Dispatches from the New World of Work

So, Work Really Does Matter ...

Readers of this blog will be well aware of the TP/TPC bias towards work. For many years now, the mantra "the work matters" has been at the heart of Tom's and TPC's philosophy, so it is always heartening when solid research comes to the same conclusions as we do! A recent study in the UK by CHA Communications Consultancy has shed light on the motivation that people have towards their work. Their study of over 1500 UK employees from across public, private, and charity sectors points to the fact that over three quarters of those surveyed want to feel that the work they are doing is worthwhile. Their definition of what makes a job worthwhile: that the work contributes to society, that it is a job they can do well, and that it is a job they can be proud of.

Sadly, almost half of those surveyed are looking for a more worthwhile job than the one they now have. And ironically, although those in the private sector see the charitable and public sectors as being more promising places to find worthwhile work, at the same time, a quarter of public and charity sector workers are frustrated enough by bureaucracy and red tape to be considering a move in the opposite direction!

I am left wondering, in today's world of Brand You, whether the challenge of finding meaning in one's work should be down to the employee herself? Surely it is up to each of us to make the connections and to discover for ourselves the purpose in what we are employed to do? It would be great if leaders could do this for us, but since work means different things to each of us, surely we have at least some responsibility to do this for ourselves?

To follow the tone of Tom's recent "reality" blog, what do you believe is realistic to expect of our leaders as they set a context for our work? And what should be done by people for themselves?

When Five Sigma Trumps Six Sigma

[This is the first blog post at tp.com, by special request from Tom, by Cool Friend Jeff Angus. You may remember him as the author of Management by Baseball. Hence, this blog entry.—CM]

A week ago, Tom posted an entry about a recent book by an adoring courtier of Jack Welch, though reading it suggested to Tom ... "a self-serving picture of an organization run by a misogynist egomaniac—you'd have to be nuts or a former male Navy Seal to want to have worked there. Welch comes across as a brutal, soulless, foul-mouthed boss who revels in putting people down in the most demeaning ways."

And yes, it's inarguable, as one of my favorite MBA ex-clients who wishes he could have been a courtier in Welch's operation has said, that Welch's combination of vision and execution made him "Six Sigma" as an organizational operative. Stats nuts know that Six Sigma represents the 99.99999980268th percentile, and it's no coincidence that to get there he achieved soullessness.

But, you don't have to commit soullessness to achieve excellence. A Five Sigma (the 99.99994266969th percentile) talent like former Major League baseball player Doug Glanville achieved extraordinary, one-in-1,744,000 excellence, making it through the perfect zero-sum competitive crucible of the minor leagues, getting into the majors, and sticking for over 1,100 games. Unlike a Six Sigma, however, Glanville relentlessly held tight to his humanity, resisted the urge to do "whatever it takes" to devour that last 0.000057133, judging it wasn't worth his soul, even if he could have closed that imperceptible (at least in the business world) gap.

In spite of the hysterical tone of the reports of supplements and performance-enhancing drugs, there is no Enron in baseball; the sport is fully accountable, the books always balance. Unlike in business, there can be no juicing the books—to perform successfully, you must perform in a demonstrable way, with the true outcomes visible to all watching. So, the temptation to close that last gap is as understandable as it is potentially damaging, at least the way Glanville described it in his wonderfully insightful op-ed piece in the New York Times, "In Baseball, Fear Bats at the Top of the Order":

A healthy amount of fear can lead to great results, to people pushing themselves to the brink of their capabilities. ... Yes, baseball players are afraid. Not just on opening day and not just because of the 400-page Mitchell report and not just because of a Congressional hearing on performance-enhancing drugs in baseball ... but because they always have been afraid. A player's career is always a blink in a stare.

In this game, change happens fast.

Human nature wants to put the brakes on that rate of change. There is a tipping point in a player's career where he goes from chasing the dream to running from a nightmare. At that point, ambition is replaced with anxiety, passion is replaced with survival. It is a downhill run and it spares no one.

If that doesn't sound to you exactly like the Welch-ian drive so many worship, you aren't listening very closely, because that style of leadership relies on fear.

Glanville is not one of those who dabbled in the substances that are now under scrutiny. As competitive as he is, he kept his ambition to be the best in control, enough to resist the temptation. Because he leads—and has spent his adult life leading—a balanced life, with avocational interests outside of work, plus active charity work, continuing education, and all the things that earning over $11 million before the age of 35 can give you the affordances to do (background here).

True, he isn't going to the Hall of Fame (the sixth of those sigmas), but note, that like most of the people who strive for Welch-like soullessness, most of the players who tried to close that last gap didn't succeed any more than those who didn't commit to "whatever it takes." As Glanville said:

We're scared of failure, aging, vulnerability, leaving too soon, being passed up — and in the quest to conquer these fears, we are inspired by those who do whatever it takes to rise above and beat these odds. We call it "drive" or "ambition," but when doing "whatever it takes" leads us down the wrong road, it can erode our humanity.

The game ends up playing us.

Listening, Secular Variety

I've been talking about the power of listening, offering what I'll call the "spiritual" version—which I commend. But I thought I also owed you the "secular" version, including a doubtless inappropriate remark. You'll find it below and as an attached PPT.

Listening may or may not be an "act of love" or way to "tap into people's dreams," but it sure as hell is (1) an uncommon act of courtesy and recognition of worth from which (2) you will invariably learn amazing stuff if you can just keep your damn mouth shut and ears open with an expression of interest on your face and (3) it will build-maintain relationships beyond your wildest dreams. (And if you are young, which I am not, the surprisingly uncommon act of listening is the most foolproof seduction "tool"-"method" ever invented, because no one, M or F, is ever able to resist the overwhelming attraction that comes from being listened to and taken seriously—and when I was young I was always amazed at how the most unlikely sorts, compared to me, "got the girl" because they were able to keep their mouths shut and ears open and at least act as if they cared more than anything on earth about what they were hearing.) Also, above, Dubai, 26°C (78°F), 1210.07, from my hotel room window.

Brand You50 Revisited

Cody McKibben, who blogs at ThrillingHeroics.com, has written a review of Tom's Brand You50. But more importantly, for those of you who prefer a Cliff's Notes summary, he's created his own shorthand version. Thanks, Cody.

Reinvention:
All in a Day's Work

For those of us who spend our days at tompeters.com or Tom Peters Company, a sentence like this jumps off the page: "He believes he always needs to reinvent himself, which is why he developed a cut fastball to go along with his high heat, split-fingered pitch ..." I found it in this article about Jonathan Papelbon, where he describes his new pitch ... the slutter.

Then I realized that it shouldn't come as a surprise that a professional athlete lives with reinvention on his mind and in his repertoire. Any day could bring a trade, an injury, a slump. And, at the end of their careers—the ultimate reinvention. Sometime after the age of thirty(?), forty(?), fifty if they're extremely lucky, they all must re-imagine themselves. And Tom's message, for years, has been that the rest of us have to look at our careers the same way. Are your Brand You skills and reputation polished to the point where you could replace your livelihood overnight?

Sentence Spartan

We've been hearing a lot lately about the struggle to keep your email inbox under control. Our Cool Friend Mark Hurst outlines a scheme in his book, Bit Literacy. Lifehack.org tries to help you avoid email bankruptcy. Today, Biz Stone pointed to an appealing strategy: three.sentenc.es. You choose a number—two through five—that will be your personal sentence limit when responding to any email. Committing to curbing verbosity might just make the task of responding to all those emails less overwhelming. Have any other inbox-wrestling tips to share with us? Or are you more of a Cool Friend Dave Freedman Perfect Mess fan?

Trump II

Is Trump's staying power, given the likes of the above, "proof" that "Excellence in 'Brand You' Development" trumps skill?

Happy 10th Anniversary, Brand You!

Reading and commenting on Nick's blog of June 29th, I realized that this is the tenth anniversary of the publication of "The Brand Called You" in Fast Company magazine (the actual date was August/September 1997; it seems like yesterday!). This is a good occasion for everyone to revisit that article and take a refresher course in why Brand You is so important. And, for those who've never read it, it's a good time to take a first look. Happy Anniversary to Tom and the Brand Called You!

The Infinite Power of Positive Thinking and Acting

"Think positive" is a/the watchword of almost every "improving performance" seminar or self-help book. Thinking right (positive) is dead on, but far easier said than done—obviously.

Nonetheless, I wish to hell my U.S.A. could find a way to get back into the positive mental orbit. Suddenly (9/11/01), we are all about borders and barriers. Don't I believe there's a serious terror threat? Well, actually, that's my point.

I think there is a severe terrorist threat—and that there will be for as far into the future as I or my 20-something boys can see. (And there will doubtless be nasty events in the process.) The disruptive power of one person, or a small band, is matchless, and will only get worse. Forever and ever, Amen—and regardless of the size of our Army or the CIA or Homeland Security.

And, I think, perhaps arrogantly, that the single most important step toward ameliorating (not eradicating—impossible, even unthinkable) the terrorist threat (small bands, not nations with well-defined positions on maps) is for the United States to continue to be the matchless, energetic, open, self-improving Beacon of Hope it has been for two-and-a-quarter centuries. (Maybe we can even brighten the wattage of that Beacon.) I'm reading a marvelous and thoughtful book, Inventing Human Rights. In effect, there was not even the idea of human rights until the 1700s. And—clearly!—the American and French revolutions were the seminal landmarks in the one giant step for mankind toward human liberty. Then the U.S., unlike France, blessed with an infinite horizon, what we now call the continental United States, took the next giant step and effectively invented Positive Thinking. "Strike out on your own! Move West (the Appalachians first)! Re-define yourself." Re-imaginings and Re-definition and Exploration and Entrepreneurship and Brand You (sorry, couldn't help myself—but Ben Franklin would have applauded) were and are the underpinnings of America's great, successful, productive society—along with our steady flow of immigrant-malcontents setting out on ridiculously dangerous voyages of re-definition and self discovery. (Immigrant = In Search of Re-definition. Right?)

My conclusion then, as an apparently strong voice in the unabashedly Positivist Reagan Revolution, is that the power of positive thinking must be retained or regained at all costs. (My White House friends of that era tell me that In Search of Excellence was a seminal clarion call, perceived as such, for American businesses to stop hiding behind our growing protectionist walls and emulation of Japanese management—and come out swinging in our own style, which we subsequently did). Which to me means that we must deal with, and to some extent learn to live with, the near-infinite in length threat of havoc, never to be fully eradicated, caused by somebody at any given time pissed off about something—and return posthaste to our more careful to be sure, historic positivist selves. Of course we must be "tough with terrorists," but the idea that bombs and fortified borders and cowering behind said borders are the solution is insane. Positivist, open, daring, freedom-obsessed America is still the world's best hope.

I say all this because I have been troubled of late, very troubled, by the strident words of several of our 2008 presidential candidates from both parties. Their message: Build walls and hide now and forevermore.

And I say that all this from me is the antithesis of a political statement. American-style Positivism is my life's work at home and abroad. Cubicle slaves and bedraggled corporations—in Turkey or Romania or Siberia or in Kansas City or Miami or Boston—rise up and cast off your self-imposed shackles. Join the Global Economy (you have no choice, for God's sake), re-imagine and re-invent yourselves or your company. Understand that pioneering is the back to the future requisite. It is indeed—again—your great grandfather's world of self-reliance.

To hide is the ultimate victory for Osama and other terrorists. If we build walls, bomb, and slash the flow of immigrants, we may survive for awhile, even decades—but we will cease to be America and to be the globe's Beacon of Liberty and the Infinite Possibilities of Re-imaginings.

(Why the hell do you think I called my last book Re-imagine—it was a 300-page Technicolor rant that said ... rise up and regain your great grandfathers' sense of infinite possibilities and accountability. My Grandfather Peters came to our Beacon of Hope, Baltimore variety, in about 1870 and proceeded, from nothing, to become a wildly successful contractor and philanthropist—until he was wiped out, never to recover, by the Great Depression. He was gone before I arrived, but I never stop thinking of him, his victories, and his losses; perhaps he was my Quintessential American Beacon, when, at age 22, helped along by the Navy, I migrated to California and proceeded to stay there for the next 35 years—making my way, as a noisy participant, through the birthing and coming of age of the Silicon Valley colossus; in the process I avoided my father's tiresome professional life as a Cubicle Slave in the Tall Towers of the Eastern Seaboard.)

Four deafening cheers for the power of positive thinking—and acting! May we re-discover it posthaste!

Showtime!

My Brand You mantra includes the necessity to realize you are always on stage. Hence I loved this headline from Time (04.16.07): "Acting Like a President: Most politicians who make it to the White House have also become masters of the art of performing."

Reminds me of a favorite quote I often use in my presentations:

"It's always Showtime."—David D'Alessandro, Career Warfare

Now Don't You Worry Your Little Self ...

The economist Alan Blinder calls himself "a free trader down to my toes." But what's that goop seeping between his toes these days?

This from a must read-ingest, major Wall Street Journal piece (yesterday/0328): "Mr Blinder ... remains an implacable opponent of tariffs and trade barriers. But now he is saying loudly that a new industrial revolution—communication technology that allows services to be delivered from afar—will put as many as 40 million American jobs at risk of being shipped out of the country in the next decade or two." And that staggering stat, per Mr Blinder, is "only the tip of a very big iceberg."

Four-zero million!
Just the start!
Zounds!

Suggests to me it's time, per a Post earlier this week, to dust off the "Brand You Plan." There probably will be, alas, counter-productive Federal legislation. But that will be a wee finger in the dike.

The message is clear—and, to a point, simple. Work on your "value proposition" with renewed urgency. Your odds of landing on your feet are directly proportional to the uniqueness of what you have to sell to the world.

(As I've said 100, or 1,000, times, this does not translate into dog-eat-dog competition. To the contrary, you will be the architect of, valued participant in intricate Webs of Value Added that involve many, many others from here, there, and everywhere.)

Hence, unprecedented team skills and individual prowess are both a must.

I'm not an alarmist. (Much.) Still, I'd argue that ... today is the day to act! (Yesterday would be better.) Is the project you are working on right now worthy of becoming a chapter, or at least a sidebar, in your emergent & urgent "Brand You Saga"? If not, what do you aim on doing to make it so? Moreover, what on-line course/s (or whatever) are you looking at as another part of your "investment portfolio"?

The problem is more or less simple. The solution is more or less simple. All that's left is the 98.3 percent called Urgent Execution.

Necessary Evil

Acid-tongued Lucy Kellaway, whose column, "Business Life," is the first thing I turn to in the Monday Financial Times, allows as how she thought my somewhat well-known Fast Company article, "The Brand Called You," was "one of the ghastliest, most irritating articles on management ever written." Well, that does certify impact on a discerning reader. Now, a decade later, she still considers it "ghastly." But acknowledges, in a very amusing riff yesterday, that it may be a ghastly necessity. I guess that's progress.

See for yourself.

Did You Know?

Came across this wonderful presentation Karl Fisch, the Director of Technology at Arapahoe High School in Centennial, Colorado, put together for his students. It's called "Did You Know?" What a wonderful educator using technology to inspire and inform his students. It struck me as something all of us Tom readers would appreciate. Enjoy.

[Note that the link takes you to Fisch's blog. I'd recommend that you explore there for a moment or two.—CM]

Reinforcing the Need for a Sense of Personal Urgency

Powered by Audioblog.com

Time: 1 minute, 22 seconds

MP3 File

Re-Versioning

The turning of the new year puts many in the goal-setting, self-analysis mindset. Tom's very good friend, Laurie Sain, hasn't limited herself to contemplation. She's very recently started a new blog called Re-Versioning Your Life. She's sharing her journey as she transforms herself to "Laurie 2.0." Her first few steps have included choosing her "personal board of directors" as well as an exercise in pushing yourself beyond your comfort zone with expression. Laurie details how to do each step, so if you're ready to make a change in your own professional or personal life, you may find her strategies and tools very useful. Since we thought "Laurie v 1.999" was already fabulous, we can't wait to see the launch of "Laurie 2.0!"

As Good As It Gets

As worthy a New Year's Resolution as you'll find (or I'll find):

"Do one thing every day that scares you."—Eleanor Roosevelt

Welcome Aboard!

Tom Peters (me) and Alan Webber, co-founder of Fast Company, congratulate Time and welcome Time's "Person of the Year" ... "You." As co-inventors of the "Brand You" notion, over a decade ago, we are delighted to see the world catching up and, more important, waking up!

The "Brand You life" is damned hard work ... and so, so, so satisfying compared to "your father's world" as, likely, a Dilbertian "cubicle slave." Talk about liberating! As Time says, it's all about self-control. Nothing cooler! And nothing more daunting, because, of course, self-control only works, on the Web or off, age 19 or 69, with its disciplined mate, self-responsibility, at its side.

(To be sure, Time's "You,"circa 2006, is a bit less restrictive than our "Brand You." While we were celebrating, as does Time, the newfound possibilities of self-control/self-management ... we were also erecting defenses for your or my "career" against the incursion of microprocessors and lower-wage offshore substitutes. Nonetheless, "You" or "Brand You" ... we, too, salute you and your year and your potential.)

[Tom's photo above: Amsterdam canal. See more at Flickr.]

You're Not Alone

"In many ways, an office job is like a prison sentence." That's Michael Malice, the co-creator of overheardintheoffice.com. He's quoted in an interview with Kevin Ohannessian of Fast Company. Malice's site collects stories from the cubicle mazes of the world, in an effort to make the "prison sentence" a bit more bearable. Just when you think you're experiencing the most preposterous behavior in your own work environment, a visit to overheardintheoffice.com will lead you to new reaches of the absurd:

"A VP says to an IT guy, 'Have you installed Google on my computer yet?' And the IT guy responds, 'Just yesterday.'"

Thanksgiving 2006: A Tribute to Brand Yous

Did the Pilgrims land at Plymouth Rock? Did they break bread with the Indians on Thanksgiving? Are we white folk responsible for genocide concerning the Native Americans?

I don't know the answers to any of those questions, other than "open to debate." But there is something I do know ... for sure. The folks who came from England on the Mayflower, landing somewhere or other, and breaking bread with someone or other ... were a flinty, tough, strong-minded, determined, resilient bunch. And America's subsequent long march to global leadership is indeed a reflection of wave after wave of such determined, tough immigrants ... many of whom, after a generation or two, broke into the clear and made a mark. For example, my Grandfather Peters, who came here from Germany in 1870 or so, and became a leading Baltimore contractor; my grandmother Peters, in turn, founded one of that grand city's leading charities of the day.

So my perhaps odd "Thanksgiving message" (how pretentious!), or rant (far less pretentious), is about, um, "Brand You."

Huh?

Yup. "Brand You" was not, as some critics contend, an idea born of the '90s desire for self-adulation. To the contrary, in the late '90s I saw technology begin to supplant workers, increasingly skilled workers; then as the calendar turned to the new millennium-century I saw the astonishing explosion of energy and determination arising in the likes of India.

American economic isolation came to an end in a flash. We all, even "management gurus," became part, overnight, of a global labor market. Wages stagnated. Outsourcing soared, and technology got smarter and smarter. A pal, Dan Pink, said, more or less, "Here are the options: Do you choose to lose your job to an Indian? Or a microprocessor?"

It's not quite that dire in reality. But it is psychologically. Any sense of lifetime job security is caput. Health insurance is a distant dream for millions. Pensions are no guarantee of a cushy, or at least adequate, retirement after 40 years as a loyal Cubicle Slave.

Enter—as I saw it and see it—Brand You. What Brand You really means (to me) is a glorious (yes, glorious) return to the idea of those flinty Pilgrim men and women. A return to Franklin's (the true Father of Brand You) principles and Emerson's self-reliance. And the spirit of the brave ones heading West in the rickety Conestoga wagons. Or the spirit of Charles Lindbergh. Or Jackie Robinson. Or Martin Luther King or Elizabeth Cady Stanton ... or Carly Fiorina.

Ms Fiorina flatly said, "There is no job that is America's God-given right." Wired guru Michael Goldhaber adds, "If there is nothing very special about your work, no matter how hard you apply yourself you won't get noticed, and that increasingly means you won't get paid much either." And Sally Field tells us, "The only thing you have power over is to get good at what you do. That's all there is; there ain't no more."

Yes, I do see this as good news, and not just for Ivy Leaguers. Ivy Leaguers? America—God bless America—now has about 11 million women-owned businesses—damn few were started by Ivy Leaguers. (But that's another story.) In our abiding attention to Google's or Yahoo's next micro-move we blithely ignore the thousands of brave entrepreneurs I talked to last year who had the guts to roll the dice, skip out on ordinary means of security, and take on the responsibilities of starting and owning tanning salons!

Is it a lonely life that I propound? To the contrary. Those hearty first white New Englanders were at once self-reliant ... but had the support of an extraordinarily tight-knit community. My "Brand Yous"? On their own—but, if they're wise, creating their own, resilient communities of reputation and support. Face-to-face or, increasingly, online. (Web 2.0? 3.0? Who cares; it can work.) I mostly work alone, or, rather, with the assistance of a wee group of colleagues in Vermont and Boston. And a powerful band of supporters from hither and, increasingly, thither. To tell the truth, I feel a lot more secure with my self-created network and devotion to self-improvement than I ever did at, say, McKinsey or Stanford. It's up to me, per Sally Field, to constantly get better-different than yesterday; and it's up to me to expand and mind my network.

Hence my flavor of Brand You is at once distinctly Solo and distinctly about creating and minding a Network-Community of, mostly, one's own construction.

My Thanksgiving suggestion is to remember the true nature and character and determination of those Pilgrim Fathers & Mothers as their little band, alone on the East coast of a great continent, carved out the beginnings of a truly New World that eventually became a Beacon of Freedom and Opportunity for all others around the globe.

(Have we dimmed the light of that Beacon of late? Perhaps. But "they" still line up at the portals of our embassies around the world—wanting in. God help us when those lines get shorter.)

There is an absolutely stunning article in this issue of Fortune about Teach for America founder Wendy Kopp. As a Princeton senior, 17 years ago, she had a dream. Seventeen years later fully 10% of the graduating classes of Yale and Dartmouth, in the midst of a more or less bull market for college hires, applied to Teach for America. All told 19,000 seniors applied for 2,400 slots. After only a few weeks of "basic training," these bold, young Brand Yous, circa 2006, will enter classrooms in some of the toughest schools in America. Hats off, way off, to the Golden Ten Percent at Yale and Dartmouth. And hats off, way, way off to Wendy Kopp. Can one person make an enormous difference in a still complacent nation of 300,000,000? Damn right.

Happy Thanksgiving to our troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locales. To, especially, our active-duty National Guard types, often serving a second tour in the desert. Happy Thanksgiving, Wendy Kopp. Happy Thanksgiving, Yalies and Dartmouth youngsters and the rest of the 19,000 volunteering for tough active duty of another sort. Happy Thanksgiving, brave tanning salon owners and pioneering women business owners.

The hell with those pensions-for-time-served-in-cramped-cubicles. Welcome to a New Age of Self-reliance in a flattening global society of equals.

Thanksgiving considerations, honoring the chutzpah of our Pilgrim forebears:

"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?"—Mary Oliver

"A year from now you may wish you had started today."—Karen Lamb

[Tom is home—and the family's Designated Shopper; part of Susan's list is above.—CM]

Whence These Google Numbers?

Tom posted his most recent Google-juice numbers in the "Bio & PR" section of the website late last week. As good Brand Yous, we assume you're all googling yourselves on a fairly regular basis. (The first thing anyone does after meeting you is to go home and google your name, so you better know what they're seeing.) I took a look at Tom's document (which you can find on this page in the right-hand column) and then googled "Tom Peters" (using the quotes in the search) and came up with a number that was quite a bit lower than the one he had documented. And so asked him about that. Nothing devious or untoward as it turns out. Seems that the Google search results fluctuate wildly. As Tom notes, he's been as high as 3.9 million and as low as 1.8 million in the same week. (And, no, he's not checking his numbers every day!)

Do the same search at Microsoft's Windows Live and Ask.com, and while the numbers of results are significantly lower, they remain more or less constant day to day and week to week. Go figure.

Guess I'll Keep on Truckin'

As you know if you follow this Blog, I occasionally have "crises of faith" (as a Priest friend of long standing, who knows me well, puts it). As in: What the hell am I doing running around like a madman at 63.9? God help me, is it all ego?

Yesterday [Meet the Press, 09.24.06], in response to a question by Tim Russert, President Clinton said in part: "The biggest problem confronting the world today is the illusion that our differences matter more than our common humanity. That's what's driving the terrorism."

As my out-of-U.S. work, for the first time, eclipses my in-U.S. work, I do to some extent (a significant extent) see my role as "Ambassador at large"—salesman for humanistic capitalism perhaps. You may recall that I returned to "excellence" (Excellence. Always.—my new signature) and the "basics" on the occasion of my April trip to Siberia. (Trying to answer my own query: "Why the hell am I in Siberia?") Furthermore I added a PPT slide and said, and believe, that:

"Business* [*at its "excellent" best] can be: An emotional, vital, audacious, innovative, joyful, frightening, risky, creative, entrepreneurial endeavor that breathes life & fire into our work & life & elicits maximum concerted human potential in the wholehearted effort to help others ** [**employees, clients, suppliers, communities, owners, temporary partners] succeed & profit & imagine & reach places they'd never dreamed they could go."

To usurp Clinton, that is effectively a plea to vigorously engage as many as possible to produce and pursue the fruits of our "common humanity." Amidst my far-flung travels, when I discuss "cultural differences," my unyielding perspective is that "of course they exist"—but a person who exudes common human decency will prevail—if not with bowls of profit, at least with the self-knowledge that her or his passing has added rather than subtracted from humanity's plight.

So, thanks, Mr President. Guess I'll keep on truckin.'

Humanity. Conflicting Notions of

I pretty much tore into the late Peter Drucker a couple of weeks ago for his description of, as I see it, you and me as "mediocrities," even "idiots." (Perhaps not you, but I know for a fact he thought of me as a charlatan-idiot. Well, I didn't think much of him either—so fair is fair.) (I participated in a Drucker tribute a few weeks after his death, appearing with several grandees. I was supposed to open with 5 minutes of laudatory remarks; me, essentially "never at a loss for words." I've seldom worked so hard on a thing—but in the end I couldn't pull it off, couldn't make it work—so I demurred. I did remain as a for once quiet participant—and did murmur a few supportive words—which, concerning constrained subjects, were genuine. Not gonna make the Highlights Tape.)

For me, as you know, the answer to everything is ... another PowerPoint. (Hmmmm ... maybe I am an idiot.)

The poet (my favorite) Mary Oliver said: "Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?"

Picasso said: "Every child is born an artist. The trick is to remain an artist."

I'm hardly he-who-wears-rose-colored-glasses. Yet I do have a rather exalted view of human potential—daily headlines on human barbarism notwithstanding. Attached you'll find the Special PowerPoint Presentation: "Peter & Mary on Their Fellow Humans."

Depends on What the Meaning of "Is" Is:

Or, Why I Don't Watch the Evening News. Or, the Speech Is the Thing.

Katie Couric is quoted as follows in BusinessWeek's "What Makes a Winner: The Competition Issue" (08.21-28.06): "Television is one of the most competitive arenas anywhere. I think the only way to thrive and survive in that atmosphere is to have the love of competition in your blood."

(For the record: As an avowed, vociferous champion of women in leadership roles, I'm delighted that Ms Couric has become the first solo woman anchor on network evening news.)

That quote helps me realize why I don't watch evening news. If your ultimate goal is to "compete," presumably for ratings supremacy, in my opinion you are/one is doomed to mediocrity.

Start here: I am an obnoxiously intense competitor, and have been for a half century, with no let up in sight. Among other things, today I regularly Google myself against the "competition" in "speaking world"—weekly vs Jack Welch and Rudy Giuliani. (Mostly keepin' the lead, though RG will nail me as the presidential election campaign approaches—but then he won't be on the circuit.) I want badly to "win" in comparative speakers' ratings at big conferences—and I'm in despair for days when that doesn't happen. I track book sales; etc; etc.

But ...

But the fact of the matter is that the only person I truly compete against is myself. Is it the best damned speech I could give? Did I push "them" hard enough, too hard? Did I connect in a way that makes a difference in a few attendees' lives? Is there enough genuinely new material in the speech? Did I take risks with new-provocative material? (Risks that might clobber those evaluations after the fact. OH LORD, I SHUDDER AS I RECALL TWO RECENT EXAMPLES—I survived 'em both, and one led directly to a Big corporate change.) Was the entire two hours or whatever spent, without a second's letup, living on or near or past the edge? Were they scared-aroused? Was I scared? Was I literally sick with mental & physical exhaustion when I staggered off the stage? Can I sincerely continue to claim, even if only to myself, that I am perpetually re-imaging the entire world of management thinking & business practice (yikes)? Etc.

When Rather "competed" against Brokaw and Jennings for ratings, the competition per se was the thing—and the product for all three, while competent, was and long has been same-same. Take a true risk, and perhaps watch ratings wobble for 6 months? What a joke!

In late 2003, Dorling Kindersley and I published Re-imagine! Did I want good sales? Damn right! But if "good sales" had been the principal goal I would have penned the "big book" that other publishers wanted. I went to DK because of one and only one thing (surely not the advance!): I wanted to re-imagine the business book! (And they were game.) Did I track sales? Of course. (We—publisher and I—were moderately happy.) But I mostly loved the Amazon reviews: Nothing in the middle! People loved the book, and indeed its attempt to change the genre. Or hated it. (NB: As a speaker, I far prefer 1s or 10s in my evaluations to a bucket of 7s.)

Renée Mauborgne and Chan Kim, authors of Blue Ocean Strategy, tell us: "To grow, companies need to break out of a vicious cycle of competitive benchmarking and imitation." "Value innovation is about making the competition irrelevant by creating uncontested market space. We argue that beating the competition within the confines of the existing industry is not the way to create profitable growth." (As usual, Churchill more or less got there first: "The short road to ruin is to emulate the methods of your adversary.")

Here's the sort of thing I dearly wish Ms Couric had said: "Ratings are the least of it. Evening TV news is stale, in the tank, even laughable. It doesn't need a 'cool' or 'refreshing' 'female' anchor. It needs to be blown up and re-thought from the ground up. If the program I anchor looks or smells or feels anything at all like evening news of the Cronkite-Rather era I will have failed miserably and horribly abused a golden opportunity, even if I do edge out the guys at the other networks."

Kim and Mauborgne dote on Cirque du Soleil. (Me too.) Our Montreal pals re-imagined the whole idea of "circus"—and took an insane risk in the process. And they indeed turned their and our world upside down—in fact they unequivocally invented a new planet within the larger solar system of entertainment. That's the idea!

In On Becoming a Leader, Warren Bennis makes this intriguing claim, based on his muscular research: "No leader sets out to be a leader per se, but rather to express him- or herself freely and fully. That is leaders have no interest in proving themselves, but an abiding interest in expressing themselves."

I burst at the seams, at 63.8, as I anticipate the opening of the 2006 "fall season" in Adelaide 10 days from now. I want to "express myself"—to bore in deeper to the souls & hearts & minds of my participants, to make my renovated message of Excellence resonate and act as a clarion call to "risky" action in halls and boardrooms across the/all lands.

Will I read the evaluations from Adelaide? Of course! Will I still Google Welch & Rudy & me? Of course! But the-speech-is-the-thing! My "competition," my hypercompetitive-need: Will it have been the best & most provocative & original & troubling & exciting speech I have ever even attempted to give? If not, as 'tis said, it will be a long plane trip back from Australia!

Please, please Ms Couric—don't "compete" with those other predictable saps. Stun us with the audacity of your effort to help us understand anew and cope with the bizarre world in which we are trying to somehow make our way.

Ben & Jerry

I really don't want to be run out of the State of Vermont.

Your comments [in reaction to this blog] have been fabulous and stunningly thoughtful, and I will respond as the days go by. One person said he was surprised that I'd consider not speaking to B & J. I had to respond ... before I head down the driveway at my VT farm. Namely:

No! No! No!

I was simply trying to make the generic point about slippery slopes—and plastic definitions. If one is an avowed, vociferous champion for the "War on Childhood Obesity," could one in good faith speak to B & J about making the process of "marketing-megacalories-to-kids" more "excellent"?

At one level I have and will consider the nature of every institution I speak to, if for no other reason that time is in short supply and there is (praise be) an "oversupply" of opportunities. As to my examples of B & J, lawyers, and those whose service level pisses me off—the specifics were for illustrative purposes only!

(NB: I happen to be a fan of lawyers. Societies based on the Rule of Law tend to do a little better than others over time.)

Incidentally, I have had B & J problems—before they sold out to Unilever. E.g., the Holier-than Thou B & J founders bragged that no one was paid more than six (?) times as much as anybody else. "No one," that is, except Ben and Jerry and a few others who owned the company. (I don't care what their W-2s proclaimed.) Then there was the new CEO hunt based on applications submitted on ice cream container lids. How cool! Well, it didn't produce viable candidates, so B & J went to a headhunter, and after they had their man they had him fill out an ice cream lid. If you were looking for the one thing I most hate, and you said "hypocrisy"—you'd be spot on. (NB: As best I can determine, the Lid Tale is not Urban Legend.) (NB2: This case of hypocrisy would not have led me to turn down a speaking gig.)(NB3: I have not in fact, pre or post buyout, talked to B & J. "Why not?" you ask. Um ... they haven't invited me.)

Keep those comments coming!

(NB4: Why this discussion redux? Because I took a vacation pause and Susan happened to ask an "innocent" question that wasn't! It was, oddly, in reflection upon a novel she'd just finished. I think such Fundamental Noodling is imperative. I have a Catholic priest pal with a huge urban parish. I occasionally act as his de facto confessor—an apt role for a moderately lapsed Presbyterian. He often ... yes "often" ... at age 55+ ... as he puts it, "question my beliefs, and go through long troubled periods of wavering faith." He argues—and I wholeheartedly agree!—that you should never trust a religious leader who doesn't question his/her faith from time to somewhat frequent time. Among other things it leads him to greater empathy—and hence effectiveness as counselor—with the troubled among his parishioners. TP: So, too, "management gurus"!)

Help Me Here!

Your turn to do the work!

While we were on vacation in Norway & Sweden, one evening's conversation took a serious turn. Susan questioned the propriety of a particular speech I was giving this Fall. It led to a sweeping & intense & lengthy family discussion of what it is I do and whether there are certain groups I should not talk to.

It subsequently led me to do a little writing to figure out what I thought about what she was arguing.* I will share it with you soon enough. But as I prepared to Post it today, I thought it would be useful to hold off and get your thoughts and biases on this all-important (to me) issue.

(*Back to my Principal Professional Bias in Life—and the topic of several pre-vacation Posts. Detailed planning vs Action First/Think-Do vs Do-Think. When confronted with an imponderable issue like this, I rarely or never "think about it," but always & immediately start writing—I figure the writing per se will be my path to action-clarity. CK Chesterton: "How do I know what I think until I see what I say?" Reporter: "Mr Drucker, why are you still giving speeches at 90?" PD: "How else can I figure out what I'm thinking?")

The discussion included the sublime and the ridiculous. I say I'm a Health-Wellness-Obesity-Hospital quality nut, and I'm increasingly talking with religious zeal to participants in that industry. So must I refuse to talk to cigarette companies and fast-food outfits? (I've spoken to Philip Morris, KFC, Boston Pizza, and Dunkin' Donuts, among others, in the last couple of years.) (And obviously I'd turn down in a flash Ben & Jerry's, the so-called do-gooders who clog arteries for a living.)

My wife's biases leaned toward her deeply held views on War & Peace. Do I talk to weapons' contractors, the Military, nations run de facto or de jure by dictators, nations that support terrorists (I reminded her of U.S. citizens' sub rosa support for the IRA in the past—that didn't go over well)? Nations that, in the distant past, gleefully burned down the White House?

Oil companies came under scrutiny as well. I tossed in financial services companies just for the hell of it—usurious practices, etc. Companies with crappy environmental records? Companies that put you on hold for long periods when you try to do business with them? Companies, like Dell, with questionable commitment to customer service? Companies with very low quantities of Women in senior roles? Church leadership groups, because extreme religious beliefs are responsible for most human conflict over the Ages? Congress? Recreation-industry groups because I think time off is a Mortal Sin? Law firms because, you know, "First thing, let's kill ..."? The Tom Peters Company, because it serves some of the categories listed above?

Obviously, before the evening was over it was clear that retirement was the only option. I jest, of course, because the question is in fact a damn good one. And I'd like your serious input. It is true that if you apply incredibly tight definitions of holier-than-thou morality you end up on the beach and without influence. But it's also true that too plastic a definition of morality is also intolerable—unless you've got the insane belief that you are here to right all the world's wrongs and can turn the tide at will.

My glib rebuttal in this family mini-drama was that (1) I am always a goodwill ambassador for the United States; (2) the World is a nasty place; (3) I am an avowed Capitalist Pig and believe that light regulations (don't ban fast food) and hearty economic growth is the best way, or at least the best we can do, to help Humanity forward a bit;** (4) my core message is about Human Liberation and Human Potential; (5) etc; (6) etc.

(**E.g.: I just read an excellent piece on the insane death total due to rampant malaria that claims, with a ton of supporting evidence, that malaria eradication happens almost automatically as per capita income increases.)

So you tell me: Declaim to all comers? Follow a restrictive path in extreme cases? (What's extreme, please? Be specific!) Retire?

(As you can tell, summer "vacation" in the Peters-Sargent family is not just a day/s at the beach.)

(I've obviously been flippant upon occasion in this Post, but that's because Susan put me on the defensive—and the issue is indeed so serious.)

