Confidently Humble

Which should you have, lots of confidence, or lots of humility? It's a trick question! Why not have both? Is that even possible? I think it is. As a matter of fact, this is an idea that goes all the way back to Socrates and Plato. (If I tricked you with that first question, I wonder if you even read the title of this post.)

Lately, I have been paying attention to a lot of the wisdom coming from a couple of Stanford professors. Their names are Jeff Pfeffer and Bob Sutton. I wrote about them in this post: The Knowing-Doing Gap. And, today, I walk to talk about what Sutton calls, “The attitude of wisdom.”

According to Sutton, the attitude of wisdom is about being simultaneously confident and humble. It's about knowing what you know and having enough confidence to act. While, at the same time, being comfortable enough with doubt that you remain open to learning. The attitude of wisdom is about being confident and humble. Perhaps confidently humble.

Many times in life we need lots of confidence to get the job done. Confidence is a good thing. However, when that confidence goes too far, and turns into arrogance or hubris, things start to backfire. This is when we close our minds to feedback. We shut ourselves off to learning and improvement. I know I have made this mistake. Thinking I had it all figured out. Yikes! It's a recipe for disaster.

Being very confident and also very humble, is a paradox. It seems to be a contradiction. And, I think the main reason I like to write about paradoxes is because I'll never run out of material. When it comes to resolving paradoxes, the challenge will never end. I think striking the right tone, between confidence and humility, will take a lifetime of practice. This all relates to one of my very favorite paradoxes, “The more you know, the more you know you don't know.” So true. And so humbling. I think that sentence sort of sums up the attitude of wisdom.

There's a guy out there, named Al Pittampalli, who is talking about the idea of being persuadable. What he found is that there are lots of book written on how to become more persuasive. But, there exists a paucity of books on how to be persuadable. The attitude of wisdom would suggest that we need to be both persuasive and persuadable. However, like Pittampalli says, to be persuadable requires humility. And often times, in our culture, humility is conflated with weakness.

How about one last paradox? Whether you like him or not our President, Barack Obama, says some pretty interesting things. In his book The Audacity of Hope, Obama talks about some of the things he does when he feels his own hope fading. Being a public servant can be a thankless job and the president is not immune to doubt. To strengthen his resolve, Obama reflects on Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, and the people, “who ultimately laid down their lives in the service of perfecting an imperfect union.”

Those last four words are what got my attention, “perfecting an imperfect union.” It's kind of like a paradox. It's kind of like what Robert Browning said about how a man's reach should exceed his grasp. I hope, and I believe, that America has this attitude of wisdom. I think it takes a pretty high level of maturity to be confident in America's greatness and still understand that she has room from improvement. I think we should all strive to perfect an imperfect union. Be it the United States of America. Or, be it our very own marriage.

I think we are pretty familiar, and comfortable, with either/or decisions. That is why I asked the question at the beginning of this post. But, I also believe we are capable of operating at a higher level. A level where we recognize and solve paradoxes. It's something I wrote about in this post: Operate at a higher level.

The Logic of Suicide

I think it is safe to say that suicide is one of the most traumatic events in all of human existence. But, I don't believe that should preclude us from discussing the subject. This post ties together the three elements of work, emotions, and paradoxes.

On the face of it, the idea that suicide is logical seems contradictory. It seems unacceptable. It doesn't make sense to most of us. However, to the person who commits the act, the decision contains its own logic. The fact that we may not understand does not mean the sufferer has not thought things through.

It may seem weird but suicide actually does relate to work and to business. Often times a company will think that their customers, or prospective customers, are acting irrationally. The producer of a new product, or service, usually has a picture, in his or her mind, of how their creation will be accepted by the market. And, as it turns out, things usually turn out other than planned.

Some years ago a company created motorized bicycles, to be sold to low income individuals, in third world countries. A fair number of bikes were sold but then something bizarre happened. All of a sudden, a lot of orders came in for just the motor. Meaning, people didn't want the whole bicycle, they just wanted the motor that powered the bike. This didn't make any sense.

The producer of the motorized bikes knew that these poor people needed reliably affordable transportation. They also knew that the motors were durable and could last a long time. They should not being breaking down. What's more, if consumers tried to take the motor, and attach them to their existing bicycle, they would spend much more than if they simply bought the preassembled product.

What were these crazy customers doing? Were they poor and dumb? This sort of scenarios plays out quite often. Most the time the producer tries to force the issue. Since the manufacturer often sees no use for a motor without a bike, they can be quite insistent that the customer is wrong. Then they refuse to sell the motor without the bicycle. That is a bad mistake.

As luck would have it, this particular company was wiser than most. Instead of pushing forward, against these “stupid” customers, the company went out and looked around. They went to see, with their own eyes, why these silly peasants didn't want the entire bike. What they found surprised them.

People were using the bicycles, to get around, but they also didn't mind pedaling themselves. So the motorized bikes weren't a huge draw. However, humans are ingenious and these customers found a better use for the bicycles. As it turns out, there exists a bigger headache than pedaling yourself around on a bike. The bigger challenge is transporting water.

The majority of the people, who bought these motorized bicycles, were indeed low income. And, the way they make the little money that they do is by farming. Many of them would farm rice. As it happens, rice requires extensive irrigation. It requires a lot of water.

What these poor and “dumb” people discovered was that the motor, from these new bikes, could be rigged up to propel water and irrigate their fields. This was something they wanted! Pedaling a bike is relatively easy. Watering your rice fields can be a real pain in the butt.

To this company's credit, they went and looked at the situation. In a moment the company changed course and got into the farming business. They adapted the motors and sold them specifically to water the fields. Most companies don't do this. People tend to be more stubborn. Instead of accepting that their ingenious invention is more useful somewhere else, most people refuse to change. They simply conclude that people are crazy or irrational. They continue producing what they want to produce instead of making what people what to buy. This is a big mistake.

Peter Drucker once said that there are no irrational customers, there are only lazy producers. And, as usual, Peter was right. Instead of assuming people are crazy it's better to assume people are pretty smart. Your customers are fully capable of thinking. And, when they do, they come up with some wild stuff. No producer of bicycles could have predicted that their real success would come in farming. And, because they are so committed to bikes, most producers would be unable to exploit an opportunity that lay right before their eyes. Most people wouldn't even try to look. Then there are those that would look and they would see what is happening. Yet they would still decide to continue making bicycles.

In a weird way, this brings us to suicide. The majority of people, who commit suicide, are suffering from depression. Depression is an emotion. It's kind of like sadness on steroids. And, suicide is, sometimes, the paradoxical solution. Thankfully we have people like Martin Seligman.

Seligman is a professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania. In 1967 he was conducting experiments with dogs. In one condition the dogs were repeatedly administer a shock and, understandably, they jumped to a new location were there was not shock. In the second condition the dogs were again shocked. But, this time, they could not move to escape the shock. Before long the dogs realized there was nothing they could do and they stopped trying to avoid the shocks. They had learned that they were helpless to change their situation.

This became known as the theory of learned helplessness, and it's a really big deal. I won't get into it here but this experiment completely upended the world of psychology. Until this point, psychology was dominated by Skinner's theory of behavioralism. The behavior of these dogs violated the prediction of the behavioralist theory. Seligman's insight ushered in the age of cognitive psychology.

That's not the end of the story. A third experiment was ran on these dogs. This time, once again, the dogs were given a safe zone. Meaning, they were able to escape the shocks. But something really interesting happened. Even though the dogs could escape the shock, many of them chose not to. They were simply resigned to their lot and they sat there enduring the shocks. Meaning, the dogs had come to learn, to believe, they were helpless.

Seligman would argue, this is what is usually at the center of depression. Over time, depressed people have come to believe there is nothing they can do to fix the problems in their life. They suffer. And they can suffer for a long time. Eventually, some come to believe the situation will never improve. They get stuck. And, this belief gets stronger and deeper every day.

Some people come to believe there is nothing they can do. They believe they are permanently stuck in misery. For some of these people death is the only way to end the suffering. And, that is what they choose. As paradoxical as it is, some people come to believe that death is the only way to end suffering. This is the logic of suicide.

Please understand, in no way am I advocating suicide as a good option. I was simply trying to illustrate that people are logical and they do think things through. This story has more to it that you must hear. Suicide does have a logic, but it also has a mistake. In the majority of situations there is a way to fix the problems of life.

The majority of people, who choose to end their own lives, had problems that could have been fixed. I'm not saying they didn't try. And, I'm not saying fixing problems is easy. But, for whatever reason, this particular person couldn't solve this particular problem. This is where it becomes extremely important that we destigmatize depression. As it stands, a lot of bias swirls around what we call “mental illness” (a term I am not a fan of.)

Nobody wants to be labeled “crazy” or “mentally ill.” Often for pride, and other understandably vain reasons, people who are suffering do not reach out for help. As I've said, most problems can be fixed. However, when a person repeatedly tries, and fails, the problem is compounded. Instead of believing the problem is difficult, this person can start to believe that he or she is defective or is a failure. It can easily become a downward spiral.

Not even for one second am I suggesting that I have all the answers. The reason for this post is very simple. It breaks my heart to see people believe they are so stuck that they give up on life. We all have problems, some worse than others. Just because a person is having difficulty with their struggles, does not make them crazy or mentally ill. As a substitute I guess I kind of like the term “troubled.” Maybe we should says that the person is “troubled” or “has troubles.” I really like that second one. To me, “has troubles” suggests impermanence. And, most problems, most troubles, are not permanent.

Don't get me wrong. I am as guilty as anyone. I have called people crazy before. And I have, hopefully, learned from my mistake. What I've learned is that I called someone crazy when I didn't know much about them. What I've learned is that, before we label a person crazy, maybe we should take a lesson from a bicycle manufacturer. Maybe we should go out and look. Maybe we should try to understand.

Simple is Difficult

How can you not love paradoxes? They're so funny. Simple is difficult. So true!

This short article is about Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert Sutton. Both Pfeffer and Sutton are professors at Stanford University. But there might be a problem. Being that I went to Cal, I guess I'm supposed to hate the Cardinal.

On a side note, in as much as we are about to enter college football season, I can't help but make a funny observation. Berkeley and Stanford are two of the most acclaimed academic institutions in the entire world. They also happen to be rivals. Having been a student, at Berkeley, I can tell you the two schools love to harass each other.

The funny thing is what they fight over. Here are two academic juggernauts and what symbolizes their rivalry? A football game. It's called the “Big Game” and it takes place in late fall. I consider it a lesson learned. Sports always have been, and always will be, more sexy than books. (Maybe I should "Sell Out" and change the subject of my blog...)

At any rate, back to the point of this post. Pfeffer and Sutton wrote a great book titled The Knowing-Doing Gap. As you are probably aware, in life, people know what they are supposed to do. But, often, they don't do it. The easiest example would be diet. People know they aren't supposed to be eating sugary snacks. But we do it anyways. I digress.

What Pfeffer are Sutton are concerned with is the knowing-doing gap in our work lives. Being professors they usually work at the organizational level. However, their advice is every bit as applicable to individuals as it is to organizations.

One of the barriers, to action, is complexity. Because they confuse people, complex ideas, concepts, and plans encourage procrastination. A confused mind tends to do nothing. For this reason it is usually a good idea to keep things simple. The problem is people tend to think that a successful outcome must be complicated and complex.

Here is what Pfeffer and Sutton say, “Simple talk is valuable because it is more likely to lead to action. It is difficult to dispute simple, direct ideas. One may disagree with a simple idea or a simple philosophy, but it is transparent at the outset. Second guessing and finger pointing are largely precluded. Simple philosophies, practices, and ideas are, ironically, more unlikely to be imitated by outsiders and competitors. Since most organizations have strong love for complexity, few will believe that a firm’s success is based on such simple premises. Consequently, they may not even try to implement what the successful organizations do.”

The authors use the word “ironically” when they could have, just as easily, used the word “paradoxically.” Paradoxes are ironic. And irony is entertaining. What the authors are saying is that it is possible to hide in plain sight. Hiding in plain sight is, in itself, a paradox. And, the reason it works, is because people distrust simplicity. So, often times, the answer you are looking for, can be hiding right in front of your nose. It usually is.

A simple strategy works better than a complex strategy. We know this intellectually. However, something in our gut makes us suspicious. We tend to think that hard things (and success is certainly hard) must be complicated things. What we must learn is that hard and complex and not necessarily synonymous. A thing can, in fact, be simultaneously simple and difficult.

Herein lies a paradox. People like to be effective. And, simple is more effective. However, at the same time, people have a distrust for simplicity. It's such a funny conundrum. What I have come to learn is that humans tend to think, and behave, in predictable patterns. For this reason, it's important to understand our tendencies.

When we understand our tendencies we are able to manage them. We are able to develop devices that help us get to where we want to go. I will end with two mental devices that have been developed to counter this human inclination towards complexity. You will probably recognize both.

The first one is slightly esoteric. It's called “Occam's Razor.” The idea is named after a gentleman who lived in the village of Ockham, England. To paraphrase Occam's Razor, it basically says that we should always search for the simplest of explanations. Stated differently, we should not permit of unnecessary complexity to explain events. Keep in mind that William of Ockham was born in the 13^th Century. Meaning, humans have been making this mistake for a long time. For more depth, you can Google Occam's Razor and find an interesting little article published by the math department at the University of California Riverside.

The other tool, that is useful to combat unnecessary complexity, is the KISS principle. First uttered by Kelly Johnson, of the Lockheed Skunk Works, KISS stands for “Keep It Simple Stupid.” Johnson was an engineer and all too familiar with people's tendency to complicate things. As you know, Lockheed creates military aircraft and this makes the KISS principle very important. While at battle, and in the field, mechanics need to be able to quickly repair aircraft. Obviously, a simple design better lends itself it quicker, and easier, repairs. Simplicity is, indeed, highly effective and functional. When we're making things harder than they need to be, we should remember to KISS ourselves.

A while back I wrote this, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, post: Don't trust yourself. And, as I am trying to convey, I think it's important that we understand our tendencies. As weird as it may sound, rather than distrust simplicity, we might want to distrust our instincts.

Safety is Just Danger Out of Place

The other day I was reading an interview, with Ellen DeGeneres, from March. In the article Ellen said something very interesting. She said, “I'm hosting the Oscars–because it's a really terrifying thing to do.” I love that! I don't know whether or not Ellen would use the nerdy “p-word.” But, she is definitely aware of the importance of the paradox.

To do something because it is scary is the very definition of a paradox. It is completely counter-intuitive. It's also very important. It is an idea I have heard, time and again, from successful people. A lot of successful people use fear to indicate the direction they should head. Meaning, when they fear something, they know that exact thing is what they must do.

Fear is arguably the most destructive force in modern life. Humans fear all kinds of stuff. Back in the day, when our survival was constantly in question, fear was an adaptive response. However, in the 21^st Century, in America, surviving day-to-day is a given. The problem is that no one told our brain.

The human brain is literally wired for anxiety. Anxiety is a a radar, it's our warning system. The emotion anxiety is meant to alert us of danger. For most of human existence we lived out in the open. Sure, we built shelters. But, they were nothing like modern houses.

This means, for the majority of the time humans have been on earth, we have been exposed to fairly high levels of danger. Anxiety is the body's way of alerting us of danger. Given this arrangement, false positives are acceptable. Meaning, when you live on the open plain and you hear a rustling of sticks or leaves, it is best to feel fear. Because this fear prepares us to flee or fight.

If the noise we hear is the result of a predator we are prepared to fight of run. If the noise was caused by the wind, or something, no big deal. We might feel some butterflies in our stomach. But, at least we're still alive. Better to be prepared than not. Hence the value of the false positive.

Undoubtedly there were humans that were more calm and serene. But they wouldn't last very long. The tranquil people would ignore the sound in the bush and eventually get eaten. They would be wiped out of the gene pool. Hopefully you can see why famed psychologist, Aaron Beck, said, “Evolution favors anxious genes.”

This is important to recognize because it teaches us about our tendencies. When we feel fearful, our first assumptions should be that our brain is being overly vigilant. If we know something about the architecture our our mind, namely that it tends toward false positives, then we can better cope with the vicissitudes of life.

I once heard it said that we have a Fred Flintstone brain, but we live in a George Jetson world. I think this is a useful analogy. Because the reality of life has changed (at least in the developed world.) We now live in well-built houses, with deadbolt locks on the doors, and 911 on the dial. The level of danger that humans experience, day-to-day, is quite low.

For this reason fear has gone from being adaptive to being maladaptive. Meaning, fear used to keep us alive. Now, it mostly holds us back. If we simply understand this human tendency we are better able to handle it. Ellen DeGeneres seems to have figured it out. And, she can teach us the modern paradox that safety is just danger out of place. Meaning, in a competitive world, being comfortable is the road to ultimate discomfort.

Listen, if you live in a tribal land, or third world country, fear has an important role to play. However, if you live in America, as I am fortunate enough to, fear will get in your way. For this reason it is advisable to do the very thing you fear. A pretty good rule of thumb is to use fear as a beacon, directing you to the very things you should do. This is what Ellen is doing. Or, to put this whole thing in the words of Emerson, “Do the thing you fear and the death of fear is certain.”