Act on your gut

By now we know about the power of first impressions (thanks to Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink, among others).  We form impressions very quickly (in seconds) and often those impressions have strong predictive power.

But the expression “go with your gut” sells this idea short – it implies your gut instead of your analytical mind…like your innards have some perceptive power that’s not possessed between your ears.

It’s not about choose which part of your body to listen to, it’s about acting on what you know is true, but that you’re afraid to do.  For instance:

“I’m not crazy about what’s being proposed here, but I’ll let it kick around for a while instead of speaking up.”

“I don’t feel excited about hiring this person, but her qualifications are great, let’s push her on to the next round.”

“It feels like we’re moving too slowly here, but that’s what’s in our strategic plan.”

“The last thing we need is another policy, but I guess it’s the prudent thing to do.”

As Mike Karnjanaprakorn wrote about yesterday, one of the three (only three!) things the Head of Product at a company has to do to be successful is to say “no” to 99% of feature ideas so she can get things done and ship quickly.  I doubt that the people who are best at this know more than everyone else (about which features to say “no” to), but I’m sure they act more on what they’re thinking and are great at sticking to their guns, even when there’s tons of pressure to cave.

You gut and your head know what you need to do; the discipline is in learning to act on that feeling time and again to test what you secretly suspect…which is that that small voice inside your head (or gut) is right.

Critics’ critiques and cheerleaders’ cheers

There was a guy I went to school with who earned the (affectionate) nickname “Yes, but…”

In any discussion, whether of microeconomic models or where to go for lunch, he started most sentneces with a nod to the contradiction, the course correction, the “on the other hand” point of view he was about to espouse.

In fact most humanities academia is built on the “Yes, but” philosophy – a peer writes a paper, the academic finds a small flaw or oversight and writes a follow-up article exposing that small miss…and in so doing gets her next piece of work published (which is the main milestone in academia).

No surprise, then, that the “yes, but” mindset passes for “critical thinking” which, in turn, is raised to the highest pedistal in our instituitons of higher learning.  “Yes, but…” comments score points with teachers (“great analysis, kid!”) and are the safest form of one-upmanship.

I used to be a terrible offender.  From a good and honest place, and a heartfelt desire to come up with the best solutions, I was most comfortable and most in the habit of finding the logical flaws and asking the tough questions.

I have a colleague who does the opposite, and from whom I’ve learned a lot.  She has an uncanny ability to find what is best, what is most inspiring, what is unique about what someone has said or done, and she shines a light on it with a smile and with no apologies.

When you’re blazing a new path, you’re constantly dogged by critics’ critiques of all the reasons that this won’t work, why it’s been done before and it crashed and burned, why it would be better if you just did it the way everyone else does.  And, of course, sometimes they’ll be right, but usually not.  They’re doing the easy thing: playing the clever, detached critic.

Much harder, and less celebrated, is to be a cheerleader who applauds victories, however small; who props people up when fatigue sets in, when the road seems to long, or when they have, just for a second, lost the will to go even one step further.   In work as in life, when times are really tough, those voices of support are priceless, especially from cheerleaders who help you break through barriers, who lean in with you, who are fully invested in YOUR success – rather than taking pot shots from the sidelines.

No resumes

I recently learned from an old friend who has a soon-to-be college-age son that, in addition to the test-prep tutors, that kids who now want to get into the best colleges have life tutors.  These are people who tell the kids (and their parents) which courses to take and which activities to get involved in so that they can demonstrate the leadership potential and diversity of experiences that colleges are looking for.

Yuck.

Is this really what we’re teaching the kids who have the most opportunity in our society (which means, by and large, that they have the most opportunity in the world)?  That they have to manufacture a kaleidoscope of experiences to put on paper so that they can – from the best high schools – get into the best colleges to get the best job to get…to get…to get….what?

This isn’t a zero sum game, it’s a negative sum game.  In exchange for increasing the (purported) likelihood of getting into the “right” school we are reinforcing the notion that struggle, reflection, falling short and self-discovery are and should be easily traded in by our so-called best and brightest.  We are teaching them that the best thing they can do with all of their privilege and promise is to game the system.

Someday, when all of their careers go well, they won’t need a resume.  Someday they will need to trade on real accomplishments and reputations that precede them;  on judgment and character and vision and moral fiber; and all the awards and merit scholarships and test scores and class rank will be long forgotten.

When that moment comes, when they have to dig deep, what will they find if this is what we have been teaching them?

Gumption and conviction

Some interview questions to get at the important stuff:

“What grounds you?”

“What are you best at?”

“Tell me about at time you changed someone’s mind.”

“At your core, what makes you tick?”

“What does generosity mean to you?”

Degrees and smarts are nice, but they’re almost easy to come by.   Being the kind of person who drives and leads (no matter what your job title) is much more compelling.

What should I do, boss?

A typical email:

Dear Boss,

Here are all the things going on with this project.   And also this.  Plus there’s this other thing we need to keep in mind.  This too, which is really important.  And I’m worried about this.

What should we do?

Employee

When you’re about to ask your boss to make a call on something, it’s worth stopping for a moment and asking what you’re doing and why.  You have the most information, usually, so the questions you might ask yourself are:

1.       Am I actually worse at making decisions than my boss?

2.       Do I not have the authority to make decisions?

3.       Or is neither of the above true and am I just avoiding responsibility for making a call?

The kicker is, the more you go ahead and decide stuff for yourself, the better you get at making decisions and the more authority you get (if this doesn’t happen, go work for someone else.)

Yes, sometimes you don’t know and/or you really need a thought partner, but I’d guess that happens 1 out of 5 times, maybe 1 out of 10 times, not most of the time.

The best birthday card ever?

A few years ago a good friend of mine started a greeting card business with all sorts of quirky cards for very specific events – buying a new Xbox; embarrassing faux-pas at the office holiday party; most sleepless nights in a row with a new baby….  When he took the cards to buyers, they all told him that the cards were great, but what they needed to see were more birthday cards, anniversary cards, and Valentine ’s Day cards.

The question he asked and we all need to ask today is: do I want to be in the business of trying to create the best birthday card ever?  Do I want to toil away and hope beyond hope that I’ll rise to the top – using the same tools and tactics as everyone else, but doing it just a little bit better?

You know:

Sure everyone does email campaigns, but ours is going to stand out a bit more because we’re going to tweak the headlines and up our open rates…

Sure everyone creates annual reports, but ours will be snappier, crisper, more memorable…

Sure everyone writes a quarterly email that no one reads, but this is what everyone expects, so we have to do it too…

Really?  You actually don’t need to do those things that everyone else does, and you certainly, certainly don’t need to do them in the WAY everyone does them (please!).

You don’t need to spend your organizational energy on things that “people expect.” Who are these “people” anyway?  What exactly do they expect?  Why?

Maybe these expectations are out there, and maybe they’re right, but I’d pressure test that a lot before spending organizational energy on creating another me-too thing that’s fighting for its life to be just-a-bit-above-average.

The chance that you write the world’s best, most memorable birthday card are pretty slim.  But creating the funniest “office party holiday gift card” ever – and getting that card in front of the people who buy and sell holiday gifts…well that sounds a lot more possible and a lot more fun.

Who do you know who’s going to change the world?

They might be anywhere in the world right now, but they’ve probably stood out their whole lives because they’re committed to social change, to empowerment and because they walk through the world with grace and humility.

They’re the kind of people who get things done in all sorts of crazy situations, the kind of people who keep their wits about them no matter what and no matter where, the kind of people who just seem to connect with others no matter where they go.

These are the kinds of people who might make up the next class of Acumen Fund Fellows.  Applications opened today.  Hear from Fellows in their own words – click on this video.

(if you’re having trouble with the link, you can also watch the video on YouTube)

Small changes, big changes

If you’re advocating for a shift, a new initiative that you’re pushing for from below, it helps to know what signs to look for (or not look for) as you gauge your progress.

In the beginning, any kind of new anything that’s not driven from the top will look like it’s not going anywhere.  With this knowledge in hand, it’s a lot easier not to give up.

Change from below can follow two paths, not three:

  1. You toil away at an idea that the organization never ends up supporting or adopting (or you give up before it does)
  2. You toil away at an idea, garner support and evidence and early wins, and the idea takes off

It’s 3 that gets us into trouble….the unstated assumption that if something’s going to get somewhere tomorrow we’ll see significant progress today in terms of the support we’re getting (funding, encouragement, approvals) and the external indicators of success.  Carrying this mental model around is the best way to ensure that you give up just when things are about to turn your way.

(by the way, the same thinking can be applied to work/salary/promotions, which often follow a step-change pattern when, of course, skills and responsibilities grow in a much more continuous way.)

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

WWYD?

It’s so, so easy to look all around for advice – to ask people who have done this before, who have more experience, who appear more qualified.

And you should get this advice. You should research.  You should dive deep into all of the tacks you can take.

But don’t forget to ask – and give credence to – the most important person of all: you.  YOU are the person gathering the information, you are the person on the front lines, you  are the one seeing the whole picture, you are the one whose opinion matters the most.

There’s a fine line between asking what others think and being too concerned about making them happy – to your/your work’s determent. Remember, getting where you need to get isn’t the same thing as making your superiors/peers happy every step of the way.

So, WWYD – What would YOU do?

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Four ways to approach business school

  1. Good students go and treat it like school.  They’re good at school and it’s a familiar model: the teacher knows more than I do, assigns stuff to do, teaches me stuff.  I try hard and get good grades because that’s what I know.
  2. Credential-ers are there for the name and the doors it opens – most of which were probably open anyhow.  Tend not to worry as much about grades, care a lot about affiliation with other classmates.
  3. Career switchers are another version of credential-seekers, though usually much more focused on where they were and where they want to go.  B-school is a ticket to get there, and they’re going to work the system (especially recruiting) as much as they can to get that plum job.
  4. There for themselves know that this is a professional program, a collection of smart people (students and teachers both), and curate their own experience inside and outside the classroom.  They work hard, but not for the grades and not necessarily mostly in the classroom.  They’re there for themselves, since it’s their time and their money.

If I were to do business school all over again I would be a 4 (there for myself), but in truth I was mostly a 1.  That’s what I knew how to do at that time in my life – be good at school.

Maybe that’s all I was ready for then, but I wish someone had grabbed me by the lapels and said: “This isn’t about the job you’ll get, it isn’t about being a good student.  It’s about the trajectory / discovery / exploration / learning you need to do – in whatever way makes most sense for you – to walk from where you are today to where you want to be.”

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook