The Paradoxes of Our Life - You do well what you have to learn the most

We do what we wish to learn the most all our life. In ways that appear most paradoxical. But the experts in those areas are those who seek and respect what they appear to do the opposite of.

Pic courtesy Pooja (Horsely Hills)

The teacher teaches well only when he seeks to learn.


The warrior fights well only when he seeks peace.


The musician makes music well only when he seeks silence between the sounds.


The doctor performs surgery well only when he seeks to heal.


The writer writes well only when he seeks to find his expression between his words.


The leader leads well only when he seeks to follow.


The preacher preaches well only when he seeks to discover divinity.


The businessman does business well because he seeks to respect the flow of money.

The lover loves well only when he seeks to grow beyond himself and let go the object of his love.

The sweeper sweeps well only when he seeks cleanliness.

The painter paints well only when he seeks the negative spaces between his colors....

Thought for the Day - Leadership, Expectations and Support

When we expect something from someone we place them in a situation where they try to fulfill our expectations. It's rather funny but its a human need almost. As we know expectations can place a severe burden on the one on whom they are placed. But if used well, they can push people beyond their boundaries to achieve big things. Exactly the kind of things that leaders wish for.

Ordinary leaders expect people to fail or not to match up to a standard, and thereby set them up for failure. This comes from their belief that most people will work less, and are not oriented to learning. In such a case even if we give a well equipped person an average or even low standards to achieve, and from the very beginning give all indications to the person concerned that we do not expect him or her to fulfill that standard, we are setting him or her up for failure. He or she will invariably tend to satisfy your expectations, and will perform below par. Of course you are proven right and your belief is fortified!

On the other hand, a good manager, sets high standards for average people and expect them to perform as if it was the most natural thing to do. They strive to fulfill your expectations. Many times they will on their own try to learn, put in longer hours, take ownership and seek to meet the high expectations. Again, more often than not, they will tend to fulfill your expectations. For your part, all the leader needs to do is hold your thought that they will fulfill your expectations, that they will find a way, and leave it at that. No rushing in for hand holding, no showing off your superior knowledge, no telling them how to do it.

The best method adopted by the masters is to expect the best from people, and when they need it, support them with the required inputs. Most times if they are told clearly what you expect of them, and if they are equipped well, they will find the way themselves.  They will learn and they will grow. They will do it themselves.

Often we find that we label people from our impressions of them and expect them to fail or succeed based on our impressions. If we expect them to fail they fail anyway (most times at least unless they are made of stern stuff). On the other hand we could expect them to succeed without giving them clear directions and without equipping them well, and risk being displeased by their lack of success or lack of speed in their success. The above expectations are not healthy expectations. They place the wrong set of expectations on the people and set them to fail.

The best way for the leader, teacher, mentor, elder, team mate and coach to drive the ward forward is to state your expectations clearly, higher standards than what the ward can achieve normally, expect the best from them and hold the thought firmly in your head. No rushing in with judgements and help at the first sign of slipping, no recriminations and hard opinions - just state the facts and hold your peace and convey your support and confidence. By giving support unconditionally and without hesitation, providing inputs required, you allow the person to find the path to achieve those expectations. You have taught the person to fish! You are a true leader.

I love this quote:
"If you tell me, I'll listen. If you show me, I'll see. If you let me experience, I'll learn." - Lao Tsu.

Alexander the Great's Art of Strategy - Partha Bose

Rajesh recommended this book by Partha Bose highly (Penguin India, 264 pages, Rs. 295) and I read through it with great interest. One one hand Partha Bose takes us through Alexander's life and on the other, he intersperses the story with modern day examples in the world of business to show how these strategies hold good even today. Strategies of war, especially used by someone who conquered a large part of the globe, from the Ionean Sea to the Himalayas, one who was undefeated in battle, would certainly have timeless elements.that will hold good forever - after all war is about life and death and every single cell would be employed for the sake of survival.

