I had a very interesting conversation today about learning and the evolution of how people learn at the Sales Leadership Conference in Philly.

There are many theories, the experiential learner, the person who learns through structure. Concepts that have been explored for centuries at all levels. As a parent it manifests as your beliefs in public, private, Montessori, fully without structure, home schooling and on an on. In the end, I believe there isn’t a one size fits all. We will all learn in different manners and it is about access, so that we can learn in the way that best suits us.

But one thing that is becoming very clear is that learning is changing in that what you know isn’t as important, it is about knowing how to sift through information and find knowledge. Sure, a base level of information is important, but knowing how to find perspective on a problem and apply it is much more important.

Seth Godin was a headline speaker and he had an interesting perspective on the evolution of learning, as it relates to his theories on tribes (I am about to watch his video’s on TED). He did a little test on a few children aged 11-14 who were A students. He put a bobbing bird in front of them and asked them to explain how it worked. They looked side to side and then the 11 year old pulled out a pen and said ‘Teach us how it works’. His point was that getting an explanation is easy. You can get that on the web, on Wikipedia in an instance. He stated if you can write it down and explain it, it probably isn’t worth anything and teaching that young person how it worked is of no value.

But what is of value is creative thinking. The ability for those children to puzzle out that idea, to be creative, to figure it out. To think and solve problems. Something that our formulaic schools system is not interested in, school is focused on compliance and having people fit in. Can you imagine trying to explain to a teacher the method to teaching creativity? He also pointed to the games that we play as kids. He said ‘remember the game Candyland? We all played it and the rules are this – pick a card, do what it says’. Become sheep.

I always worry that the rigid approach to learning kills creativity. As one HBR blogger put it in his article ‘What Leaders can Learn from Children’ :

the curiosity of a child is incomparable. Children ask questions because they want to know. Naturally curious, hungry for information, and constantly churning new facts to understand the world around.

Seth then put up a quote which I found rather ominous:

‘The reason why they want you to fit in is so that when you do, they can ignore you’

I think he is right on the mark. In a world drowning with information, it isn’t about what you can memorize. It isn’t even about what you can find (although it is good to be able to find information quickly in the sea of data) and one really has to question the value of a test that grades based on the quality of your memory (when the reality is, the internet is a big memory bank – available virtually everywhere). It is about how you use that information to be creative, to come up with ideas, how you interpret it.

I also suggest that the vast majority of tests should be open book. Find the information fast, then do something with it – and be graded on how you use it.

And of course, challenge the norm. Something that hasn’t ever been a real personal challenge (smile).

Last week marked back to school for University and once again, business schools will fall flat with regard to teaching new business people about sales and sales management, leaving it for corporation to train ‘raw’ students who have yet to acquire the most basic of sales or sales management skills.

Many training organizations suggest that the sales training that is happening in corporations isn’t enough:

“Sales management training is the category of sales training addressed with the least frequency – less than annually, if at all.”

• American Society for Training and Development State of Sales Training – Research Study 2009

I would wager that ‘coaching’ regardless of management class or skill, is probably under trained. Thank goodness for books.

This weekend I read Esquire’s write up on Newt Gingrich, the disgraced Republican House Speaker who is making a come-back and is a clear runner for the Presidential candidacy along with other notables, such as Sarah Palin.

It is a tawdry article, about his multiple affairs, multiple divorces and Republican leadership. One particular quote really left me slack jawed:

He asked her to tolerate the affair, an offer she refused (referring to his 2nd wife).

He’d just returned from Erie, Pennsylvania, where he’d given a speech full of high sentiments about compassion and family values.

The next night, they sat talking out on their back patio in Georgia. She said, "How do you give that speech and do what you’re doing?"

"It doesn’t matter what I do," he answered. "People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live."

Reminds me of the theory of cognitive dissonance, which is so key to human interaction, to organizational success:

Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions.^[2] Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.

Perhaps the Republican Party will only find itself again if it can put to bed fundamental conflicts such as:

• Foundation based upon capitalism while spending trillions on defence and big government, with no balanced budget and the danger of economic collapse due to debts that become unserviceable. Ironic that Clinton paid down US debt like a mad man.
• Reported Christian values as the foundation while reducing taxes to the rich (Remember, the eye of the needle) and refusing to spend on things such as universal health care (the golden rule comes to mind)

Seems like the Republicans need a leader who does what he/she says, desperately. Every organization does.

