Some impressionistic takes from the book originals v2

Some Impressionistic takes from the book of
Adam Grant
“Originals “
( How Non-conformists move the world)
by Ramki
ramaddster@gmail.com

About the Author
Adam Grant is Wharton’s top-rated Professor and a leading
expert on how we can find motivation and meaning, and live
more generous and creative lives. He has been recognized as
one of the world's 25 most influential Management Thinkers
and Fortune’s 40 under 40.
He is the author of two New York Times bestselling books
translated into 35 languages. Originals explores how individuals
champion new ideas and leaders fight groupthink; it is a #1
national bestseller praised by J.J. Abrams, Richard Branson,
Malcolm Gladwell, and Sheryl Sandberg. .
Give and Take examines why helping others drives our success, and was named one
of the best books of 2013 by Amazon, Apple, the Financial Times, and The Wall Street
Journal—as well as one of Oprah's riveting reads and Harvard Business Review’s
ideas that shaped management.
Adam earned his Ph.D. in organizational psychology from the University of Michigan,
completing it in less than three years, and his B.A. from Harvard University, magna
cum laude with highest honors and Phi Beta Kappa honors.

 The New York Times bestselling author examines how
people can drive creative, moral, and organizational
progress-and how leaders can encourage originality in their
organizations.
 How can we originate new ideas, policies and practices
without risking it all Adam Grant shows how to improve the
world by championing novel ideas and values that go against
the grain, battling conformity, and bucking outdated traditions.
 Using surprising studies and stories spanning business,
politics, sports, and entertainment, Grant explores how to
recognize a good idea, speak up without getting silenced,
build a coalition of allies, choose the right time to act, and
manage fear and doubt.
Prelude

 Parents will learn how to nurture originality in children, and
leaders will discover how to fight groupthink to build cultures
that welcome dissent.
 Told through dazzling case studies of people going against
the grain, you'll encounter an entrepreneur who pitches the
reasons not to invest, a woman at Apple who challenged
Steve Jobs from three levels below, an analyst who
challenged secrecy at the CIA, a billionaire financial wizard
who fires employees who don't criticize him, and the TV
executive who saved Seinfeld from the cutting room floor.
Originals will give you groundbreaking insights about
rejecting conformity and how to change the world
Prelude

“The greatest leaders
don’t stop at introducing
original ideas into the
world. They create
cultures that promote
originality in others.”
By Adam Grant

Creative Destruction explains that originality begins
with questioning the status quo and argues that
managing risk is key to pursuing original ideas.
Key ideas:
 The 3 reasons why people don’t question the status
quo;
 Evidence that originals and entrepreneurs are risk
adverse;
 How to balance your risk portfolio.
1
Creative Destruction

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the
unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to
himself. Therefore all progress depends on the
unreasonable man. By George Bernard Shaw
The Risky Business of Going Against the Grain
 Orig-i-nal, adj The origin or source of something; from
which something springs, proceeds, or is derived.
 Orig-i-nal, n A thing of singular or unique character; a
person who is different from other people in an appealing
or interesting way. A person of fresh initiative or inventive
capacity.

Achievement
Conformity Originality
Conformity means following the
crowd down conventional paths and
maintaining the status quo.
Originality is taking the road less
travelled, championing a set of novel
ideas that go against the grain but
ultimately make things better.
Nothing is completely ORIGINAL.
All ideas are influenced by what we learn

 Originality starts with creativity.
 Generating a concept that is both novel and useful.
 But it doesn’t stop there.
 Originals are people who take the initiative to make their
visions a reality.

Question the
Default
Protect the
Downside
Domain Experience
, then broaden
Become an Idea
Machine
Procrastinate on
Purpose
Creativity
Creativity- 5 steps

Questioning the status Quo-Selection of Browser
 Grant talks about a study by economist Michael Housman.
 Housman studied data from 30,000 call-center employees.
 Surprisingly, the browser they used correlated with
statistics about job performance.
 The employees who used Firefox or Chrome stayed in
their jobs 15% longer, were 19% less likely to miss work,
had higher customer satisfaction rates, and shorter
average call times.
 But what the heck does a browser have to do with that?
 The answer might surprise you.
 Your browser choice says a lot about your mindset,
according to Grant.

 Safari and Internet Explorer come pre-installed.
 If you’re using them, you’re settling for a default.
 In the study mentioned above, the call-center employees
who used these browsers were less likely to deviate from
their sales scripts or standard operating procedures.
 If you’re using Firefox or Chrome, however, you’re closer
to the mindset of the originals.
 You had to seek out and download those browsers
because you believed they had more to offer than what
came with your computer.
 Similarly, the call-center employees using Firefox or
Chrome also looked for new ways of selling and solving
their customers’ problems.
Questioning the status Quo-Selection of Browser

Rejecting the default
Exploring whether a better option exists
The starting point is curiosity
Pondering why the default exists in first
place
The Hall mark of Originality…
Questioning the Default

 Originality starts with creativity.
 Generating a concept that is both novel and useful.
 But it doesn’t stop there.
 Originals are people who take the initiative to make their visions
a reality.
The Warby Parker Story
 Strike 1 (against them) – All of them still studying
 Strike 2 (against them) – Limited time; attention divided
 Strike 3 (against them) – Took other jobs/interns as
back-up

Warby Packer
 Adam Grant goes on to describe in his book the many
doubts that seeped in about the business pitch:
 Ecommerce for glasses sounded like a losing
proposition. Who would buy glasses online?
 Decision-making seemed a little slow, taking over six
months to commit to a company name. Could this slow
pace of decision-making sustain a business?
 None of the founders were pursuing the opportunity full
time. If they were fully invested in the idea, how could he
be.
 With hindsight, Grant reflects: “When I compared the
choices of the Warby Parker team to my mental model of the
choices of successful entrepreneurs, they didn’t match. In
my mind they were destined to fail.”

Warby Packer
 Warby Parker was founded in 2010, by four friends, Neil
Blumenthal, Dave Gilboa, Andy Hunt and Jeff Raider, who
happened to be in business school.
 The inception of the idea had taken place in a computer
lab, as the four friends lamented the state of the eyeglass
industry. Why are glasses so expensive?
 The first Eureka moment came when investigating that
very question. Dave describes: “Understanding that the
same company owned Lens Crafters and Pearle Vision,
Ray-Ban and Oakley, and the licenses for Chanel and
Prada prescription frames and sunglasses -- all of a
sudden, it made sense to me why glasses were so
expensive.”

Warby Packer
 And with that epiphany, the idea began to take shape and
the business model was born.
 They would create a vertically integrated company. Neil
explains, “It was really about bypassing retailers, bypassing
the middlemen that would mark up lenses 3-5x what they
cost, so we could just transfer all of that cost directly to
consumers and save them money.”
 If you think that’s a mouthful, that’s just the beginning:
“When you buy a Ralph Lauren RL-0.10% or Chanel pair of
glasses, it’s actually a company called Luxottica that’s
designing them and paying a licensing fee between 10 and
15% to that brand to slap that logo on there.
 If we did our own brand, we could give that 10-15% back to
customers.”

Warby Packer
 Even with all this thought out, it still wasn’t clear what would
come of the idea. As Dave Gilboa, Warby Parker’s future co-
CEO, put it: “Warby Parker wasn’t the basket that I wanted
to put all my eggs into.”
 And Neil Blumenthal, the other future Co-CEO, felt no
differently: “In some respects, my time in business school, I
was sort of hedging my bets between
 Would be Warby Parker take off in the startup world, or
 Would I have an offer after [graduation.]”
 After incubating the idea for a year and a half, the idea
finally hatched. The launch was so successful that the team
hit their first year sales targets in the first three weeks.
That’s like expecting one child and instead landing with
triplets

Warby Packer- How did they do?
 Questioning the Status Quo ?
 Originality mean pursuing novel ideas that contradict
conventional wisdom, yet create positive transformation.
 Being original has two characteristics :
 Creating innovative and useful ideas
 Taking initiative to turn ideas into reality
 Originality begins by questioning the status quo and
exploring whether a better idea exists.
 People often assume the status quo in a natural,
preordained outcome, and most people never challenge it
for 3 reason:
 Comfort in the status quo
 Fear of “ Rocking the boat”
 Achievement crowds out originality.

2
Blind Investors & One-Eyed Investors
Blind Inventors and One-Eyed Investors discusses
the art and science of idea selection - how to identify
the right original ideas with promise.
Key ideas:
 How to avoid false positives and false negatives;
 Caution about overconfidence and intuition;
 Looking for the right kind of passion;
 Why quantity matters more than quality;
 The value of peer feedback;
 Creative vs. evaluative mindsets;
 The value of diverse experiences

The Art & Science of Recognizing Original Ideas
Social scientists:
We are overconfident when we evaluate ourselves
 It’s widely assumed that there’s a trade-off between
quantity and quality – if you want to do better work, you
have to do less of it – but this turns out to be false.
 In fact, when it comes to idea generation, quantity is
the most predicable path to quality.
Possible Solution: Kissing Frogs – Many Frogs

 The best way to get better at judging our ideas is to gather
feedback. Put a lot of ideas out there and see which ones
are praised and adopted by your audience.
 Conviction in our ideas is dangerous not only because it
leaves us vulnerable to false positives, but also because it
stops us from generating the requisite variety to reach our
creative potential.
Possible Solution: Kissing Frogs – Many Frogs

 As we gain knowledge about a domain, we become
prisoners of our prototypes.
 Instead of attempting to assess our own originality or
seeking feedback from managers, we ought to turn more
often to our colleagues.
 They lack the risk-aversion of Managers/Leaders and test
audiences; they’re open to seeing potential in unusual
possibilities, which guards against false negatives.
Prisoners of Prototypes and Parochial Preferences

 Research on highly creative adults shows that they tended to
move to new cities much more frequently that their peers in
childhood, which gave them exposure to different cultures and
values and encouraged flexibility and adaptability.
 The most creative fashion collections came from houses where
directors had the greatest experience abroad, but there were
three twists.
 Time living abroad didn’t matter: it was time working
abroad, being actively engaged in design in a foreign
country
 The more the foreign culture differed from that of their
native land, the more that experience contributed to
creativity.
 The most important factor was depth – the amount of time
spent working abroad.
The Double-Edged Sword of Experience

 If we want to improve our idea selection skills, we
shouldn’t look at whether people have been
successful. We need to track how they’ve been
successful.
The Perils of Passion

3
Out on a Limb
Out on a Limb advises how to promote original ideas
without jeopardizing your reputation or career.
Key ideas:
 The difference between power and status;
 Idiosyncrasy credits;
 Leading with weakness;
 The curse of knowledge;
 The mere exposure effect;
 The value of disagreeable supporters;
 Avoiding middle-status conservatism;
 Exit, voice, persistence and neglect.

Putting Your Worst Foot Forward: The Sarick Effect
Rufus Griscom and Alisa Volkman
Online magazine and blog network - Babble
Adopting Griscom’s form of Powerless Communication:
1. …leading with weakness disarms the audience;
2. …it makes you look smart;
3. …it makes you more trustworthy;
4. …it leaves the audience with a more favourable
assessment of the idea itself, due to a bias in how we
process information.
Speaking Truth to Power

Quitting Before Leaving
Change the Situation
Maintain the Status Quo
Detrimental to
the Organization
Beneficial to the
Organization
Exit Voice
Neglect Persistence
Our choices
based
feelings of
control &
commitment
If you believe
you’re stuck
with the
Status Quo…
With no
commitment to
the cause…
you’ll leave
Neglect
…when not
committed
Persistence if
you are…

Speaking While Female, and the Double Jeopardy of
Double Minorities
 Speaking up to an audience of risk-averse middle managers
is challenging for anyone, but it is especially so for a woman
in a male-dominated organization. Doubly so if she is also
from a perceived minority group.
 Sheryl Sandberg (Lean In):
 When a girl tries to lead, she is often labelled bossy.
 For minority-group members, it’s particularly important to
earn status before exercising power

4
Fools Rush in
Fools Rush In discusses the importance of timing in
originality.
Key ideas:
 3 ways procrastination boosts creativity;
 Pioneers vs. settlers – whether it’s better to be
early or late;
 Conceptual vs. experimental innovation

Timing, Strategic Procrastination & the First-Mover Disadvantage
Never put off till tomorrow what you can do
the day after tomorrow. Mark Twain
 This chapter considers the question of when to take
original action
 The goal is to overturn common assumptions about timing by
examining the unexpected benefits of delaying when we start
and finish a task, as well as when we unleash our ideas into
the world.
Also:
1. Why procrastination can be as much of a virtue as a vice
2. How first-mover entrepreneurs frequently face an uphill battle
3. Why older innovators sometimes outdo younger ones
4. Why leaders who drive change effectively are those who wait
patiently for the right moment.

