A couple of weeks ago I wrote about Roy F. Baumeister’s research showing how decision fatigue affects hiring, self-control and is tied to ego-depletion.

Self-control and will power aren’t traits you as much about as you did when I was a kid; these days the focus is on instant gratification, whether it’s a child demanding a treat, an adult looking for a new job or you-name-it.

The question really boils down to whether self-control really offers significant long-term benefits?

Benefits that are substantial enough to stand up to the embarrassing tantrum your child pitches when she doesn’t get what she wants?

In experiments beginning in the late 1960s, the psychologist Walter Mischel tormented preschoolers with the agonizing choice of one marshmallow now or two marshmallows 15 minutes from now. When he followed up decades later, he found that the 4-year-olds who waited for two marshmallows turned into adults who were better adjusted, were less likely to abuse drugs, had higher self-esteem, had better relationships, were better at handling stress, obtained higher degrees and earned more money.

Impressive; certainly enough to at least get parents to think about showing some backbone and helping their kids learn self-control.

But what about those of us who are Millennials, Gen Xers and Boomers? Is our situation hopeless? Are we destined/doomed to careen through life without those benefits if we don’t already have them?

Fear not. According to other research by Baumeister your self-control, AKA, will power, can be toned by exercising it, just like any other muscle—and he wrote a book about it.

In recent years the psychologist Roy F. Baumeister has shown that the force metaphor has a kernel of neurobiological reality. In “Willpower,” he has teamed up with the irreverent New York Times science columnist John Tierney to explain this ingenious research and show how it can enhance our lives.

Wow; buff self-control.

How cool is that?

UPDATE: I just read this article about SpongeBob, which adds an interesting kicker to the research.

In another test, measuring self-control and impulsiveness, kids were rated on how long they could wait before eating snacks presented when the researcher left the room. “SpongeBob” kids waited about 2 1/2 minutes on average, versus at least four minutes for the other two groups.

Image credit: Kirkus Reviews

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

“We are not made, or unmade, by the things that happen to us but by our reactions to them.” (from a comment on the original post)

I guess everyone has some kind of September 11^th story. I wrote mine in 2009 and am reposting it below.

A Different View of September 11

Much will be done today to commemorate the lives lost on September 11, 2001. The story I’m going to share has a different focus than most and one I believe is worth your time.

Among those who died that day was the husband of a woman I knew casually and because our acquaintance was casual I was surprised when she called nearly six months later.

I’ll call her “Kerry” and we talked for hours, but the kernel I want to share is this.

She needed support to move; not just move on, it was too early for that, but to physically move.

Kerry said the reaction to “Craig’s” death changed when people found out he died in the attack. It changed from sympathy or empathy to an almost macabre interest in how she felt because he died “that way.”

Many seemed to feel that her politics should change (she is ‘liberal moderate’, her words) and that the event should be the main focus not only in her life, but also for her two young daughters and she didn’t want that.

Kerry said she called me because she remembered my saying that I found it sad that John Kennedy Jr.’s life seemed to be defined by his father’s death; that he never was able to become anyone other than the little boy who saluted at the funeral.

Kerry said that she didn’t want her kids to be forever known as “Kristy/Jenny-her-father-was-killed-in-the-September-11-attacks”

The problem was that many of her family and friends were horrified at how she felt. They acted as if losing Craig September 11 made his death a national symbol, not a personal tragedy.

We talked many times over the next few months and the upshot was that Kerry did move far away where no one knew them. When Craig’s death came up in conversation Kerry just said that her husband had died; she said when her daughters were mature enough she would tell them what happened, but not until they had the opportunity for a normal life—not one filled with other people’s baggage.

I think for Kerry I was “the stranger on the plane,” the uninvolved person to whom you can say anything because you will never see or hear from them again and I was honored to play that part.

The death of a parent is always tragic. I know; I was five when the driver of the car in which my father was traveling fell asleep at the wheel and drove off a mountain road.

The point I want to make today is that we don’t forget, but we do move on and as we move we grow and change.

No matter how horrendous the event we all have the ability to choose what defines us and what memories rule our lives.

Never allow others to force you into a role that fits their view of what should define you.

Image credit: Foxtongue

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

I was reading a post from Mark Suster and I realized that something he said near the end really encompasses the way I try to live.

Life is an informational interview.

Informational interviews are how you learn; they entail talking to people in different walks of life, different positions and different ways of thinking.

Informational interviews require you to come with an open mind and your listening skills fully engaged.

It’s an approach that should flavor all parts of your MAP—reflect in your mindset, inform your attitude and permeate your philosophy.

Try it; you may be surprised, not only at how much you learn, but also how much fun it is.

Flickr image credit: Gangplank HQ

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

I have to admit that a post by Penelope Trunk, founder of Brazen Careerist, about “why you shouldn’t do a startup with women (if you’re a man)” greatly annoyed me, but not for the reasons you might think.

I have no quibble with what Trunk wrote about her own experience, but I do object strenuously to the idea that it is universally applicable.