In the beginning much is told about the influence of Alexander's father Phillip on his life (and on Macedonia itself). Philip was the pioneer of the building of well-prepared, coordinated fighting units (as opposed to the rather undisciplined and unfocussed armies  of those days). He trained his forces into the famous and almost impregnable phalanx formation of the Macedonians, modified weapons for maximising damage to opponents and minimising damage to self. Philip developed a professional army cadre. In fact Macedonian armies came with Alexander so far across the globe because they joined the force by choice and not by force.(as was common then). Horses were trained for 5 years, superior horsemanship was taught, soldiers were trained to withstand intense hardship and made better than other fighters. Stories of past victories were told to the soldiers to improve their morale and pride. What I found interesting was that a code of conduct was shared with the soldiers and every soldier knew it. Violators were made examples of!

Philip was an exponent of expanding his kingdom without fighting (which he used only as a last resort). Most kings were bought over by bribes, alliances and even marriage. Meanwhile Philip gave his son Alexander one of the best education anyone could have got - under the tutelage of the philosopher Aristotle - at Mieza, where a bunch of noblemen's children studied with Alexander for 3 years. In those days Alexander (356-323 BC) learned the basics of strategy, of acquiring and using information well, of using diverse sources to triangulate and get the information to plan his strategy. Much importance was given to building character through multiple rounds of self-enquiry (which showed later  in Alexander's magnanimity and his concern for his soldiers). Under Aristotle, Alexander learned to train his mind to look for patterns and facts and synthesise them to form his famous strategies, developed a risk taking culture and understood the importance of asking good questions to get correct information.

Alexander became King of Macedonia after his father was assassinated. He was the proponent of  using small armies effectively and ended the rather crude full frontal battle as was common then - a mode that had no strategy and was fought on mere strength. He rose beyond mere tactics and used strategy - choosing not to do things when the opponent expected him to, choosing where to engage in battle, planning when to enter and when to exit, and even how to do battle so it inflicts maximum damage on opponents and a minimum on his own.

Alexander was known to be magnanimous in victory as is shown in his battle against the Indian king Porus whom he made King of an even bigger empire after defeating him in battle. Other traits of the man who defeated Persias's mighty army led by Darius over a period of ten years, with a much smaller force, were to minimise ambiguity and uncertainty (good business sense), appointing visible leaders, specifying clarity in roles, sowing a transparent succession process. Alexander would use overwhelming force to destroy to send signals - thus creating the illusion he wanted to deceive his opponents. He was most known for acting swiftly and decisively and for taking his opponents by surprise.  The Macedonians were known for their lightning speed and surprise tactics.

Alexander always chose to engage in land and not at sea - his strength was not the sea. Alexander would not hesitate to burn his ships so as to tell his soldiers that there was no retreat (just as he burnt his baggage and loot to help his movement). When fighting the daunting Persian army, he evoked the mythical Trojan war to spread a sense of elation among his troops. Alexander used good public relations and communications to built an air of invincibility, an illusion and created a myth of his role as divinely ordained, giving his troops even greater sense of belief that they were invincible. As a leader Alexander had many faces - trusting, inspirational, connective, aggressive, got down to the thick of the war and a humanistic style. He was always known to be in the thick of the battle, always at the forefront of his army, gave decent burials to opponent soldiers, treated their families respectfully. He would ride up and down the army before the fight and motivated his forces, calling soldiers by name and recalling past victories and acts of valour.

Alexander always believed that when possible, always attack.

On a bigger level he had a purpose and plan to globalise the world. He encouraged the mingling of communities and nationalities, hired local talent. One of the key factors to his great victories were establishing forward bases and building of logistic support. The cities of Kandahar, Herat, Begram and Samarkand were built by him as were some sixteen others, including Alexandria in Egypt. He kept his army logistics simple. They carried their own supplies themselves, set up forward bases wherever possible, planned meticulously in advance, broke his armies into small units in the deserts and hills for more flexibility and established a single point of contact.

Alexander was a master in the art of deceptive strategy. (I loved the quote - "all warfare is based on deception"). After conquering lands as far as India, going through the mighty armies of Persia, beating the dreaded Afghan tribesmen, passing the searing heat of the desert, scaling the treacherous Hindukush mountains, crossing mighty rivers and conquering lands in India, Alexander was struck down by fever suspected to be malaria and died on his return journey in Babylon.

It is an interesting book and certainly one that gets the mind thinking. Many strategies make sense even now of course, in any battlefield, sports or business. Attack, plan, implement, be ahead of the mental game, believe in yourself and the army, show integrity and generosity, prepare thoroughly. Enjoyable read though I skipped parts of the business examples which spoiled the flow for me a bit. But Partha Bose is an erudite man and it shows in his writing. Alexander's story is fascinating just as the detailed accounts of the famous wars are, complete with maps, tactics and speeches.

The Paradoxes of Our Life - What we do not grasp stays

What we do not grab at or grasp tightly, stays. What we try to grab, spills out. Like water in a palm. Like a catch in the slips.

Pic Satish

To have, let go.

A Whole New Mind - Daniel H. Pink

Continuing the learning from Rajesh's library this week, I read 'A Whole New Mind' (Marshall Cavendish Business, BR 9.99, 246 p) by Daniel H. Pink. The book comes with a tag line that says 'Why Right Brainers Will Rule the Future' - which explains it all. Pink talks of the future and the emerging world where the almost forgotten right brainers - the supposedly creative ones and the arty ones - will have an advantage. Pink makes a case that rather elusive "creative", "instinctive" or "right brain" stuff can be "learned" and that it is best to balance and learn both sides of the brain for the best effect in one's career and life in the future. Or rather to be more prepared for how the world would shape up soon.

For those who (like me) are rather puzzled about the right brain and left brain, the funda of the two sides is such. The left brain is about logic, analytical, detail, small picture based, sequential, of specialisation, rational and so on. The right brain (previously ignored for being rather touchy feely) is about inventiveness, empathy, joy, meaning, non-linear and so on.

Pink says that the world will need right brainers as the three As - Asia, Automation and Abundance - will drive the world (or at least the western world that he lives in) to adopt the rigth brained to meet the future. Asia - because all left brained jobs can be outsourced there for much cheaper, Abundance - because now we no longer have to struggle for daily existence and can look for the higher levels in Maslow's scale and Automation - because it will also take over many clerical or lowly left brained jobs. So all you left brained people - learn some right brained stuff. The way forward, with all this happening, is towards high concept and high touch! Pink describes high concept as the ability to create artistic and emotional patterns, to detect patterns and opportunities, to write satisfying narrative and combining seemingly unconnected ideas into a  novel invention. High touch is about empathy, subtlety of human interaction, finding joy in one self, the pursuit of purpose and meaning.

The six senses that Pink suggests one develop and pay more attention to in the development of the right brain activity (which can be cultivated) are these - design, story, symphony, empathy, play and meaning.

Design is about seeing design in everything - in business, in good design and bad design and in getting our mind to design new stuff aesthetically. Pink suggests we note down good and bad design, get used to design, get choosy about things we buy and start the process in our minds.

Story is the art of story telling which moves away from the bullet points culture to a rounded story which people remember more. Story telling can be learnt and be used in business as well (the most left brained activity as considered by people but the one that drives the money and jobs!). Pink talks of the classical story form - of departure, initiation and return of the protagonist - and the increasing use of story in healing and medicine. To develop these skills Pink asks us to write the 50 word story, to read about story writing, to write more stories and understand the storytelling business.

Symphony is of seeing relationships - as in music and painting, and understanding negative spaces. Music and painting can be learned and appreciated and Pink gives the examples of three types - the boundary crosser (one who jumps easily into seemingly unrelated areas), the metaphor maker (user of metaphors) and the inventor (again not one who is trained specifically in that area) - as the three major types that show up in this area. To appreciate symphony better, Pink suggests one takes art and music classes, listen and appreciate, celebrate amateurishness, seek solutions to problems and so on.  A classic example that he gives and also that Carol Dweck gives in her book 'Mindset' is that of a 'before' and 'after' self-sketch - the difference that a 5 day sketching course can do is unbelievable (seeing is believing so check the net for those before and after sketches).

Empathy is that quality that will turn out to be a big diffrentiator in the future in managerial skills, decision making skills, people skills - and one needs genuine empathy (can be measured as empathy quotient) as against lip service. (Empathy being "your pain in my heart".) Pink suggests we empathise more by putting ourselves in others shoes often and understanding the world from their point of view.

Play is that part where one needs to use games, play and humour to carry along the team and the self for higher productivity. There is a statistic where Pink says that physicians who played video games fo 3 hours or more every week made 37% fewer mistakes in laproscopic surgeries and performed the task in 27% lesser time than those physicians who did not play games. Humor, seen as the highest form of intelligence, is considered right brained, and the use of humour is considered excellent to carry teams across and to send messages across. To incorporate play and humour, one can start appreciating the use of both, by watching children, reading books, meeting people, having fun, playing and so on.

In the last of the five senses, Pink argues for the importance of Meaning in our lives. He quotes Victor Frankl, a holocoust survivor, and a psychiatrist who lost his family in the Nazi camps at Auschwitz - "man's main concern is not the pursuit of pleasure or avoiding pain, but to see meaning in life". Pink also quotes His Holiness the Dalai Lama, as saying that "the purpose of life is to seek happiness...as we are all seeking soemthing better."

After every chapter, Pink gives a portfolio or exercises to do, references and tests to take, books to read, websites to visit and so on to practice the six senses. It is a fine insight, of this whole new mind, and one that I agree with. But its not new in the sense that the more evolved leaders or people of all time were the ones who always had a healthy balance of the big picture and the detail, the vision and the tactic, the need for discipline and empathy, the eye on team victory and on individual growth, the maintaining of morale through happiness and the imparting of responsibility through trust. In short, the use of both the left and right brain were always emphasised at higher levels of leadership. It has always been the case that the two parts of the brain need to be balanced and developed well, and one cannot stay stuck, saying that one belongs only of one side and not the other. Studies have proved that both can be developed and one need not fall into one label or anorher - all it needs is some work! To bring play, creativity, humour, joy, empathy, spirituality and meaning into our lives is a huge step forward for mankind and I totally endorse Pink's ideas and views and hope that people embrace these ideas not so much for progressing in careers as for being fuller and more complete and joyful  people. 'A Whole New Mind' is a nice easy read and one that is enjoyable and informative as well. Recommended read for its nice and interesting perspective that is well preserved.

Mindset, A New Psychology of Success - Carol S. Dweck

The debate between whether talent works best or hard work with a growth mindset works is finally over. 'Mindset - The New Psychology of Success' (Ballantine Books, USD 16, 246 p) addresses these issues precisely and presents convincingly the case in favour of hard work and the growth mindset. Another good one from Rajesh's collection, Carol Dweck's book 'Mindset' is an interesting and engrossing book that focuses on the two governing mindsets that rule our lives and how one mindset can help us grow to our potential and how the other may not. The well-known Stanford psychologist has researched enough to know what she is talking about and she gives examples from sports, schools, colleges, business, relationships, teaching, coaching and it is fascinating to see the fine differences and conclusions she presents. The book primarily is about the two mindsets - fixed mindset and the growth mindset - on which she dwells in detail.

The book states that anything can be learned and that hard work and growth-oriented learning is more likely to take you closer to full potential than simply relying on 'talent'. The author brings out the basic differences between learners and non-learners and states that learners are the ones who are likely to fully achieve their potential. But the two mindsets - fixed and growth - seem paradoxical and appear to be the opposite. For example the fixed mindset makes a person want to always succeed (so they do not try anything new for fear of failure), so they do the same things again and again, because "smart people always succeed". The growth mindset person sees success in stretching themselves and in learning, and thereby becomes smarter in the long run. Most people who believe that talent can see them through without the need to work hard and constantly learn, fall into the fixed mindset.

Primarily what the book says gives hope to everyone and pushes them to do better because it is a question of learning constantly. Intelligence is not fixed. One failure or success does not define you. The more you use your intelligence the better it gets. So the person who is constantly challenging oneself, who does not worry about hiding shortcomings and who is playing with bigger and older people is constantly bettering himself. Challenge and interest go hand in hand for the one with the growth mindset. And the harder the challenge the harder they work. Clearly the Fixed Mindset gives short term results while Growth Mindset is for long term.