I read a great quote this morning:

‘A wise man learns from the experience of others; a fool by his own’

Life’s greatest lessons can be learned by watching others succeed or fail. If I look back on the last 4 years, these are definitely the most valuable of lessons and I have seen some very interesting ones. Always be watching and learning.

I have often heard a story about Bill Gates. It could be an outright lie, a falsehood, I am not sure. But it does make a point. The story goes like this; Bill Gates is famous for his abrupt manner and impatience. It was related that during people reviews or reviews of projects, he would often cut people off as they went through the ‘good’ of the project or how they had been successful in their role and say ‘Don’t tell me what you did right. Tell me what you did wrong, and how you learned from it’. His abrupt – bullying style is well known, so it does not seem like a stretch.

Personally, I have seen it time and time again. Big wins are often celebrated, but the little wins are forgotten, celebrating the journey toward success seems to never be a priority even though it is clearly correlated to success in adults and children (when done correctly). Of course, I have also been in work environments where the praise is unwarranted and the culture is one that ignores the negative, blind to the challenges ahead, which is equally as frustrating and damaging. A point that Steven DeMaio in his article ‘When being positive is positively meaningless’.

In the end, the above represent two ends of the spectrum. The Bill Gates ‘don’t praise’ mentality to the other end where praise is meaningless and dangerous. So it must be about balance. Providing critical feedback to help people learn, progress and be more successful while seeking opportunities to find people doing things right, making the effort. I like the advice in ‘The Art of Giving Praise’:

• Be truly specific
• Don’t confuse politeness with praise
• Praise with action, not just words.
• Don’t pad criticism with empty praise

And I would add, be cautious of praising skill versus effort. The article ‘How Not to Talk to Your Kids’ is a truly scary example of the dangers of the wrong kinds of praise (I have seen this one time and time again in kids):

Dweck sent four female research assistants into New York fifth-grade classrooms. The researchers would take a single child out of the classroom for a nonverbal IQ test consisting of a series of puzzles—puzzles easy enough that all the children would do fairly well. Once the child finished the test, the researchers told each student his score, then gave him a single line of praise. Randomly divided into groups, some were praised for their intelligence. They were told, “You must be smart at this.” Other students were praised for their effort: “You must have worked really hard.”

Why just a single line of praise? “We wanted to see how sensitive children were,” Dweck explained. “We had a hunch that one line might be enough to see an effect.”

Then the students were given a choice of test for the second round. One choice was a test that would be more difficult than the first, but the researchers told the kids that they’d learn a lot from attempting the puzzles. The other choice, Dweck’s team explained, was an easy test, just like the first. Of those praised for their effort, 90 percent chose the harder set of puzzles. Of those praised for their intelligence, a majority chose the easy test. The “smart” kids took the cop-out.

Seek balance.

The HBR article Envy at Work is an interesting insight into the human mind and the potential for destructive behaviour when inter-team competitiveness goes sideways. Personally, I have always been a proponent of sharing best practices whenever your team has one and saying thank-you as much as possible.

But, that is not always enough. The following quote really struck me, this goes deeper, right to human nature:

Although the German word schadenfreude – delighting in others’ misery – rapidly entered the English lexicon, the term mudita (from Pali,an ancient language of India), used by Buddhists to mean ‘rejoicing in the good fortune of others’, has not. It is the rare person whose automatic impulse is to feel glad when meeting someone smarter, prettier or richer.

An interesting point and a reminder that to build a great team, you have to watch for the warning signs. In the article they talk about one case where the employee left the company because he believed that his colleague was getting all of the credit for his hard work. The article focusing on how we, as individuals, can realize when we are feeling envious so that we can stop destructive behaviour.

One has to wonder, had he had a good manager who was watching for signs, could he have been coached out of the situation? Maybe he just needed coaching on how to represent the good things he was doing each day (so that he did not feel that someone else was taking credit) or on how to come to grips with the feelings of envy and resolve them? It was clear that he needed coaching on conflict resolution.

A great follow-up article should focus on how a good manager could have helped resolve it within a team. Personally, this article could be extrapolated well beyond work to the home life. How many children are encouraged to compete by parents? Leading to inter-family envy and dysfunction. I know that was the norm with young boys in families as I grew up, where there was always this competitiveness and I still see it today, parents encouraging their children to compete. Doesn’t that create envy and increase the propensity for dysfunction as the children compete for parental praise?