Wondering if it was only me, I sent the link to KG Charles-Harris, founder/CEO of EMANIO and founder of the M3 Foundation, whose co-founder at EMANIO is female, and he emailed back,

“Interesting.  I hadn’t thought of this until now.  This is my first startup and my experience is that having Julie as co-founder has made us survive.”

I also sent it to Matt Weeks, Chief Marketing & Revenue Officer, Actio.tv and who occasionally writes for the Friday entrepreneur feature If the Shoe Fits,

“Some of the best women I’ve worked with were direct, authentic, professional, and had very similar styles as the men.  The open question is– were they adapting and modeling the men in the workplace to fit-in (having observed that crying and throwing tantrums was not likely to lead to advancement)….? or were they hard-wired to have the same style and temperament as men,and that was a key to their success…?   Most female workers are not about drama or making chaos or making their female-ness a centerpiece of the workplace dynamic or culture.  In fact having diversity in a fast-moving team with a variety of perspectives has led to better insight, better strategy and better product creation in my direct experience.  Great teams are better for the diversity of perspective, not hopelessly paralyzed and unable to focus. It depends how experienced they are in managing divergent views and coalescing around a single course of action.  That said, some men with whom I have worked indulged their male-ness,and narcissism, creating their own flavor of drama and chaos. This doesn’t even begin to figure-in the gender and sexual orientation component, which could flip the equation again.  And then flip it again.”

I also looked in the mirror and had to admit that I have been know to inject drama and chaos in my interactions, but those occasions had nothing to do with my gender.

They happened at that moment because I ran out of rope and they were over almost immediately because I reached deep or out and found more rope.

Personally, I have a hard time understanding monthly mood swings since I never experienced them, nor am I particularly comfortable with prolonged exposure to highly emotional people no matter their gender or orientation.

When I was young there seemed to be fewer choices, women got upset, got emotional and cried, whereas men got upset, got drunk and hit the wall or whatever was handy—I have done both—I wonder what that makes me?

The take-away is that your MAP will dictate the amount of drama and chaos acceptable in any culture you establish or that you are willing to personally endure.

Please join me tomorrow for a look at the power and pitfalls of influence.

Flickr image credit: scriptingnews

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

We glorify top managers, print their pictures in newspapers and magazines, praise their decisiveness and vision, give them awards and treat them like superstars. All they’re guilty of – the poor bastards – is believing the BS we write about them.” –Freek Vermeulen, Associate Professor of Strategy  and Entrepreneurship at the London Business School and author of “Business Exposed: The naked truth about what really goes on in the world of business”

Good press starts at a tender age, even before walking or talking, and continues, getting louder all the time.

Eventually, for some, it drowns out any bad press or critical comments, so they hear only the positive glowing phrases used to describe them—and they believe.

As the good press gets louder and belief becomes stronger anything resembling balance is jettisoned and what emerges is a tyrannical ego seated on a throne of hubris.

You often find that throne at the desk of a positional leader and the ego occupying it wreaking havoc in the name of leadership—and the higher the position the more extensive the havoc.

We are all living the cost of the hubris that occupies so many corner offices in the world’s financial community, not to mention the halls of politics, but hubris has been wreaking havoc for centuries.

Long before hubris destroyed our economy and forever changed our world, its results were obvious in the failed acquisitions so prevalent over the last few decades.

Yesterday, I quoted Gordon Segal, founder of Crate and Barrel, whose comment is perfectly applicable to any age or position, “No matter how successful you are, stay humble, stay nervous, and don’t believe your own press.”

Our world would be better if more leaders, from parents to teens to CEOs to politicians, stopped believing their own press.

Flickr image credit: Mike Cattell

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

I’m hearing the same lament from a lot of managers these days; the words and circumstances are different, but it boils down to the same thing—s/he has the knowledge, but doesn’t do anything.

It’s not just younger workers, but all ages.

The current term is “unengaged” and the problem is rampant.

Most managers who call don’t use that term, they complain that people just don’t care. They don’t care about doing more than the minimum; they don’t care about doing great work, instead of just adequate; they don’t care how the company is doing; the list of ‘they don’t care’ goes on and on.

They all see this as a problem with the people they hire.

They ask me where to source good candidates; how to better interview, so they can hire “people who give a damn.”

Some complain that the so-called entitled attitude of Millennials has spread to all ages.

These managers are a disparate group; they come from different industries and range from management newbies to senior executives, but they all have one thing in common.

None of them sees “not giving a damn” as a result of the way they manage, but 98% of the time it is.

So the next time someone you know (or you) complains about people not caring, suggest they ask the only person who really knows the answer—the one they will find in the mirror.

Flickr image credit: antkriz

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

This post was published first on Technorati

For more than a decade at RampUp Solutions and for the last five years at MAPping Company Success I’ve coached and written about what managers need to do to motivate and engage their teams and what employees really want from their managers. Others have been saying similar stuff for far longer.

We’ve been telling them what is most important to employees, i.e., clear communications on everything, including where the team is going and why, support and opportunities to grow, etc.

Nothing you haven’t heard before, but mostly anecdotal—no hard science to support it, so we end up preaching to the choir, not converting the non-believers.

Like Google.

Google employees deal in facts and stats, stuff that can be munched, crunched and analyzed, and have little use for anything else.

So it’s logical that when the company decided it needed to improve its management skills it turned to analytics to provide the answers.

“So, as only a data-mining giant like Google can do, it began analyzing performance reviews, feedback surveys and nominations for top-manager awards. They correlated phrases, words, praise and complaints.”

And guess what?

The data supported the same results that those of us without data have been saying for years.

But Google took it a step further and prioritized the list based on hard numbers.

And of eight core employee preferences do you know what came in dead last?

Technical skill and technical skill had been Google’s main criteria for promotion.

This finally brings us to my main point, which, this time, is supported by statistical research.

“Technical skill” covers far more ground than most people think. It refers to any hard science (math, engineering, chemistry, etc.), but also to soft sciences (psychology, social science, etc.), sales, finance, the arts—just about anything in which humans develop expertise.

The lesson here is that technical superiority does not predict success in a management/leadership role.

Managerial success is based on a person’s ability to connect in a meaningful way to those she manages and provide what each one needs to produce and grow.

Not new information, but now that it’s backed by hard science and with Google as the role model the choir just got a whole lot larger.

Flickr image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/warrantedarrest/74688743/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

A fascinating study of successful women brings to light some interesting and unexpected facts about women who know when and how to turn off “masculine” traits, i.e., aggressive, assertive and confident.

They received 1.5 times more promotions than masculine men, and about two times as many promotions as feminine men, regardless of whether the men were high or low self-monitors. They also received 3 times as many promotions as masculine women who were low self-monitors, affirming that masculine behavior alone does not garner success. … The study also showed that self–monitoring masculine women received 1.5 times as many promotions as feminine women, regardless of whether those women were high or low self-monitors.

This is researched proof of my own attitude of “work for an ideal, but you have to function in the real world” and the real world requires flexibility.

I’m guessing that these women were smart enough to apply whatever was needed to a given situation, instead of approaching them all the same way.

This seems to be the “why” to the results of a previous study by the same people.

“…learned behavior patterns — not biological sex — may be the greatest determinant of workplace success as measured by salary and promotion.”

If you are a woman, accepting the accuracy of the research does much to put career control directly in your hands. And that’s a good thing.

Of course, along with personal control comes personal responsibility when you can no longer blame external forces.

You need to take a hard look at your own actions; request input from those you trust to tell you the truth (not just what you want to hear or what fits their world view), then assess where you are, where you want to be and how best to get there.

Start your voyage immediately.

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gpaumier/5134947440/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

My post today has only three links, but the subject matter requires a good deal of thought and (uncomfortable) self-analysis if you are to take advantage of it, so I didn’t want to add anything else.

McKinsey is well-known for its consulting and studies; its newsletters are an amazing resource. Registration is free; I mention this because you will have to register to access information that will be of use whether you are running a Fortune 50 corporation, dealing with teenagers or anything in-between.

Have you heard of cognitive bias? It refers to the set way our brains work, whether we are aware of it or not—mostly not unless you make an effort. Keep in mind that although McKinsey is talking about corporate situations you can tweak the information for use under any circumstances.

• Behavioral strategy: Yet very few corporate strategists making important decisions consciously take into account the cognitive biases—systematic tendencies to deviate from rational calculations—revealed by behavioral economics. It’s easy to see why: unlike in fields such as finance and marketing, where executives can use psychology to make the most of the biases residing in others, in strategic decision making leaders need to recognize their own biases.

• Countering biases: Addressing cognitive challenges like these is hard because executives can’t change how their brains work. What they can do is put in place processes for challenging entrenched beliefs and approaches.

• Visual wrap: A quick, simple summary of the various types of bias.

I am familiar with many of my own biases and have found ways to either avoid or short-circuit them, so I know it is possible. And I encourage you to identify your own—just don’t waste your time trying to change them, because it’s not going to happen.

Image credit:  MykReeve on flickr

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Shakespeare wrote in his description of Feste, the jester in Twelfth Night that one should never underestimate a man who is “wise enough to play the fool.”

I’ve given that advice to executives, managers, workers and friends and it always works, especially if you broaden your concept of “fool.”

Being a fool doesn’t mean being foolish; it is more acting innocent or ignorant instead of showing off your knowledge or expertise.

Playing the fool draws out the other person; it gives you the opportunity to learn what they know and get a far better understanding of where they are coming from, where they are going and how they plan to get there.

Playing the fool is sort of like Undercover Boss where the CEO learns far more about her organization by pretending to be a candidate than she ever could in her normal persona.

However, I find fewer people willing to play the fool in these days of social media no matter how successful the technique.

They worry that playing the fool might be misconstrued in 140 characters and that is more important than the beneficial outcome that can result from playing the fool.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/eaglebrook/5571173181/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL