Always question the data

Just wanted to share this link to an article by John Kay.
On sex, lies, and the pitfalls of overblown statistics

Pick of the Week: IBD 10 Secrets to Success

I don't normally pay much attention to lists that claim to hold the secrets of success. They tend to make one of two basic errors:

The first error is that they tend to be faddish and heavy on wishful thinking--focused on the bright business idea of the moment or pushing the ideas of a particular leadership guru who is hyping his or her latest book.

The second error is that they are often just the personal credo of some successful person. This means that they are prone to the correlation/causation fallacy. Just because a successful person has a particular list of traits does not mean that those traits led to his or her success or that they will work for the rest of us.

The Investor's Business Daily newspaper, on the other hand, has a list of ten "secrets" that I think are worth attention (the list can be found here). What I like about this list is that they are not secrets at all, and they don't offer simple, magical solutions. They are common sense guidelines that if you follow, and if you work hard, and if you are just a little bit lucky, will increase your chances of accomplishing your goals.

IBD also publishes articles each day based on one of these secrets, and they're available free online (click here).

Pick of the Week: The Basics of Science

I've been busily preparing for the International Enneagram Association board meeting and conference next week and unable to post as much as I'd like, but I did want to get out this pick of the week before leaving for Fort Lauderdale....

My inclination in both my education and the early part of my career was more toward the humanities than anything else, so I am grossly undereducated when it comes to the sciences. Later in life, however, I came to appreciate how important the sciences are for all of us as we try to make sense of our world--whether it is trying to make better business decisions, better decisions regarding the health and well-being of our families, or better decisions about who we should vote for.

I'm often surprised at how easily people fall victim to the misinterpretations or distortions of science, whether it be the distortion of Darwin's "survival of the fittest" (a term actually coined by Spencer) by the Wall-Street types or a distortion of the observer effect in quantum physics by the New-Age crowd. As with any other tools, the sciences can be misused and abused to further our preexisting biases or agendas.

To overcome these tendencies, it is helpful to spend some time with a good primer or two on the basics of science. Understanding what Darwin really meant or what the observer effect really is, for example, can help us past our biases and illusions about the world and how it works. My two favorite such primers are: "The Canon: A Whirligig Tour of the Beautiful Basics of Science" by Natalie Angier and "Science Matters: Achieving Scientific Literacy" by Robert Hazen and James Trefil. While Angier is a more engaging writer, her style can seem a little too cute at points and she lacks the simplicity and crispness of Hazen and Trefil's book. Either one is a very worthwhile read.

Note: Whenever I write about science, I get emails or comments stating the obvious "well, science doesn't address values..." or "you're just a scientistic reductionist" arguments in defense of less than rigorous ideas. I am not saying science addresses values, nor am I advocating logical positivism, nor am I undervaluing the importance of subjective experience. I am not saying that reading, say, Richard Feynman has any anymore inherent value than reading Virgil or the Upanishads. I am saying that an accurate understanding of science helps us see the world more clearly and can help free us from illusion.

Pick of the Week: The US Army Leadership Field Manual

I just started a book on General George C. Marshall and it made me think of this book and how important it is. I'm always a bit reluctant to recommend it, especially to my non-US friends and clients. I hate the idea of being seen as someone who in anyway glorifies war. My father grew up as a refugee in war-torn Germany and if one lesson stuck in my head from hearing his stories, it is that war is always bad, even when it is the least bad option. However, the US Army Leadership Field Manual may be the single best book on leadership I've ever read.

I am always much more interested in hearing what people with "skin in the game" have to say about almost any topic, and you can't get anymore genuinely invested in results than leaders in combat. The Field Manual has many things going for it:

• It is battle-tested--literally. Over the years, ideas that don't work got weaned out because they could lead to people dying.
• It is written in clear, simple, and direct language. There is no hint of a consultant or professor trying to impress you with the sophistication or originality of his or her ideas, and it is not filled with the self-glorifying tales of ex-CEOs. It is written in simple, declarative sentences that leave no room for ambiguity. Its authors' goals are to clearly and unambiguously share important knowledge.
• It acknowledges that different skills are needed at different levels of any hierarchy and different stages of one's career. It clearly articulates those stages, making it easy to find what qualities are necessary given your leadership circumstances.

My shelves are filled with hundreds of books on leadership; this is the one I keep returning to. If you are a leader or work with leaders, add it to your shelf too.

The US Army Leadership Manual is, I believe, a public-domain publication. The version I have was edited and produced by McGraw Hill in 2004.

Pick of the Week: "On Writing Well" and Polish Poets

I have two recommendations this week.

First, I recommend anyone who hasn't read it to pick up a copy of William Zinsser's "On Writing Well." When I work with leaders, we almost always end up talking about their ability to communicate. Leaders need to communicate clearly so people understand what is expected of them and how to deliver on those expectations. Nothing is more dispiriting to an organization than having people waste time going the wrong direction because the leader was not clear. In fact, clear communication affects every part of our lives and all of our relationships. Effective communication is direct, concise-but-sufficient (it says enough without droning on), coherent, and consistent. Zinsser's book teaches writers (anyone who writes) how to do this better than any book I've ever read (I'll take it over Strunk and White any day.) Good writing requires good thinking--coherence, logic, accuracy, etc.--so writing well will make you a better thinker. Writing also carries over into good speaking because it forces one to become disciplined in crafting and delivering a message. One's sentences follow in a logical order that keeps the listener engaged rather than inviting them to tune out. Good communication skills are the secret weapon of effective leaders in all areas of life. Arm yourself well; read this book and learn its lessons.

My second pick is more broad: "Polish poets." Perhaps it's mid-life re-appreciation of my Polish heritage, but I've been immersed in modern Polish poets lately. I've always tried to stay away from sentimentality and exuberance in poetry, and there is no fear of stumbling across them with these writers. Rather, these poets tend to exemplify the Poles' ability to wistfully endure hardship and oppression, to stare life in the face without blinking or backing down, and to be dignified without taking themselves or anyone else too seriously.

Milosz would be a little too obvious I think, so his volumes sit largely as-yet-unexplored on the shelves. It started by chance with Zbigniew Herbert (I was captivated by the photo on the cover of his "Collected Works"), and quickly spread to Adam Zagajewski and Janusz Szuber. Reading Tadeusz Rozewicz, my newest discovery, is like receiving a light slap in the face by a slightly stern uncle urging you to wake up and see--really see--the world around you. (His picture reminds me of my grandfather, a quietly urgent man who took a bullet trying to stop Hitler.) But most of all, I've fallen in love with Nobel-laureate Wislawa Szymborska, the kindly, gentle, and ferociously intelligent aunt to Rozewicz's intimidating uncle. If you like poetry, or simply appreciate good writing that captures the essence of people with hard-won soul, give them a try.

Look Outside Before You Look Inside

"One of the basic assumptions of the field [of social psychology] is that it's not the objective environment that influences people, but their constructs of the world. You have to get inside people's heads and see the world the way they do. You have to look at the kinds of narratives and stories people tell themselves as to why they're doing what they're doing. What can get people into trouble sometimes in their personal lives, or for more societal problems, is that these stories go wrong. People end up with narratives that are dysfunctional in some way." Timothy Wilson (http://edge.org/conversation/social_psychological_narrative)

I'm a big fan of Wilson and his book "Strangers to Ourselves." Wilson makes a compelling case that there is a downside to too much self-reflection because it is literally impossible for us to see all of the workings of our own mind. We think we know ourselves but we don't, and the best way to learn about ourselves is not necessarily to go inside but to go outside and get feedback from objective parties. Going inside to explore our narratives often just makes our existing narratives stronger and more difficult to change.

One of the beauties of the Enneagram is that it provides an objective listing of our tendencies. Whenever I am accused of "Eight-ish" behaviors, my first reaction is to rationalize and justify my behavior. In time, however, I often see how I behaved in one of the habitual Eight-ish patterns that I wrote about in my own book. It is this combination of feedback and objective perspective that get me past the land mines of looking inside for the explanations of my behavior.

At the same time, the Enneagram can point us to the central theme of many of the narratives that Wilson talks about in the quote above. At the heart of our stories is, often, our preferred strategy, and learning to rewrite the definition of our preferred strategy can help us to change our story and, ultimately, our behaviors. For me, the preferred strategy is "striving to be powerful," and I get into trouble most often because my narratives are rooted in an immature or outdated of what it means to be powerful; I may, for example, be acting on the assumption that being powerful means being forceful rather than being kind. I can't change the behavior if any new behaviors run counter to my non-conscious narratives.

So the pattern for creating change is to go outside first and then go inside:

• Seek feedback on what needs to change (and to be open to ongoing feedback) either from others or from tools such as the Enneagram;
• Decide what changes need to be made;
• Reflect on your existing narratives and how they make you resist the changes you need to make;
• Explore how your definition of your preferred strategy holds that narrative in place;
• Redefine your existing strategy so you can change your narrative;
• Practice the new behaviors until they become the norm.

(For more on rewriting the story, see the book "Awareness to Action" or these videos on youtube.

Pick of the Week: Good People Doing Bad Things, and Vice Versa

I'll admit it--I love TV. Not reality TV, or any show that involves a judge of any kind, and don't get me started on the inanity of most newscasts. But we live in an area of exceptional scripted drama if you know where to look. Three shows in particular, I believe, rise to the level of great art and great art tells us as much about the human condition as the insights of the best psychologists and philosophers.

The first show is "The Wire," a sprawling look at the cops, criminals, and politicians populating Baltimore's underbelly that aired for five seasons on HBO and is available on DVD or through HBO's HBOGo service. The dialog is pitch perfect and subtle wit pervades the writing. What makes "The Wire" so special, however, is its "there but for the grace of God" quality; watching it you realize how much environment, circumstance, and family and friends shape the person we become and the choices we make. The show avoids drug-dealer-with-a-heart-of-gold cliches while still making people that we should find despicable compelling, interesting, sympathetic. I don't think it is too much of a stretch to call "The Wire" a masterpiece of storytelling, Tolstoy-esque in scope, about flawed (and thus real) humans trying to make the best of the cards they were dealt.

If "The Wire" evokes Tolstoy, then "The Sons of Anarchy" evokes Shakespeare. I did not have high hopes for this show about the trials and tribulations of a northern California motorcycle club, and of course comparing anything to Shakespeare goes too far, but the show has a cast of characters as compelling as any I've ever seen. Matriarch Gemma evokes Lady Macbeth in her deviousness and ability to manipulate and her drive to be a source of strength to the men around her who she sees as sometimes too weak to save themselves and "the family." Gemma's son and club vice-president, Jax Teller, evokes Hamlet, searching for guidance on how to be a man and future king from a murdered father. Club president Clay Morrow, Gemma's husband, evokes Lear as he wrestles with the trials of being an aging ruler with an no obvious successor to carry out his vision for his kingdom. The beauty of "SoA" is that it makes us care deeply for people who under any normal circumstances we might fear and loathe; criminals and outlaws who can display profound humanity moments before they commit inhuman acts.

I have no literary analogy for "Breaking Bad," but it is an arresting drama about what happens to an everyman faced with circumstances that are extraordinary, but still circumstances we can easily see ourselves facing some day. High school chemistry teacher Walter White finds out that he has cancer and decides to manufacture methamphetamine as a way to get enough money for his family to live on after he is gone. Walt is a brilliant person who carries the weight of his own and his wife's diminished expectations, but he comes alive once that he has a mission and a way to apply his knowledge and training in a practical (if illegal and anti-social) activity. The care and craftsmanship that he applies to producing meth almost makes you forget that he is engaging in the production of something that may benefit his family but will bring calamity on those who use it. More so than the other two shows, "Breaking Bad" asks what happens when a fundamentally decent person does something bad for ostensibly good reasons, and how far will he go once he has crossed the lines of where he thought his boundaries were?

All three shows demonstrate the importance of place--inner-city Baltimore, rural California, the Arizona suburbs--as a contributor to who we are, and they show that being human means making choices in difficult circumstances and then having to live with the consequences of those choices and an altered sense of who we are.

Great art teaches us about our world, and about ourselves; you can learn a lot from watching these shows.