While it may be risky to delay, remember you
don’t have to be first to be an original. The
most successful originals don’t always arrive
on schedule, . Fashionably late to the party

 Procrastination may be the enemy of productivity, but it can
be a resource for creativity.
 Historian William Pannapacker on Leonardo da Vinci:
 You cannot produce a work of genius according to a
schedule or an outline.
 Idealab Founder Bill Gross on what drove success vs
failure
 The most important factor was not the uniqueness of
the idea, the capabilities and execution of the team, the
quality of the business model, or the availability of
funding.
 The number one thing was timing!

 Being original does not require being first.
 It just means being different and better.
 Economist David Galenson:
 Answered why some originals peak early and others
bloom late.
 Discovered two radically different styles of innovation:
 Conceptual and experimental
 Conceptual innovators formulate a big idea and set
out to execute it.
 Experimental innovators solve problems through trial
and error, learning and evolving as they go along.

5
Goldilocks & the Trojan Horse
Goldilocks and the Trojan Horse reviews tactics for
building alliances and how to temper radical ideas to
make them more mainstream.
Key ideas:
 Horizontal hostility and why infighting occurs;
 3 lessons in making allies;
 3 tactics to go mainstream

Creating and Maintaining Coalitions
This chapter examines how originals form alliances to
advance their goals, and how to overcome the barriers that
prevent coalitions from succeeding.
Key: Building effective coalitions involves striking a delicate
balance between venerable virtues and pragmatic policies.

 The key insight is a Goldilocks theory of coalition
formation. The originals who start a movement will often
be its most radical members, whose ideas and ideals will
prove too hot for those who follow their lead.
 To form alliances with opposing groups, it’s best to temper
the cause, cooling it as much as possible.
 Yet to draw allies into joining the cause itself, what’s
needed is a moderately tempered message that is neither
too hot nor too cold, but just right.

 The Narcissism of Small Differences
 We assume that common goals bind groups together, but
the reality is that they often drive groups apart.
 The more strongly you identify with an extreme group, the
harder you seek to differentiate yourself from moderate
groups that threaten your values.
 In seeking alliances with groups that share our values, we
overlook the importance of sharing our strategic tactics.
 Coalitions often fall apart when people refuse to moderate
their radicalism.

 Psychologist Judith White:
 A lens for understanding these fractures is the concept of
horizontal hostility.
 Sigmund Freud (more than 100 years ago):
 It is precisely the minor differences in people who are
otherwise alike that form the basis of feelings of strangeness
and hostility between them.
 Management Researches: Blake Ashforth & Peter Reingen:
 Find that insiders and outsiders have distinct ideas about who
represents a coalition
 For insiders, the key representative is the person who is most
central and connected in the group.
 For outsiders, the person who represents the group is the one
with the most extreme views.

 Enemies Make Better Allies Than Frenemies
 The Godfather: Part II, Michael Corleone advises:
 Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.
 But what should we do about people who don’t fall
neatly into either category

 Negative relationships are unpleasant, but they’re
predictable:
 If a colleague consistently undermines you, you can
keep your distance and expect the worst.
 But when you’re dealing with an ambivalent relationship,
you’re constantly on your guard; grappling with questions
about when that person can actually be trusted.
 Michelle Duffy:
 It takes more emotional energy and coping resources to
deal with individuals who are inconsistent.
Our instinct is to sever our bad relationships and salvage the ambivalent ones.
But the evidence suggests we ought to do the opposite:
Cut our frenemies and attempt to convert our enemies

United We Stand: Creating Coalitions Across Conflict Lines
Psychologist Herbert Kelman- Studying conflict between
Israel and Palestine, observed:
 Conflicts between two groups are often caused and
intensified by conflicts within the groups.
 To build coalitions across conflict lines, it’s rarely effective
to send hawks to negotiate. You need the doves in each
group to sit down, listen to each other’s perspectives,
identify their common goals and methods, and engage in
joint problem solving

6
Rebel with a Cause
Rebel with a Cause explores how birth order affects
risk-taking in children.
Key ideas:
 Niche picking;
 How parents can channel risk-taking into
constructive behaviors

How Siblings, Parents, and Mentors Nurture Originality
 We are not our brother’s keeper… in countless large and small
ways we are our brother’s maker.
 This chapter examines the family roots of originality. What’s unique
about a younger child, how does family size figure in, and what are
the implications for nurture. And how can we account for the cases
that don’t fit in.
 Grant uses uses birth order as a launching pad for examining the
impacts of siblings, parents, and role models on our tendencies to
take risks.
You’ll find out:
 What determines whether children rebel in a constructive or
destructive direction,
 Why it’s a mistake to tell children not to cheat, how we praise them
ineffectively and read them the wrong books, and what we can
learn from the parents of individuals who risked their lives to rescue
Jews during the Holocaust.
Rebel with a cause

Stanford Prof James March:
When many of us make decisions, we follow a logic of
consequence – which course will produce the best result
If, however, you consistently challenge the status quo, you
operate differently, using instead a logic of appropriateness
– what does a person like me do in a situation like this, i.e.
rather than look outward in an attempt to predict outcome,
you turn inward to your identity.
You base the decision on who you are – or who you want to be
Rebel with a cause

 Logic of Consequence:
 We will always find reasons not to take risks
 Logic of Appropriateness:
 We act more on a visceral sense of what someone like
us ought to do
 Grant uses birth order as part of the research, but then
concludes that birth order doesn’t determine who you are,
it only affects the probability that you’ll develop in a
particular way.
 There are many other contributing factors, both in your
biology and your life experience.
Rebel with a cause

 Firstborns tend to defend the status quo; laterborns are
inclined to challenge it
 There are two dominant explanations for the later-born
tendency to take risks. One concerns how children
themselves handle sibling rivalry; the other, how parents
raise younger children differently.
 Although we can’t control birth order, we can influence
how it plays out.
Rebel with a cause

 Niche Picking: Competing by Not Competing
 Look at lots of siblings, and you’ll notice a baffling fact:
the differences in personality don’t exist between families,
but within them.
 Niche picking might help to make sense of this mystery.
The concept has its roots in the work of Alfred Adler.
 Adler argued that because firstborn children start life as
only children, they initially identify with their parents.
Rebel with a cause

The Slippery Slope of Strict Parenting
The evidence on birth order highlights the
importance of giving children freedom to be original.
But one of the dangers of doing so is that they might
use the freedom to rebel in ways that put
themselves or others at risk.
Important here is how parents discipline bad
behaviour and praise good behaviour!
Rebel with a cause

Persona Noun Grata, or Why Nouns Are Better Than Verbs
 Behaviour (Verbs) vs Character (Nouns)
 Don’t drink and drive vs Don’t be a drunk driver.
 Please don’t cheat vs Please don’t be a cheater.
 When we shift our emphasis from behaviour to character,
people evaluate choices differently.
 Instead of asking whether this behaviour will achieve the
results they want, they take action because it is the right
thing to do.
Rebel with a cause

7
Rethinking Groupthink
Rethinking Groupthink shows how to avoid cultures
of conformity and groupthink in organizations.
Key ideas:
 The commitment blueprint;
 The power of dissent;
 7 ways to avoid groupthink cultures.

This chapter examines:
 What really causes groupthink and what we can do to prevent it.
 Why are some cohesive groups vulnerable to bad decisions while
others do just fine?
 What does it take to maintain a strong culture without spawning a
cult?
 Why dissenting opinions often fall on deaf ears;
 Why most groups use devil’s advocates ineffectively;
 Why it’s sometimes better to encourage people to complain about
problems than solve them…
The Myths of Strong Cultures, Cults, & Devil’s Advocates

A Bolt from the Blueprint
 Study led by sociologist James Baron interviewed the
founders of nearly 200 high-tech start-ups in Silicon Valley.
 Research question: What organizational models did they
have in mind when they started their companies?
 Three dominant templates were found:
 The professional blueprint emphasized hiring candidates with
specific skills.
 The star blueprint shifted the focus from current skills to
future potential, placing a premium on brightest hires.
 The commitment blueprint acknowledged that skills and
potential were fine, but cultural fit was a must

The future wasn’t nearly as bright when founders used other
models. Failure rates were substantial for the star
blueprint and more than three times worse for the
professional blueprint
A Bolt from the Blueprint
The founder blueprint that predicted the greatest success:
 The commitment blueprint acknowledged that skills and
potential were fine, but cultural fit was a must.
 When founders had a commitment blueprint, the failure rate
of their firms was zero – not a single one of them went out of
business

Growing Pains: The Dark Side of Commitment Cultures
As fruitful as commitment cultures are in the early stages
of an organization’s life, over time, they tend to falter.
1. Commitment firms have greater difficulty attracting,
retaining, or integrating a diverse workforce.
2. When employees have a shared set of goals and values,
they execute effectively in predictable environments.
3. Once a market becomes dynamic, big companies with
strong cultures are too insular: They have a harder time
recognizing the need for change, and they’re more likely to
resist the insights of those who think differently

Growing Pains: The Dark Side of Commitment Cultures
Something to think about:
 There’s a common belief that creativity flourishes when
criticism is withheld, but this turns out to be false.
 Dissenting opinions are useful even when they’re wrong.
 The evidence suggests that social bonds don’t drive
groupthink; the culprits are overconfidence and
reputational concerns.

“Think Different” Culture
Bridgewater Associates – Financial Services Company
 Over 200 hundred principles capture the philosophy of the
founder.
 New employees are hired based on an assessment of how well
they fit with the way of operating as outlined in the principles
 A strong commitment culture, but their secret is the expression
of original ideas. They invited dissenting opinions.

Finding the Canary in the Coal Mine
If you’re a leader talking to your employees, how would you fill in the
blanks in this sentence?
 Don’t bring me Problems ; bring me Solutions.
 Psychologist David Hofmann found that:
 A culture that focuses too heavily on solutions becomes a culture of
advocacy, dampening inquiry.
Bridgewater’s CEO, Ray Dalio:
 Getting problems noted is half the battle against groupthink; the other is
listening to the right opinions about how to solve them.
 Although everyone’s opinions are welcome, they’re not all valued equally.
Voting privileges the majority, when the minority might have a better
opinion.
 Democratic decision making – one person, one vote – is dumb because
not everybody has the same believability.

Finding the Canary in the Coal Mine
 At Bridgewater every employee had a believability score on a range of
dimensions.
 Bridgewater displayed the track records of colleagues on 77 different
dimensions of values, skills, and abilities in the areas of higher-level
thinking, practical thinking, maintaining high standards, determination,
open-mindedness yet assertiveness, and organization and reliability.
 When you express an opinion, it’s weighted by whether you’ve established
yourself as believable on that dimension.
 Your believability is a probability of being right in the present, and is based
on your judgment, reasoning, and behaviour in the past.
 You had to be assertive and open-minded at the same time
 Karl Weick: Argue like you’re right and listen like you’re wrong

Movers and Shapers
Bridgewater’s CEO Ray Dalio:
 Shapers are independent thinkers: curios, non-conforming,
and rebellious.
 They practice brutal non-hierarchical honesty. And they
act in the face of risk, because their fear of not succeeding
exceeds their fear of failing.
 The greatest shapers don’t stop at introducing originality
into the world. They create cultures that unleash originality
in others.

8
Rocking the Boat & Keeping it Steady
Rocking the Boat and Keeping It Steady provides
strategies for dealing with the emotions of challenging
the status quo.
Key ideas:
 Dealing with fear;
 Overcoming apathy;
 Rechanneling anger.

I learned that courage was not the absence of fear, but the
triumph over it…. The brave man is not he who does not feel
afraid, but he who conquers that fear. By Nelson Mandela
This chapter examines the emotional drama involved in going
against the grain.
By studying effective strategies for managing emotions, you’ll
discover when it’s better to plan like an optimist or a
pessimist, whether calming yourself down can fight fear and
venting can quench anger, and what it takes to maintain your
resolve when the odds are against you
Managing Anxiety, Apathy, Ambivalence & Anger

The Positive Power of Negative Thinking
 Although many originals come across as beacons of
conviction and confidence on the outside, their inner
experiences are peppered with ambivalence and self-
doubt.
Psychologist Julie Norem:
Two different strategies for handling these challenges:
 Strategic Optimism and Defensive Pessimism
 Strategic Optimists anticipate the best, staying calm
and setting high expectations.
 Defensive Pessimists expect the worst, feeling
anxious and imagining all the things that can go wrong.

The Burning Platform
If you want people to modify their behaviour, is it better to
highlight the benefits of changing or the costs of not
changing?
One of the Originators of EQ: Peter Salovey:
 It depends on whether they perceive the new behaviour as
safe or risky.
 If perceived as safe, emphasize all the good outcomes
 If perceived as risky, destabilize the status quo &
accentuate the bad things that will happen if they don’t
change

The Burning Platform ( contd..)
To counter apathy, most change agents focus on presenting
an inspiring vision of the future.
This is an important message to convey, but it’s not the type
of communication that should come first.
 If you want people to take risks, you need to first show
what’s wrong with the present.
 To drive people out of their comfort zones, you have to
cultivate dissatisfaction, frustration, or anger at the current
state of affairs, making it a guaranteed loss

The Show Must Go On
Sociologist Arlie Hochschild:
 Managing intense emotion like anxiety or anger
 Surface Acting and Deep Acting.
 Surface Acting
 Putting on a mask – modifying your speech, gestures, and
expressions to present yourself as unfazed.
 Burns us out: Faking emotions that we don’t really feel is both
stressful and exhausting. If we want to express a set of emotions,
we need to actually experience them.
 Deep Acting
 You actually become the character you wish to portray. This
involves changing your inner feelings, not just your outer expression
of them
 Deep Acting turns out to be a more sustainable strategy for
managing emotions than surface acting.

Becoming original is not the easiest path in the
pursuit of happiness, but it leave us perfectly
poised for
the happiness of pursuit.
I arise in the morning torn between a desire to
improve the world and a desire to enjoy the world.
This makes it difficult to plan the day.
E B White

 “Originals” – that is, creative thinkers who passionately pursue their
ideas – share several traits that differ from populist notions about
innovators.
 Originals tend to be “moderate procrastinators.” Such individuals are
16% more creative than either “pre-crastinators,” people who rush to
complete tasks, or “extreme procrastinators,” people who run out of
time for original thought.
 A propensity for procrastination means originals often lose out on the
“first-mover advantage,” but studies show that this benefit is a myth.
 Improving on another person’s idea often can generate greater gains
than being first.
 Many originals experience “idea doubt,” which prompts them to test,
experiment, revise and improve their concepts.
 Originals know that the best predictor of success is volume; the more
ideas and work they produce, the more likely they will create something
extraordinary.

 Generating and Recognizing Original Ideas
 Question the default.
 Triple the number of ideas you generate.
 Immerse yourself in a new domain.
 Procrastinate strategically. When you’re generating new ideas,
deliberately stop when your progress is incomplete.
 Seek more feedback from peers
 Voicing and Championing Original Ideas
 Balance your risk portfolio.
 Highlight the reasons not to support your idea. Start by describing the
three biggest weaknesses of your idea and then ask them to list
several more reasons not to support it.
 Make your ideas more familiar.
 Speak to a different audience.
 Be a tempered radical.
Individual actions

 Managing Emotions
 Motivate yourself differently when you’re committed vs.
uncertain.
 Don’t try to calm down. If you’re nervous, it’s hard to relax.
It’s easier to turn anxiety into intense positive emotions like
interest and enthusiasm. Think about the reasons you’re
eager to challenge the status quo, and the positive outcomes
that might result.
 Focus on the victim, not the perpetrator.
 Realize you’re not alone. Even having a single ally is
 Remember that if you don’t take initiative, the status quo will
persist
Individual actions

Sparking Original Ideas
 Run an innovation tournament.
 Picture yourself as the enemy. People often fail to generate
new ideas due to a lack of urgency . You can create urgency by
implementing the “kill the company” exercise from Lisa Bodell,
CEO of future think.
 Invite employees from different functions and levels to pitch
ideas. At DreamWorks Animation,
 Hold an opposite day. Since it’s often hard to find the time for
people to consider original viewpoints, one of my favorite
practices is to have “opposite day” in the classroom and at
conferences.
 Ban the words like, love, and hate. At the nonprofit
DoSomething.org, CEO Nancy Lublin forbade employees from
using the words like, love, and hate, because they make it too
easy to give a visceral response without analyzing it.
Leaders actions

Sparking Original Ideas
 B. Building Cultures of Originality
 Hire not on cultural fit, but on cultural contribution.
 Shift from exit interviews to entry interviews. Instead of
waiting to ask for ideas until employees are on their way
out the door, start seeking their insights when they first
arrive.
 Ask for problems, not solutions.
 Stop assigning devil’s advocates and start unearthing
them.
 Welcome criticism.
Leaders actions

Mail your comments to ramaddster@gmail.com

Some impressionistic takes from the book originals v2

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a Some impressionistic takes from the book originals v2

Semelhante a Some impressionistic takes from the book originals v2 (20)

Mais de GMR Group

Mais de GMR Group (20)

Último

Último (20)

Some impressionistic takes from the book originals v2