It's nice to think that the reason that people don't do what you need them to do, or conform to your standards, or make good choices is simply that they don't know enough.
After all, if that's the case, all you'll need to do is inform them, loudly and clearly.
So, that employee who shows up late: just let her know that being late isn't allowed. Threaten to fire her. That'll do it.
The thing is, ignorance is rarely the problem.
The challenge is that people don't always care about what you care about. And the reason they don't care isn't that they don't know what you know.
The reason is that they don't believe what you believe.
The challenge, then, isn't to inform them. It's to engage and teach and communicate in a way that shares emotion and values and beliefs.
March 17, 2017
The efficacy of a technology, a shortcut, a medicine, a tool, a method—you get the idea—is directly related to how difficult it is to obtain.
Placebos work because our brain picks up where our belief begins. Without some sort of conscious or subconscious trigger, the placebo effect never kicks in. But when it does, it's astonishingly effective. Placebos change performance, cure diseases and make food taste better.
Consider the case of the new music format, MQA. The overdue successor to the MP3 files we've been listening to for a decade or more, MQA treats your music with more care, and the reports are it sounds better. A lot better.
Of course, most people can't hear the difference in a double-blind test, particularly with disposable earbuds. But that's okay, because no one is double blind in real life. Instead, we have information about what we're listening to and where it came from, and it turns out that knowing the provenance of your music can actually make it sound better.
The fact that MQA might actually sound better is a fine thing, but the lesson here is about the story.
The MQA rollout has been agonizingly slow, with dates promised and then missed, with absent bits of gear, with no easy way to get this new technology. Which makes it even better, of course.
The same is true for baked goods that sell out every morning at 8 am, and the new beta-version of an app that makes you more productive.
If you want your medicine to be more effective, consider making it difficult to get.
[PS I'll be doing a Facebook Live Q&A about the altMBA. See you at 2 pm ET today, Thursday.]
March 16, 2017
There are institutions, professionals and organizations that would like you to believe that you don't have much choice in the matter.
They want to take away your agency, because it makes their job easier or their profits higher.
But you have more choice than you know.
More ability to shop around, or to skip that procedure altogether. More rights to read the fine print or not sign that document at all.
Mostly, the agency to say yes and to say no, to choose your own course, to not do what everyone else is doing.
March 15, 2017
When we join an organization and become part of something, collisions happen. Standards change.
Sometimes, these tribal affiliations push us to become better versions of ourselves. We take a long-term view, check our selfish impulses and work hard to meet the high standards of those around us.
But if we're not careful, we can join a group that indulges in our selfishness, one that pushes us to be callous or short-sighted. To become part of the mob, or the insolent bystanders.
There's nothing inherent in the way humans associate that will lead to one or the other. But once on the path, the culture is difficult to change…
The challenge, then, is to push ourselves to find the right groups (and leave the others behind.)
March 14, 2017
Most of us can agree that picking a great team is one of the best ways to build a successful organization or project.The problem is that we're terrible at it.
The NFL Combine is a giant talent show, with a billion dollars on the line. And every year, NFL scouts use the wrong data to pick the wrong players (Tom Brady famously recorded one of the worst scores ever 17 years ago). Moneyball is all about how reluctant baseball scouts were to change their tactics, even after they saw that the useful data was a far better predictor of future performance than their instincts were.
And we do the same thing when we scan resumes, judging people by ethnic background, fraternity, gender or the kind of typeface they use.
The SAT is a poor indicator of college performance, but most colleges use it anyway.
Famous colleges aren't correlated with lifetime success or happiness, but we push our kids to to seek them out.
And all that time on social networks still hasn't taught us not to judge people by their profile photos…
Most of all, we now know that easy-to-measure skills aren't nearly as important as the real skills that matter.
Everyone believes that other people are terrible at judging us and our potential, but we go ahead and proudly judge others on the basis of a short interview (or worse, a long one), even though the people we're selecting aren't being hired for their ability to be interviewed.
The first step in getting better at pre-judging is to stop pre-judging.
This takes guts, because it feels like giving up control, but we never really had control in the first place. Not if we've been obsessively measuring the wrong things all along.
March 13, 2017
We spend a lot of time talking about celebrities and how attractive they are. Paul Newman's blue eyes, how tall is Jake Gyllenhaal, how fast is Usain Bolt…
Most of the time, though, our success is based on something we have far more control over: our emotional attractiveness.
People who are open, empathetic, optimistic, flexible, generous, warm, connected, creative and interesting seem to have a much easier time. They're more able to accomplish their goals, influence others and most of all, hang out with the people they'd like to be with.
The best part is that this is a skill, something we can work on if we care enough.
March 12, 2017
Movie reviewers, food critics, the people who write about wine or stereo equipment… they write most of the review before they even encounter the final product.
Because, of course, they experience it before (you/they/we) think they do.
They've seen the marketing materials. They know the reputation of the director or the vineyard. They have a relationship with their editor, and an instinct about what the people they represent expect.
And of course, it goes double for the non-professional critics… your customers. And even the hiring manager when you're applying for a job.
The last click someone clicks before they buy something isn't the moment they made up their mind. And our expectations of how this is going to sound, feel or taste is pre-wired by all of the clues and hints we got along the way.
We lay clues. That's what it takes to change the culture and to cause action. The thing we make matters (a lot). But the breadcrumbs leading up to that thing, the conversations we hear, the experiences that are shared, the shadow we cast–we start doing that days, months and years before.
March 11, 2017
Just a few decades ago, there were only three TV channels to watch.
Worse, it was pretty common for people to continue watching the same channel all night, rather than checking out the two alternatives. The 8 pm lead in was critical.
TV Guide, at one point the most valuable magazine in the United States, changed that posture. The entire magazine was devoted to answering just one question: What's on right now?
It turned consumption into a bit more of an intentional act. I mean, people were still hiding out, glued to their TVs, but at least they were actively choosing which thing to watch.
The internet, of course, multiplies the number of choices by infinity.
And our screen time has only gone up.
But here's the question: The next thing you read, the next thing you watch–how did you decide that it was next?
Was it because it was the nearest click that was handy?
Or are you intentional about what you're learning, or connecting with, or the entertainment you're investing in?
We don't have a lot of time. It seems to me that being intentional about how we spend our precious attention is the least we can do for it.
March 10, 2017
The first rule is that you follow the rules.
That's the mantra of the obedient organization. And there are many of them. You follow these rules, restrictions and systems. Not because they're up-to-date, effective or correct, but because that's what makes us who we are.
Obedience is its own reward. Obedience is required. And obedience is prized.
It ensures a reliable homogeneity, it gives the illusion of solidarity, it evokes power.
The alternative is an organization based on inquiry.
Do what's right and ask useful questions.
This is a supple organization, one more likely to deal with change over time. It certainly has more raucous meetings, and it sometimes appears disorganized, but the resilience can pay off.
Obedient organizations get better when they find more obedient team members and enforce their systems on them. And organizations based on inquiry get better when they ask better questions, and when they create a culture based on what's right, not merely what's come before.
March 9, 2017
If you want a hot shower, you'll need to turn on the hot water a bit before you step inside. It can take a while for the hot water to rise up and clear the cold water from the pipes.
The thing is, though, that if you mistakenly turn the cold water tap instead, it'll never get hot. No matter how long you wait.
Sometimes, it takes us too long to realize that we shouldn't wait any longer and might consider checking if we turned on the wrong tap.
Nothing good comes from impatiently jumping from one approach to another, one grand scheme replaced by another. But persistently sticking with a plan that goes nowhere is almost as bad. The art of making a difference begins with thinking hard about when it's time to move on. The Dip is real, but there are dead ends everywhere.
Sometimes, the world is telling us it's time to leap.
March 8, 2017