In sports, where the concept of the 'natural' is most common, the book pretty much proves that there are no such thing as naturals. Talent is the starting point but there is an enormous amount of hard work required. The case of Wilma Rudolph, the fastest female sprinter on the earth in 1960, winning 3 Olympic golds is one such case (she had braces on her legs till she was 12 and was not expected to survive her illness or even walk). Apart from some (like McEnroe who has not had the growth mindset and a few others) the author talks of James Marshall, an American football star, who scored an own goal in a big match but quickly got out of the mindset and made his team win by scoring two goals after recovering from the horrendous mistake he made. She cites Mohammed Ali who was not built like a boxer but trained on his strengths, and Michael Jordan who worked twice as hard as any, as cases of sportsmen who put in lots of hard work to get where they did. It is really about understanding that talent is not everything, and hard work and growth orientation is the key. People with talent as their main weapon stopped working hard.

While on how these mindsets affect the fortunes of companies, the book cites companies that did well, those that did not and those that did well and sustained it. The leaders of companies that did well - leaders with the growth mindset - were not larger than life, were not ego oozing, not highly talented but self effacing people who asked questions and confronted the most brutal answers, looked failure in the face and maintained faith they would succeed in the end surely. They did not try to prove that they were better than the others, surrounded themselves with able people, looked at mistakes and deficiencies, added skills needed for the future. They were not worried about measuring and protecting fixed abilities, looked directly at their mistakes, received feedback and altered their strategies accordingly. For growth leaders, success was about learning and growing, and failure was motivating, and a wake up call to put more effort. Iacocca and Welch are compared and other leaders such as Lou Gerstner and Anne Mulcahy are analysed for their mindsets. Leaders are made and not born concludes the study (I agree). And the best thing is that they are made by themselves. In the corporate scenario, the book says, we have bosses and not leaders. Leaders are the ones who have genuine empathy, who mentor and guide their employees and peers, and not boss over them.

In the areas of relationships as well, the issue of the mindset can make or break the relationship. In the fixed mindset, people seek revenge and in the growth mindset they look at forgiveness and moving on. Most seem to think that if you have to work at it, the relationship is not for you. In fixed mindset we tend to look at  relationships as mind reading exercises. The mindsets also explore the connection between problems and counselling, shyness, bullies and victims.

The chapter that interested me most was the one on parents, teachers and coaches who have the biggest impact on students, children and wards. The book emphasises the attitude of developing and conveying the fact that you are interested in the child's / ward's development. It warns agains giving the child and ward needless praise as it conveys to the kid that he / she is more talented and can set them off on the fixed mindset path. It is better to keep the child pushing his / her limits each time, than giving up. (Make them push limits a bit each time without demeaning them.) Instead of protecting them from failure by lowering standards, it is better to talk of bettering their preparation and of effort. It is important that we convey the right messages, clearly and honestly and mean what we say because children learn and pass on messages. Coming from Hyderabad and Andhra Pradesh where achieving the IIT or Engineering rank is paramount, I can identify with parents who appear to want the best for the child in the worst way. "We love you they say but on our terms". Great teachers, Dweck says, believe in growth and intellect and are fascinated by the process of learning. They set high standards and a motivating atmosphere. (There is the amazing story of a group of disadvantaged children doing amazing things when standards were set higher - 3 and 4 year olds reading vocabulary for high school students, 7 year olds reading the "Wall Street Journal" and older kids reading Plato's Republic, Animal Farm, Machiaevelli. 5th graders reading the Mice and Men, Joy Luck Club, To Kill a Mockingbird and having discussions as well.)

The growth mindset is about hard work and more hard work. Talent is good but to rely on it entirely is useless. With hard work you are likely to go a long way in the long run. But hardwork and growth is the real clincher. We need to set high standards for wards to work with (or colleagues, or team mates even) to work with and equip them with the right tools to handle it and guide them. It's always beter to tell the truth and show them how to bridge the gap and not leave them in the middle. The best teachers are about learning.