My wife has a philosophy of encouraging the boys to be competitive, but never against each other. Instead, encouraging them to support each other, help each other succeed and always seeking opportunity to raise each boy’s confidence up a level. I think it is brilliant, counter cultural and one of the reasons why our boys are the best of friends.

Mudita.

Catching up on my HBR reading. The article General McChrystal’s Failure of Followership has an interesting point of view on why the General has failed as a leader in Afghanistan:

The story provides more evidence that McChrystal is not now, as he never was, the kind of a follower you want as a leader. In contrast to the old days, when manly virtues seemed to suffice, in the 21st century this style of leadership will no longer wash. As the delirious reception to Obama’s nomination of General David Petreus to replace McChrystal testifies, what we want now are leaders who can be, simultaneously, followers, commanders who can cooperate and collaborate as skillfully as they can command and control. It’s a lesson as applicable to the boardroom as it is to the battle field — and one better learned before, not after, the fact.

Having just watched the Green Zone, it continues to be clear that this will require the best of leaders.

The leadership call that President Obama made yesterday, sacking his top General in Afghanistan, represents a good topic for debate.

When I was last interviewing for a leadership role I was asked a question I had never been asked before;

You have a super star sales rep. I mean that rep is blowing it out of the water, all the time. But the rep is disruptive, not being a good team player. Not following process, being demanding, among other things. What do you do?

My answer was pretty simple. In that case i would set expectations, encourage mentorship, actively engage, coach as things happened, and seek results and change. If there is not agreement to seek change (the rep didn’t see the problem at hand, which is common. Many people are in denial of their own shortcomings), then i would take a more formal route like a plan.
I wonder if the President missed an opportunity here, considering the following;

1. The general is doing a good job and making progress in an untenable situation where others have not.
2. The guy clearly cares, his heart and soul is in it.
3. The Afghan President wanted the general to stay as he believed that more change at this juncture is really bad (I would agree).
4. There was a real opportunity to demonstrate that he could look beyond the insubordination, that it wasnt about him, that it was about the soldiers and the Afghan people.
5. That the appropriately chastised general would realize that his leader spared him, and would invest his gratitude for not ending a long career into a serious attitude change.

In the end, we will never know because it is all about that last point. The general has been involved in 2 cover up scandals, has shot off his mouth before and is clearly trying to play general and politician (which he is clearly not adept at  .. He is a tool, to be employed by a skilled leader). He also prides himself a little too much on being the rebel or cowboy. If achieving 5 was not possible then he made the right decision.
After all, success will be all about people and the team, not one general.

I was reading through an article on a new company that is entering a mature Canadian market last week. In the article, the CEO made the point that of the five companies trying to enter the mature market, only one would survive. And in a telling statement, he was quoted as follows:

“I know I’m going to be that one”.

What a curious use of the word “I”. I know the impression it left on me.

To this day, I clearly remember how I learned the “I” lesson six years ago. There was a new incoming President and I had a 1:1 with him to walk him through the status of the business I was managing. After the 1:1, I was given this piece of feedback:

                “Michael used the word “I” to much”.

“I” have never forgotten that. I was crushed, but “I” was very self conscious of the word from then on. A great lesson. It sounds trite, over used … a cliché, but there is no “I” in team. As a mentor once taught me:

“Focus on the success of your team and the people working with your team and your success is a forgone conclusion”

Remember “WE”.

The N.Y. Times article Hooked on Gadgets, and Paying a Mental Price discusses how people are no longer living in the moment, buried under by the ‘email a minute’ culture and too linked to technology.

Mr. Campbell continues to struggle with the effects of the deluge of data. Even after he unplugs, he craves the stimulation he gets from his electronic gadgets. He forgets things like dinner plans, and he has trouble focusing on his family.

His wife, Brenda, complains, “It seems like he can no longer be fully in the moment.”

Scientists say juggling e-mail, phone calls and other incoming information can change how people think and behave. They say our ability to focus is being undermined by bursts of information.

These play to a primitive impulse to respond to immediate opportunities and threats. The stimulation provokes excitement — a dopamine squirt — that researchers say can be addictive. In its absence, people feel bored.

