“What are you reading now?” or “What book are you reading?” are questions I often hear. It may be a friend, an acquaintance, or someone I just met. Charlie Rose in his nightly program of interviews sometimes poses a similar question to his famous guests, most of whom are national or international leaders in their professions. They always seem to have a book they are reading about which they have opinions, insights, comments. I asked this question to several people in 2012. The most frequent answer was Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow.

Lifelong learning is essential to grow as a leader. It would seem that a habit of reading books would be important to that growth. In a blog written over five years ago, Wayne Hulbert made that argument. He suggested that you start with books from your area of business and branch out from there. To quote Hulbert, “Let a book be your ship as you sail that wonderful journey to the land of lifelong learning.”

But how do you nurture book reading in those who do not enjoy reading. There is some evidence that younger people read more if you count the Internet but read less if you count book reading. The Harry Potter series engaged many young minds. How will that translate into other books as they age? I found this debate about “how important is reading to today’s teenager” insightful. 

For those of us in education, we lead by example.  We share our stories, the role books have played in our lives. As parents, we read to our children. I had an aunt who read to me in my very early formative years. She nurtured my love of books.

What role do books play in your life? In your learning? My guess is that for many, we just don’t have enough time. Is reading books a habit for you? If not, is reading books something you would want to be a habit? 

So what am I reading? On audio CD during my commute, Macolm Gladwell’s Outliers: The Story of Success. On my Kindle, 2312, a science fiction novel by Kim Stanley Robinson. And sitting on my desk awaiting me is a hard copy of Walter Isaacson’s biography of Steve Jobs. 

“The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them”, Mark Twain. 

Or as the comedian Groucho Marx said, “Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.  Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.”   


Image of Corot's painting, Young Girl Reading, 1868, at the National Gallery of Art. Photo by cliff1066 at http://www.fotopedia.com/items/flickr-3299054544. Permission to use Creative Commons.

More from the files of the Dr. Juran "An Immigrant's Gift" Archival Project, research and dissemination of information from the interviews conducted about Joseph Juran for the PBS Special, An Immigrant's Gift.

From an interview with Steve Jobs, December 19, 1991, in Redwood City, California. 

Here Jobs talks about motivation and criticism.

STEVE JOBS:  . . . I think most people that are able to make a sustained contribution over time - - rather than just a peak -- are very internally driven. You have to be. Because, in the ebb and tide of people's opinions and of fads, there are going to be times when you are criticized, and criticism's very difficult. And so when you're criticized, you learn to pull back a little and listen to your own drummer.  And to some extent, that isolates you from the praise, if you eventually get it, too. The praise becomes a little less important to you, and the criticism becomes a little less important to you, in the same measure.  And you become more internally driven. 

My take-aways:  

1. I agree with Jobs that most highly successful people, defined by fame and fortune, are probably more internally motivated than externally motivated. They have something deep inside that energizes, directs, and sustains their behavior, enabling them to face adversity and external criticism. The balance though between valuing legitimate, useful criticism and rejecting same can be difficult. We all need an honest "sounding board," someone who will tell it to us as it is, from another pair of eyes. The higher one goes, the more difficult this becomes. Kaplan, Drath, and Kofodimos (1987), studying executive self-development, found that executives at the top of organizations tended to be isolated and not likely to receive useful criticism about their performance. 

2. Steve Jobs underscored the power of intrinsic motivation. In Boston last August I listened to Vic Vroom talk about his career and his expectancy theory (in my opinion the most practical motivational theory).  He said that if he were developing expectancy theory today, he would give more thought to intrinsic rewards. For managers, it is easier to manage extrinsic motivational factors (pay, benefits, etc.) than intrinsic factors (job satisfaction, feeling of accomplishment, meaningfulness of work, etc.). But sometimes the most valued outcomes may be intrinsic. A simple “great job” may make someone's day. 

Kaplan, R. E., Drath, W. H., & Kofodimos, J. R. (1987). High hurdles: the challenge of executive self-development. The Academy of Management Executive, 1 (3), 195-205.