While dealing with coaches, the book cites hard driven coaches who got results, but who did not help the players grow in other areas. The cases of Bobby Knight, the coach for the successful Indiana University and that of JohnWooden, the coach for UCLA are examined. Wooden taught his players to be successful in life while Knight restricted himself to the Championships - even sacrificing the players self-esteem to achieve that goal. Success was seen as being full preparation and full effort - "you may be outscored but you will never lose". I love that statement. All you need is to make your best effort.

The best coaches never differentiated between their wards and treated everyone equally. They were non-judgmental in their talk on developing the ward (not simply praise, but feedback). They set high standards and give process feedback and the growth framework. They believe that everyone can learn, are tolerant of mistakes, do not judge, show the process, ask for commitment and full effort, give respect and coaching and develop the players potential.

While on changing one's mindset the book dwells on the importance of asking for help, doing those small acts that could change things, working on beliefs and mindsets and get a process orientation. One has to get over the-world-owes-me and denial (as in my-life-is-perfect syndrome). One should work at the mindset by pushing gently to find something harder to do when something is easily achieved. One should also remember that champs are people who work the hardest and constantly challenge themselves. The best way of course is to learn and help learn.

When you think of any failure, says Dweck, feel it, then get over it after taking any feedback worth taking. One must understand that it is about high effort and high risk (what if we make the effort and its still not enough). Certainly low effort has no chance. On ability and accomplishment there are examples of Edison, Mozart and others who learnt and practiced for years. Research showed that the ones who did well were the ones who were treated like geniuses - and they performed. The key is in being treated like geniuses with clearly stated standards, with help and hardwork and not simply by attaching positive and negative labels.

In a wonderful visual at the end of the book Dweck condenses the two mindsets and explains it all in a nutshell. Simply the Fixed Mindset is about guys who desire to look smart, who avoid challenges, who give up easily, who get defensive, who see effort as fruitless, who ignore useful nagative feedback, who feel threatened by others successes and as a result of all this, they plateau early and achieve less than their full potential. The growth mindset guys desire to learn, to embrace challenges, to persist in the face of setback, to see effort as the path to mastery, to learn from criticism, to find lessons and inspiration from others success and reach even higher levels of achievement as a result. The growth mindset takes you closer to your potential.

The book slams the basic idea that intelligence and superior output cannot be cultivated. It talks of how exceptional individuals have a special talent in identifying their strengths and weaknesses. Success is learning and not about proving that you are smart. It is about stretching, about self-esteem, learning, preparation and effort.

I loved the book because it validates much of what I feel. I do a workshop called 'The Champion's Mindset' based on my experiences as a cricketer, writer, lecturer and coach, and my years in the corporate arena, and can see  how wonderfully Dweck has put the fine ideas of talent and hard work in place. I identify with almost everything she says, in each arena that I have been exposed to, As the book's blurb says it is a good book to read for every parent, coach, teacher, corpoate leader to have, to own. Wonderful stuff and a must read for everyone.

Thought for the Day - It's not the money, It's how we use it

It is not about how much money we want that is the question - it is always about what we plan to do with it when we have it. Because the equation is that unless we have the uses for it, we will not get the money for it! So the key really is to begin at the other end of the pipeline, as all entrepreneurs do, and not by merely wanting money because everyone says we should have money!

Pic courtesy - Satish

A vibrant enterprise (read as career, life, business) is always built because of the outcome and what it means to you. It is never begun as 'I have so much money so what should I do with it' because that's a sure way of losing your money or running a low energy business - the kinds that wind up after a few months because you're not getting the kind of money or return or fun you expected. If we only want the money and have no use it will end up rotting in the locker instead of giving you pleasure of creation and acquisition.

So then, if we know pretty much what we want to do with the money and why, the money presents itself. In innumerable ways - equity, loans, investments and so on and so forth. Money really is never the problem - it is what you can do with it or rather, what you really want to do with it. The more we use the money, the more it gets energised and the better the flow. But the key as always is the end - how am I going to use the money.