That is a very dangerous assertion. That in the absence of activity, people feel bored. The act of doing something, of being busy is the ‘rush’ or the goal. An old boss of mine used to make a comment when I would talk about my activity level. He would first ask what I was doing, assessing whether my activities were actually productive or time filling. And often he would help me realize that many of the things I was doing were just ‘busy work’. They were not progressing me to the goal, at that time – the goal was selling more.

Email is a dangerous feeder of the ‘busy work’ feeling. And just because we are busy, it does not mean that we will be successful. It is an artificial sense of accomplishment. There is no correlation to success.

It is all about what you are doing. As an aside, I frequently turn my Blackberry off.

A leader’s job is to look into the future and see the organization, not as it is, but as it should be.

 

-Jack Welch

Last week I had to do a few big presentations. With the ‘return from vacation’ workload, it was not a good week for that because I believe in prep. When I present, I follow a couple guidelines:

1. Take a hand in the content. The best presentations are when the speaker has a sense of ownership of content.

2. Make sure the content suits the audience. Never do a ‘canned’ presentation. There is always something you can customize to connect with the audience.

3. Ensure the content has visual appeal. I have seen my fair share of presentations that have the right content but are just bullet points on a PowerPoint. It is like a first impression, visual appeal is important.

4. Simplify. Way too many PowerPoint’s are chucked full of bullet points. Less is more.

5. Check your number of slides. If you have 45 minutes and 45 slides, it will not work. 15 slides maximum in that case. It is hard to judge the rule of the thumb, but remember number 4 and do some math to figure out the maximum number of slides.

6. Most important practice. For my presentation I “dry ran” it at least 6 times. Through the process I locked down my anecdotes, noticed a few flow challenges and ensured that I knew the key points of each slide. This allowed me to think less about what I was presenting, it came across as more natural and I was significantly less stressed.

I would say that number 6 is one of the biggest mistakes people make. I do it in front of the mirror (old school) or while driving in the car or by locking myself in a room. Way too many people come into a presentation and are running it for the first time – and it is so clear.

Our boys have done speeches in front of their grade, peers, classes as part of the regular curriculum for years and whenever that happens – we ensure there is a ton of practice out loud, at home.

It works for 12 year olds. It works for 41 year olds.

I was processing paperwork over the weekend (translation: cleaning up my office) and I came across notes from a leadership conference I went to a year or two ago at Tylney Hall (click the link to see what a simple UK hotel looks like). During the conference they discussed what it takes to be a ‘Leader of Tomorrow’. The key elements:

• Raises people to new levels of performance through recognition and praise. A leader who says thanks.
• Creates teams that cross inter-organizational boundaries.
• Builds a team that is enthusiastic, enjoys themselves and has hope.
• Beating the goals is a team habit, accomplished by pulling every lever available, driving efficiency and by building a great business engine.
• Connects individually through EQ/IQ and a varied leadership style.
• Leads by example.

A few good points to ponder.

“Not all readers are leaders, but all leaders must be readers”      Harry Truman

Last week I was listening to a speak talk about leading teams. He had a very interesting point of view (I paraphrase):

Business is not a family. Families tolerate dysfunctional behaviour.

Business is about being part of a team. You do not get born into a team. You try out for a team. You work hard and practice to get on a team. Teams do not tolerate poor performance, because it brings the entire team down. It is a privilege to be part of a team.

A very interesting point of view.

I have never been one to watch sports. I enjoy playing sports, although I am drawn to golf and recently tennis over others. Of course, as a kid growing up in Canada all we did was play hockey .. On the pond, on the canal, at recess, in the rink and of course, Saturday night was "Hockey Night in Canada" on the black and white TV.

But I never really enjoyed watching it. Which is why, shocking as it might sound, despite living in England and working for a company that had tickets at Arsenal and Wembley .. I never caught a single football game. One day ….

That being said, I was drawn to the movie "The Damn United" on the plane. Not because of the football, but because of the story. I was curious and it didn’t let me down. The summary:

After tackling Tony Blair and David Frost, actor Michael Sheen turns to another driven historical figure: football manager Brian Clough. Talented but abrasive, Clough alienates some of those around him, including his rival, Don Revie. When Clough has the chance to coach Leeds, Revie’s former team, he takes on the role of the manager of the country’s best soccer team. Also starring Timothy Spall, Jim Broadbent, and Colm Meaney, this film marks the fourth time screenwriter Peter Morgan (THE QUEEN, FROST/NIXON) has crafted a character for Sheen

I am not sure why actor Michael Sheen is drawn to playing arrogant characters, but he was as good in this movie as Brian Clough as he was in Frost/Nixon playing the driven, but equally arrogant David Frost. The story is fantastic, covering the life of a great English leader as he rises, drops and rises again.

And as it concluded, I reflected on a few lessons from the life of Brian Clough, who is “widely considered to be one of the greatest managers of the English game and the greatest English manager never to manage the England team”:

• Teams feed on passion. On drive. On setting a goal and going for it. Set your goals low .. And you will perform low. Set your goals high, train hard, work hard, and you will get there.
• Success is all about people. Brian achieved greatness when he inspired his team, when he built the team and they worked together. Like hundreds before and after him, his failure in Leeds was all about people. His success before and after was all about people.
• The higher up you go, the faster you can fall.  Brian Clough let his arrogance and pettiness blind him. At his peak, he abandoned the person who helped get him there and paid the price.
• The greatest lessons come from failure. If you are not making mistakes, you are not pushing hard enough and learning. Of course, you also need to recognize they are mistakes and learn. Fascinating to watch him go through that lesson.
• It is never too late. To make a change, to apologize if you hurt someone, to see a situation as it is and change it. After everything he did, after all the people he hurt, he wiped himself off, begged forgiveness and started again, to go on to even greater success with his partner right beside him.

While this is a fictional portrayal (who knows how much is real), it is a great movie, with one or two things to reflect on.

Sent from an old colleague, his own personal list which makes an interesting read:

The 11 Rules of Email

These rules were born of necessity and if followed properly can help return some time and sanity into your day.

They are currently being published in Issues 8 and 9 of The Naked Leader’s “Leader Board” newsletter.

1. Inbox management – Clear your inbox every day to less than 30 emails (so the list dos not reach the bottom of outlook page). Set up folders covering each area you work on – or groups you deal with and religiously file – even if you have not always read. That way you can go back and review by topic and avoid the stress of an overfull inbox.  (Note: Not in line with Getting Things Done, but fair point!) 

2. Responding – Don’t be too quick to respond to email requests – emails are dead easy to send, and often hard and time consuming to respond to. I train people I work with and clients to call me if they want something urgent so that I know whether they are really serious and why they need a response.

3. Set a Delay – Set a sending delay of at least 2 minutes on your Outbox – it gives you just enough time to delete that accidental email. Better still you can set it for specific addresses such as clients.   (Note: I use this one all the time. I cannot tell you the number of times where I have gone ‘oops’, reopened the mail and added one last little thing or double checked something)

4. Double Check Addresses – Double check your address lines in email before you send – outlook auto insert puts odd names in there (see 3 above!).

5. Arguments – Never, ever have an argument by email – everyone loses and it is recoded for posterity. If you sense a disagreement coming, make a call or organise a face to face meeting and then circulate the conclusions by email.

6. Favourite Form of Communication – Email is not everyone’s favourite form of communication. Some people are better “live”, others like to use the phone, and others respond (even in this day and age) to formal letters or memos. Try and find out which form your key people like and use if for important communications.

7. Email Content – The Daily Mail Test I used to work at the BBC right at the time when the big circular email scandals were taking place. We developed a very simple test for writing email content – don’t write anything in an email that you would not be happy for your mother to read on the front page of the Daily Mail.

8. Circulation List – When you need to respond to an email with a wide circulation on it stop and think. Do I need to send this to everyone? Is this “thread” wasting a lot of people’s time? (You can be sure that it is).

9. Interruptions – While internal emails can be a huge waste of time (is it so hard to either talk to someone?), they can also avoid an unnecessary interruptions. Interrupting someone at their desk wastes on average 11 minutes per interruption, so while talk is best,  email may be a useful method to log a question or thought. Equally making a note and saving it for a lunchtime chat is also a good option.

10. Getting Something Actioned – if you are sending an email looking for someone to act you need to flag this everywhere ACTION REQUIRED in the title usually means it gets read. Flagging specific asks under: “Action: John to check this issue and confirm.” Makes it really clear who and what you are asking. This only works with people you know well.

11. Getting Your Message Across – people are all really pressured by email but scan the title an first few lines. If you need to get a response from people who are busy or don’t know you very well, construct your title carefully (proposition?) and get the message over in three paragraphs – no more. If you want approval, ask for it by asking them to merely reply to that email and type “yes”. You would be surprised how well this works – it’s so easy for them to respond!

A few interesting tips to keep email productive and in control. I would add a couple extra:

12. Don’t send email on the weekend unless it is truly urgent – your employees or peers may read it. Try to give them a break, and keep them off their Blackberry so they come in ready to go on Monday.

13. Avoid ‘Reply All’ at all cost – it just clogs the system.

14. Ask yourself one question over and over – do I really need to send this email? The world has enough email. If the answer is probably not or not really, then don’t.

I was skimming through a book that I have read a few times, Major Account Sales Strategy: Rackham, this weekend looking for a particular data point when I came across this great advice:

We usually find ourselves giving two pieces of advice. The first, simply, is to reduce paperwork. In some organizations salespeople spend up to 10 hours a week completing paperwork in the name of the selling strategy. Much of this time is unproductive; much of the information is faked to a point where it’s an unreliable guide for management action. A measure of the health of a sales organization is the amount of time it spends relating to customers compared with the time it takes relating to the internal needs of the company. By this measure many organizations are sick, and we’ve seen some that border on terminally ill. So our first piece of advice is usually to cut paperwork.

Our second piece of advice is to build a selling strategy that focuses on the steps the customer takes in making a decision, not on the steps the salesperson take in making a sale. The two are not the same. As we’ll see in future chapters, strategies based on the selling process are usually far less effective than strategies based on the buying process. Our problem, as salespeople, is that it is far easier to understand the steps of selling than those of buying. And it’s far more dangerous, because we tend to base strategy on what we understand, rather than what’s effective.

Having worked in organizations that valued the process over the content or progress of the sales organization, I cannot agree more. As for the second piece of advice, that is one I need to rethink. You always gain something when you re-read the best books, kind of like finding another joke inside a Monty Python movie that you have seen 100 times.

Addition: from HBR, article ‘Wisdom on Improving Sales and Marketing’:

In your career, what’s the biggest lesson you’ve learned about sales process improvement?

To be patient and to work for progress in small steps …  the more successful they (sales reps) are, the more resistant to change they become. Show them the big picture, reinforce process changes with tools and good management, and make it simple.

It is all about making it simple and selling how the change helps everyone. Having been at the receiving end, I know that when I understood the ‘why’, I would buy in. Bully me, or make it too complex … and forget it. Good thoughts.

I have often blogged about one of my favourite sales lessons: ‘It takes 5 no’s to make a yes’. Reading today’s HBR blog, the article ‘How Not Achieving Something is Key to Achieving it’ serves as a proof point. In it, Peter Bregman makes a key point about his learning experience as he tried to win consulting business:

So I set up a meeting with Lily. Who cancelled. As I prepared to reschedule I noticed something unexpected: I started to enjoy the process of trying to get in, the challenge of making the sale. It became a game to me and my goal was to keep playing until, at some point, I’d say the right thing to the right person and get my foot in the door. I was, surprisingly, having fun.

And I was starting to be good at it. Scheduling. Rescheduling. Finding a way to keep the conversation going. You’d think it wouldn’t be something hard or useful to become good at but you’d be wrong on both counts.

Most of our jobs hinge on repetition. That’s how we become good at anything. The problem is we give up too soon because anything we do repetitively becomes boring.

That is, unless we have a peculiar taste for the task; if it captures our interest. For some reason, maybe we don’t even understand — and we don’t have to — we enjoy it.

That’s how I learned how to do a handstand. It always seemed completely out of reach for me. But then someone told me they learned as an adult. So I figured I could learn too. It took six months but now I can, somewhat reliably, stand on my hands.

Which has led me to believe that anyone can do anything. As long as three conditions exist:

1. You want to achieve it

2. You believe you can achieve it

3. You enjoy trying to achieve it

We often think we only need the first two but it’s the third condition that’s most important. The trying is the day-to-day reality. And trying to achieve something is very different than achieving it. It’s the opposite actually. It’s not achieving it.

The entire article is a good read. Peter then goes on to talk about the Outliers and the rule of 10,000 hours, which simply states that it is not innate talent that gets someone to the top in a field (be it sports, music or other field) but practice.

In his book Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell discusses research done at the Berlin Academy of Music. Researchers divided violin students into three categories: the stars, the good performers, and the ones who would become teachers but not performers. It turns out that the number one predictor of which category a violinist fell in was the number of hours of practice.

The future teachers had practiced 4,000 hours in their lifetime. The good performers, 8,000 hours. And those who were categorized as stars? Every single one of them had practiced at least 10,000 hours.

And here’s the compelling part: There wasn’t a single violinist who had practiced 10,000 hours who wasn’t a star. In other words, 10,000 hours of practice guaranteed you’d be a star violinist. According to Gladwell, 10,000 hours of practice is the magic number to become the best at anything.

I read the Outliers finally last month. It made me think; reading, learning, practicing, taking courses, they all add up to success. It also dispels the myth that the truly talented are just ‘born’ to be there. Or as Peter Drucker says in the 111 Thoughts on Selling:

                Work hard beats work smart. (mostly).

All about rolling up those sleeves. Management, selling, sports … you name it, no money for the person who chooses to be a coaster.

I read this interesting passage in Launching a Leadership Revolution:

A leader begins investing time in important issues, and then gets interrupted by urgent issues. Gradually the urgent issues eat away the time the leader has to spend working on important issues. The more this happens, the more urgent issues erupt, because the important things are not being handled. Eventually, the leader is engulfed by urgent crises and has no time for important, vital issues at all.

At this point the leader is finished.

It all goes back to that old philosophy of ‘busy work’. Too many people feel that being busy and the affiliated sense of accomplishment is relevant. It isn’t.

Leaders must live in the realm of the important, not in the realm of the urgent.

Interesting book. Half way through.

I was reading the recent NYTimes interview with Yahoo’s CEO and found her humility and insight quite inspiring:

Q. How would you say your leadership style has changed over time?

A. I’m calmer. I think that just comes with confidence. I would hate to describe the C.E.O. I was in ’92. I think I was pretty pathetic, actually.

And her view of annual reviews is worth pondering:

Q. And how do you give feedback?

A. I have the puppy theory. When the puppy pees on the carpet, you say something right then because you don’t say six months later, “Remember that day, January 12th, when you peed on the carpet?” That doesn’t make any sense. “This is what’s on my mind. This is quick feedback.” And then I’m on to the next thing.

If I had my way I wouldn’t do annual reviews, if I felt that everybody would be more honest about positive and negative feedback along the way. I think the annual review process is so antiquated. I almost would rather ask each employee to tell us if they’ve had a meaningful conversation with their manager this quarter. Yes or no. And if they say no, they ought to have one. I don’t even need to know what it is. But if you viewed it as meaningful, then that’s all that counts.

Couldn’t agree more. If a manager is not having those types of reviews monthly, they are not doing their job. For me, I have always gauged my effectiveness in this role based on the length of the annual review. If it is too the point with no surprises for the employee, then I am doing my job because we have communicated regularly. If not … an improvement item for my review.

HBR has an interesting view on leadership openness in their June issue, which is worthy of contemplation:

‘….NASA researchers had placed existing cockpit crews – in flight simulators and tested them to see how they would respond during the crucial 30 to 45 seconds between the first sign of a potential accident and the moment it would occur. The stereotypical take-charge ‘flyboy’ pilots, who acted immediately on their gut instincts, made the wrong decisions far more often that the more open, inclusive pilots who said to their crews, in effect, ‘We’ve got a problem. How do you read it?’ before choosing a course of action.

At one level, the lesson of the NASA findings is simple: Leaders are far likelier to make mistakes when they act on too little information then when they wait to learn more. …. the pilot’s habitual style of interacting with their crews determined whether crew members would provide them with essential information during an in-air crisis. The pilots who’d made the right choices routinely had open exchanges with their crew members. The study also showed that crew members who had regularly worked with the ‘decisive’ pilots were unwilling to intervene – even when they had information that might have save the plane’ 

(HBR, June 2009, What’s Needed Next: A Culture of Candor)

I have worked for leaders who were not willing to create a culture of openness, where people held back information or were afraid to speak up – and it definitely hurt the business – opportunities lost, pitfalls not avoided. I much prefer the culture of collaboration. Good article (full version is available free online).

I was taught a philosophy early in my sales career: ‘Good news should travel fast, bad news should travel faster’. I heard another good quote on this topic the other day :

‘The only messenger I would every shoot is one who arrived too late’.