Image by acaben on Flickr. Permission to share http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

Revisiting Harvard Business Review article from November 2010, “What’s Your Personal Social Media Strategy.”  Soumitra Dutta’s article is a classic. Social media has a shifting face, ever changing. We are in the early years of social media in terms of impact. I think there are myriad strategies and uses we are only beginning to comprehend. At the Organization Design Conference I attended last summer at Harvard, I learned of NASA solving a perceived-to-be unsolvable problem. Sourcing it to the Internet, NASA received over 500 answers and eleven solutions. The power to tap the collective intelligence of on-line humanity is humbling. The potential of crowdsourcing, as this is called, is enormous.  

Dutta’s article underscores the importance of thinking through your Internet impression management. Do you google yourself? That is part of monitoring your presence. Do you have a business profile? Do you have a LinkedIn presence or other professional presences? Do you participate in professional groups, such as on LinkedIn? Have you thought through where you are on the Internet and why you are there.

Dutta lays out a useful 2 X 2 matrix where the dimensions are personal-professional and private-public. I found this useful last year as I thought about how I wanted to manage my on-line presence. For me, personal and private is Facebook; professional and public is this blog, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Preventing the personal and the professional from blurring can be difficult, but a deliberate strategy makes it easier.

If you have never read Dutta’s article, I recommend. 

More from the files of the Dr. Juran "An Immigrant's Gift" Archival Project, research and dissemination of information from the interviews conducted about Joseph Juran for the PBS Special, An Immigrant's Gift.

From an interview with Peter Drucker on December 20, 1991, in Claremont, California.  Peter Drucker (1909 – 2005) at the time of this interview was Clarke Professor of Social Science and Management at Claremont Graduate University.

Drucker said he met Juran in the late 1940s, early 1950s. For a while they shared a management training session for the American Management Association. According to Drucker, they remained in close contact.

Here Drucker talks about his relationship with Juran, what brought them together, what he appreciated most about Joe Juran.

PETER DRUCKER:   . . . what brought us together, I think, was that both of us shared the conviction that management deals with people  -- and that the job of management is make human strength productive and human weaknesses irrelevant. That's my formulation, but I think he would say very similarly.

But (he has an) incredible ability to meld basic values and 
very specific action. And (the) impact he has on people. I don't 
think anybody who ever worked with him has ever forgotten the 
experience. Oh -- it's the respect for people he has, (it was the) 
fundamental humanity of the man. And, at the same time . . . 
totally, uncompromising on principles. Joe is just not going 
to do anything that is not right. It's got to be right. But it's got 
to fit the person.

Joe doesn't say: 
this is what you do, and you do it my way, and there is only one 
way, and that's my way. Joe says: what do you need to do and what is 
the best way for you to do it, it's got to fit you  . . . Joe diagnoses. Joe says: what do you really need, 
what are your strengths, what are your competences, what are 
your goals. And then let's work on making them -- making you
 most effective.

That unique ability to have an 
objective, scientific approach and the compassion, that organization and people-focused application, is his very great 
strength. If only because he changes the people he works with. They acquire a much bigger view of themselves, and I think 
that is what I appreciate the most.

My take-away:

Juran understood that leaders need to know their people, that they build the capabilities of their people starting with their strengths. I am reminded of a classic HBR article by Robert Hayes. Hayes (1985) discussed how leaders can flip the “ends-ways-means” approach to strategic planning. By knowing their people, knowing the capabilities they have, leaders can assess the strengths and weaknesses of their human resources. From this, they can determine ways or methods that flow best from their people. Finally given this analysis, they can determine the best objectives or ends to pursue. (I think this works on the level of self-analysis also. What am I good at, how can I use this talent, what should I pursue?)

For great leaders it comes down to treated people as assets – not costs. Juran clearly understood costs and the bottomline – but he valued people to reduce costs and improve quality  -- given good leadership. 

R. H. Hayes (1985). Strategic planning – forward in reverse? Harvard Business Review, 63 (6), 111-119.


Image of Peter Drucker: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffmcneill/5789354033/ under license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/deed.en

The Kennedy Center honored David Letterman last year, for his career in comedy and broadcasting. Charlie Rose interviewed Letterman in December. Part of the interview was broadcast on “CBS This Morning.” The complete interview aired on the Charlie Rose Show, Friday evening, January 4.

An excerpt from that interview (any errors in transcription are mine.):

ROSE: You get this award and there have been others but for 30 plus years of doing something you love.

LETTERMAN: Right

ROSE: That’s a nice way to go.

