. (1988). A Principal-Components Analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and Further Evidence of Its Construct Validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5). Note that Journal of Personality and Social Psychology is one of the best and most rigorous psychology journals, so the source is excellent.

    Try taking the quiz. I just did and scored an "8,' which suggests a low level of narcissism.  I confess, however, that I am wondering if my low score was a reflection of my lack of narcissism or of my knowledge of the narcissism literature in concert with a bit of self-delusion.  I also confess that I completed it a second time as if I were one especially narcissistic boss that I once worked with.  That boss (in my opinion) earns a 32 — a very high score as above 20 indicates narcissism.  The quiz omits one thing this person did which indicates narcissism:  It was amazing how, no matter what the topic, how within 3 minutes, every conversation with that boss always became conversation about what a successful and impressive person he was and all the people who admired him and his work. 

     If you really are the mood for self-assessment, you can take both this quiz and the (less scientific) Asshole Rating Self-Exam or ARSE.   That way you can find out if you are a narcissist, a certified asshole, or both!

    Enjoy.

  • Richard Feynman On The Folly Of Crafting Precise Definitions

    One of my best friends in graduate school was a former physics major named Larry Ford.  When behavioral scientists started pushing for precise definitions of concepts like effectiveness and leadership, he would sometimes confuse them (even though Larry is a very precise thinker) by arguing "there is a negative relationship between precision and accuracy."   I just ran into a quote from the amazing Nobel winner Richard Feynman that makes a similar point in a lovely way:

    "We can't define anything precisely. If we attempt to, we get into that paralysis of thought that comes to philosophers… one saying to the other: "you don't know what you are talking about!". The second one says: "what do you mean by talking? What do you mean by you? What do you mean by know?""

    Feynman's quote reminded me of the opening pages of the 1958 classic "Organizations" by James March (quite possibly the most prestigious living organizational theorist, and certainly, one of the most charming academics on the planet) and Herbert Simon (another Nobel winner).  They open the book with a great quote that sometimes drives doctoral students and other scholars just crazy.  They kick-off by saying:

    "This is a book about a theory of formal organizations.  It is easier, and probably more useful, to give examples of formal organizations than to define them."

    After listing a bunch of examples of organizations including the Red Cross and New York State Highway Department, they note in words that would have pleased Feynman:

    "But for the present purposes we need not trouble ourselves with the precise boundaries to be drawn around an organization or the exact distinction between an "organization" and a "non-organization."  We are dealing with empirical phenomena, and the world has an uncomfortable way of not permitting itself to be fitted into clean classifications." 

    I must report, however, that for the second edition of the book, published over 20 years later, the authors elected to insert a short definition in the introduction: 

    "Organizations are systems of coordinated action among individuals and groups whose preferences, information, interests, or knowledge differ." 

    When I read this,  I find myself doing what Feynman complained about.  I think of things they left out: What about norms? What about emotions?  I think of situations where it might not apply: Doesn't a business owned and operated by one person count as an organization?  I think of the possible overemphasis on differences: What about all the times and ways that people and groups  in organizations have similar preferences, information, interests, and knowledge? Isn't that part of what an organization is as well?  I could go on and on.

    I actually think it is a pretty good definition, but my bias is still that I like original approach, as they did such a nice job of arguing, essentially, that if they tried to get more precise, they would sacrifice accuracy. Nonetheless, I confess that I still love trying to define things and believe that trying to do so can help clarifying your thinking.  You could argue that while the outcome, in the end, will always be flawed and imprecise, the process is usually helpful and there are many times when it is useful pretend that you have a precise and accurate definition even if you don't (such as when you are developing metrics). 

  • Matt May’s Shibumi Strategy: What a Lovely Book!

    I have had Matt May's new book, The Shibumi Strategy: A Powerful Way to Create Meanningful Change, sitting on my desk for a few weeks, and I finally picked-up. Wow. I read it from cover to cover this morning. It is sort of a business book, sort of a change book, and sort of a self-help book… it defies classification in some ways, but that is one of the things that makes it so great.  A quick and satisfying read that made me think of ways I might lead a calmer and more constructive life. 

    Below is my review on Amazon; also check out this one at Fast Company:

    I am one not a Zen or touchy-feely guy, so I began reading this book with considerable skepticism. But once I got past the first page or two, I was hooked, the story is great, it feels authentic and emotionally compelling, and as it unfolds it teaches you how to apply the Zen mindset and concepts to be more effective at what you do, more patient, to avoid pushing too hard, to keep pressing forward during tough times, and always, to chip away at small wins. It is nothing like a typical business book, and as a result, far more fun, satisfying, and useful then most other business books. It is a bit like Randy Komisar's The Monk and the Riddle, which is a great book that sold a lot, but it is even better and I think even more useful for most of us.

  • Work Matters Passes 1.5 Million Page Views

    I just noticed this little milestone. According to stats supplied by Typepad, Work Matters passed 1.5 million page views this week (1514242 at the moment). Typepad also shows Work Matters has averaged 946.99 page views per day.  I've done 1002 posts (wow… what a blabbermouth) and you've made 4404 comments.

    It seems like I just started blogging yesterday, but I wrote my first post on about June 10th, 2006. It just said "hi, I am blogging" basically, and I deleted it (now I am sorry). My first substantive post was called Brainstorming in the Wall Street Journal in which I commented, and challenged, research and stories suggesting that "brainstorming doesn't work." My next post was called Masters of the Obvious, which argued that the best managers don't do magical, mysterious, or massively complex things well — they use widely known, well-understood, and simple methods, and implement them relentessly and well.  This theme perists in Good Boss, Bad Boss and in this HBR post.

    Looking ahead, I am thinking about finding an alternative to Typepad as I find it most user-unfriendly.  The editor is awful and does strange and unexpected things to my text that I can't figureo ut how to repair.  If you have any suggestions, please let me know.  Also, will keep blogging away, but anticipate that my range of topics will get broader as I am starting a couple new projects.  I also expect that I will blog a bit less in the coming year or so because I will start writing one, possibly two, new books. I also expect, knowing me, that at some point I will stop blogging.  I can't predict when, but I give myself standing permission to stop doing things when they are no fun any longer!

    As I am in a reflective mood about this blog, it would be great to hear some feedback from readers. What do you want more of? What do you want less of?  Any ideas about how to improve things?

    Finally, I want to thank all of you for reading my blog over the years, for your comments and emails, and for all the wisdom you've provided over the years.

     

     

  • Sociomateriality: More Academic Jargon Monoxide

    We academics do many things to invite deserved ridicule and parody.  Perhaps the most vile habit– especially among behavioral scientists like me — is we invent or spread new words that are just absurd abuses of the English language.   Academics usually try to justify and  glorify this practice by arguing that no word in the English language quite captures what they want to say; but in truth, I think we do this because to show others that we are so damn smart that mere "civilians" can't possibly understand our brilliant ideas — or, worse yet, because if we spoke clear English, they would realize how absurdly simple and obvious our ideas actually were.  For example, about 20 years ago, I recall an article that ripped sociologists for using the term "mimetic isomorphism," which means, in English, copying other organizations. 

    Unfortunately, along these discouraging lines, I just got sent a PDF of an academic article on "Sociomateriality"  (The full title is "Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work, and Organization." I feel ike I am lying or it is April Fool's Day, but it is a real article by accomplished scholars.  I will not name the authors, as I consider one a friend, although she may not feel the same about me after reading this post.  But it is completely beyond me why this word had to be invented (or perhaps imported from someplace else) and, frankly, I refuse to read the article because using such language is just absurd as it invites deserved criticism.

    In the words of Polly LaBarre, we really don't need more jargon monoxide. I confess that I am sometimes guilty of this sin.  When I have been, it happens because I am unable to take my reader's perspective, or worse, because I suffering a bout of arrogance or insecurity.  I once titled a co-authored article (with Anat Rafaeli)  on the good cop, bad cop technique "Emotional Contrast Strategies as Means of Social Influence."  I really had no answer, except "I was feeling insecure," when a friend asked my why on earth I didn't call it "The Good Cop, Bad Cop Strategy."  And note this jargon monoxide was not my co-author's fault, she wanted that simple and clear title too.   Indeed, we even studied actual cops (along with bill collectors) for the article!

    To return to the "Sociomateriality" article; it appears to be on an important subject, but I hope the authors can find a simple word or two to explain what they mean by it to normal human beings.

  • A Rather Personal Interview With Gretchen Over at The Happiness Project

    The amazing Gretchen Rubin, bestselling author of The Happiness Project, posted a rather personal interview about what makes me happy — and unhappy — over at her blog.  Frankly, it was one of those things were she sent me the questions, I typed out the answers without censoring myself and did not think about it again until they appeared.  I winced a little when I read it because it has a bit more personal information than I probably should have revealed, but I think it is accurate.  She calls it "Be Yourself, But Keep Your Inner Jerk In Check."  Here is where the headline came from:

    Gretchen asked:

    Is there a happiness mantra or motto that you’ve found very helpful? (e.g., I remind myself to “Be Gretchen.”)

    I answered:

    There are three things that I say to myself:

    “Think about how others around you feel, not how you feel or what you want.” (This makes me less selfish)

    “Focus doing the best you can, not on doing better than others.”
    (This focuses me on intrinsic qualities and rewards, not social
    comparison and competition – I am much happier and nicer when I don’t
    see life as a contest… and as Dan Pink’s book Drive shows, focusing intrinsic rewards might make me creative too).


    Also, I use a variation of Be Gretchen, but because I have the capacity to be a jerk (this is certainly a reason I wrote The No Asshole Rule), I say to myself like “Be Yourself, but keep your inner jerk in check.

    You can see the rest of the interview here; I have been focusing mostly on promoting Good Boss, Bad Boss these days, but Gretchen's questions made me stop and think about what matters most. So although I might have edited out a few things if I was to do it again, it was most constructive to be forced to stop and think about more important things during this rather crazy time in my life. 

    Thanks Gretchen!  As I have written before about her book, she wrote a great self-help book for people (like me) who in theory hate those kinds of books!

  • Aristotle on How to Avoid Criticism

    I was just reading Jonathan Fields great blog "Awake at the Wheel" and came upon a wonderful little quote from Aristotle : “To avoid criticism say
    nothing, do nothing, be nothing.”       Jonathan's last pair of comments are especially nice:

    Sure, criticism hurts.
    But a life unlived hurts more.

  • 17 Things I Believe: Updated and Expanded

    In gearing up for my next book, Good Boss, Bad Boss, I am putting together a list of "12 Things that Good Bosses Believe," which you will soon see on this blog and elsewhere.  In the process, I took two or three ideas from my old list of  "15 Things I Believe" that has been on this blog for a long time. So I decided it was a good time to update and expand that list, as I have not changed much in the last couple years.  So I spent the morning updating the new list, now "17 Things I Believe," which you can see to the left.

    The first 9 items aren't really changed much, although one or two of the links are updated.  Items 10 through 16 are all new.  And item 17, which I removed for awhile, is back because I thought it was important to remind others — and myself — that there is a lot more to life than work.  Here is the new list. As always, I would love your comments, and as this is a pretty big change, if you have ideas about items you might add (or subtract) if it was your list, or that you think I should add or subtract, I would love to hear your reactions.  Here it is (and note that #17 has no link):

    1.
    Sometimes the best management is no management at all — first do no
    harm!

    2.
    Indifference is as important as passion.

    3.
    In organizational life, you can have influence over others or you
    can have freedom from others, but you can't have both at the same time.

    4.
    Saying smart things and giving smart answers are important. Learning to
    listen to others and to ask smart questions is more important.

    5.
    You get what you expect from people. This is especially true when it
    comes to selfish behavior; unvarnished self-interest is a learned
    social norm, not an unwavering feature of human behavior.

    6.
    Avoid pompous jerks whenever possible. They not only can make you
    feel bad about yourself, chances are that you will eventually start
    acting like them.

    7.
    The best test of a person's character is how he or she treats those
    with less power.

    8. Err on the side of
    optimism and positive energy in all things.

    9.
    It is good to ask yourself, do I have enough? Do you really need more
    money, power, prestige, or stuff?

    10.
    Anyone can learn to be creative, it just takes a lot of practice and
    little confidence

    11.
    "Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong."

    12.
    If you are an expert, seek-out novices or experts in other fields. If
    you are a novice, seek out experts.

    13.
    Sutton's Law: “If you think that you have a new idea, you are wrong.
    Someone else probably already had it. This idea isn’t original either; I
    stole it from someone else”

    14.
    "Am I a success or a failure?" is not a very useful question

    15.
    The world would be a better place if people slept more and took more
    naps

    16.
    Strive for simplicity and competence, but embrace the confusion and
    messiness along the way.

    17. Jimmy Maloney is right, work is
    an overrated activity.