LETTERMAN:  Well it is. . . I think how fortunate people are when you know what you want to do, and then you find a way to do it, and then you continue to do it for as long as you want. That’s great good luck. That’s great good luck because I think and I know a lot of people never really quite sure what they want to do, never quite sure what path they want to follow. And maybe they make themselves happy with whatever path they end up on.

Letterman sums up much about person-job match.

1.  Finding what you want to do. Letterman discovered in a 10th grade speech class that he was good at extemporaneous speaking. He found a talent, found what he enjoyed, and then figured out what he could do with it. 

2.  Make those things happen. First on a local TV station broadcasting the weather, then driving an old pick-up truck to LA, doing standup, and earning an appearance on Johnny Carson’s “Tonight Show.” Letterman took risks and succeeded. It is not enough to know what you want to do. At some point one must act.

3. But he acknowledges a role for luck, that others may have similar stories but different outcomes. I have heard the same from other successful people. The right place at the right time.

We see luck in different ways. For many it may involve events over which we have absolutely no control. For others there may be preceding events unfolding in our lives that sow conditions for luck, both good and bad. “Hey, if I could only get a lucky break?” “That was really bad luck.” “I don’t believe in luck, you make your luck.” How you view luck will depend on your beliefs, most of which derive from your life experiences.

Hao Ma (2002) described types of luck in organizations. There is pure luck but there is also prepared luck. He wrote:  “(prepared) luck is usually nothing but opportunities knocking upon those who are looking for them, who will notice them, and who will act on them. Luck favors the prepared mind. And luck favors those in action.” (p. 527).

Favors the prepared mind, favors those in action. Best of luck for the New Year.

Ma, Hao. (2002). Competitive advantage: What's luck got to do with it? Management Decision, 40, 525-536. 

Image of David Letterman by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class C. J. McNeeley, http://www.flickr.com/photos/thejointstaff/5830291 
Free to share.

Time magazine had Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, on its short list for Person of the Year at #3.  The article about Cook is a good read (Time, Dec 31/Jan 7 issue). In 1997 Apple pursued Cook while he was at Compaq. He met with Steve Jobs at Jobs's request, mainly because he just wanted to met Jobs, not that he wanted to work with him. But within five minutes of their first conversation, Cook was ready to join Apple. Jobs was that compelling.  In Walter Issacson’s book Steve Jobs, Cook described it this way: “Five minutes into my initial interview with Steve, I wanted to throw caution and logic to the wind and join Apple. . . my intuition told me that joining Apple would be a once-in-a-lifetime  opportunity to work for a creative genius” (p. 360). He joined Apple in 1998. 

In the article, Time's Lev Grossman describes Cook as a “workaholic, and not of the recovering kind” (p. 114). But Cook describes it differently. “The thing about it is, when you love what you do, you don’t really think of it as work. It’s what you do.”  You do not have to be a CEO to have that attitude but my guess is that many CEOs and senior VPs share that perspective. They eat, live, and breathe their jobs. 

In my opinion Ann Howard and Douglas Bray’s Managerial Lives in Transition is the definitive study on who gets ahead in organizations, who reaches the top. They conducted their longitudinal studies over several decades at AT&T. Analyses of life themes figured prominently in the results (For more on life themes, see Rychlak, 1982). Not surprisingly, those managers with the highest scores on the occupational life theme (“eating, living, breathing the job”), both men and women, advanced fast and far.  In the first several years after being hired the differences among managers were small but around the fourth year, occupational life theme scores started to move apart. By year seven, the occupational life theme corresponded to the highest managerial level eventually to be attained. Those with the highest scores were headed to the higher levels, AT&T Levels 5-6, whereas those with the lowest scores were destined to stay at Level 1. In most organizations, those who “eat, live, and breathe their jobs” are more likely to rise to the top. 

Of course, not everyone wants to rise to the top, be available 24/7, "to eat, live, and breathe the job." But I think Cook nails it about person-job match. If you love what you do, it really doesn't seem like work -- most of the time. 

Howard, A., & Bray, D. W. (1988). Managerial lives in transition: Advancing age and changing times. New York: Guilford Press.
Rychlak, J. F. (1982). Personality and life-style of young male managers: A logical learning theory analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.      

Image by dfarber on Flickr. http://www.fotopedia.com/items/flickr-1042740161
Shared under this license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/