More Brand You

Just in case you all hadn't had enough of brand you...our Cool Friend Raj Setty, author of Life Beyond Code, has created an ebook available as a free download at his site. I think this book began as a pdf but now it is available in NXTbook format. Looks like a pretty cool technology. Check out Raj's site for more details. When you get there, just click on the image of the flipping pages.

3 in 5 = Yuck

Three international redeyes in five days (Boston-Madrid, Madrid-São Paulo, São Paulo-Chicago); no way to treat a 63-year-old (or 33-year-old) body. That's why in the Men's room in the Red Carpet Club, I passed a mirror (bad move) and figured out what "3 in 5" does—not pretty.

Q: When will I learn? A: Never. I had wonderful audiences in both Madrid and São Paulo. (I was asked by a TV reporter in São Paulo what made a "good speech." My answer was "good body language from the audience" and "that I'm so exhausted by the expenditure of emotional energy that I collapse into the arms of the organizers the second I walk off the stage.")

Escaping the Cubicle

In the Boston Globe blog, March 13, 2006, there is an entry titled: "The Fidel Castro of office furniture" and it reads: "Reviled by workers, demonized by designers, disowned by its very creator, Robert Propst, who deemed it 'monolithic insanity,' the cubicle still claims the largest share of office furniture sales—$3 billion a year—and has continued to outlive every design meant to replace it. It is the Fidel Castro of office furniture. The only thing likely to slow the Borg-like cubiclization of our lives? Telecommuting."

The Globe writer was commenting on this article from Fortune. I am glad to say I've escaped the cubicle—how about you?

Washington (G.) in Winter

Those of you who inhaled, as I did, David McCullough's 1776 will remember that 230 Februarys ago George Washington and his ragtag, disease-ridden army were holding the British at bay during a very nasty winter in Boston. Saturday I was traversing the Boston Public Garden as snow began to fall. I thought of a snowy February 1776 as I walked past GW's statue.

By the way, Washington looked about as good on a horse in reality as he does in statues like this. The uncommonly tall & perfectly postured General was one of the Colonies' best and most graceful-elegant horsemen. I mention this because Washington's purposefully self-managed demeanor was essential to the Army's success—the General's bearing per se went a long way toward convincing the British that we were a force to be reckoned with. (Hint: We weren't.) Thus Washington's "Brand You abilities" carried the day those 230 winters ago! (Or that's the way I see it.)

More Big Ben!

Seems as though Ben Franklin invented most everything worth inventing including effective American diplomacy. A couple of wonderful comments on an earlier post suggest that he merits these two additional accolades: First Blogger. Father of Open Source.

Nice!

Bad News, Good News

Well, "Google world" or not I seem to have blown Ben Franklin's birthday. January 17, not February 24. Thanks for alerting me in a Comment ... and for not ripping me up for such a glitch.

That's the bad news. The good news is that old Ben is indeed 300 this year, and I'm glad I had an excuse to do the Post. He is a "brand you" extraordinaire, and hence I do declare that Brand You is indeed 300 years old! (What lengths one goes to NOT to take credit for an idea! Ben beat me by 290 years, and I'm delighted!)

Happy Birthday, Brand You!

The Big Week is here! Brand You turns 300!

Thursday. February 24, 2006. The 300th birthday of my favorite American ... Benjamin Franklin. Born 24 February 1706. Boston.

I'm in the midst of re-reading Ben's Autobiography, a marvel and perhaps more apropos today then when he wrote it. Franklin, born to humble circumstances and subsequently a polymath who was the toast of Europe and America, oft considered the world's most famous citizen, arguably did more than anyone to define and shape the American character. He believed in frugality and decency and hard work. He was the ultimate self-made man, and made no bones about it. Though indeed a champion of frugality, he was also a champion of commerce and welcomed the profit therefrom. He became in Philadelphia a wealthy man, and then at about 40 "retired" to doing four decades of good deeds—such as inventing America and in his 70s taking on some of the thorniest tasks associated with the Revolution.

As to the "brand you" bit, Professor Kenneth Silverman, discussing, in his "Introduction," Franklin's youth, notes, "He not only worked hard, but also arranged to be noticed doing so." Throughout his long life, Franklin arranged his reputation with the same meticulous care that he applied to his many businesses and his scientific experiments; in fact, over the years he carefully constructed many different personas to be trotted out as needed—and was the unmistakable manager of his own legacy, of which the autobiography is an essential part.

(His attention to persona went so far as to encompass his peculiar dress—and its impact on others. The "father" of "dress for success," or "dress-for-impact," too? Doubtless so.)

As one who has been on the sharp end of much criticism that my Brand You idea is "self serving," I can at least take solace from the fact that Franklin, too, was repeatedly excoriated for being too self-centered and oriented toward "material success" and reputation.

Also, many dismiss the Covey-Robbins sorts of "formulas" for self-guided development as "simplistic." Maybe, but again Franklin got there first. He unfailingly began his carefully planned and productive days, Silverman reports, by asking himself, "What Good shall I do this Day?" and ended his day, at 10 o'clock sharp, with the follow-up self-assessment, "What Good have I done to day?"

Happy 300, Ben.

(NB: In re Brand You, consider this headline in the "BostonWorks" section of Sunday's Globe: "The Ladder Isn't the Only Way Up: More grads eschew the entry-level job in favor of working for themselves." Not your father's world. On the other hand, Ben's world.)

(NB: My favorite Brand You quote, courtesy the author Isabel Allende, "You are the storyteller of your own life, and you can create your own legend or not.")

Two New Year's Questions

In the last month I've been chewing on the question an audience member once asked Tom: What have you done this year? For a New Year's Eve exercise with friends I switched the question to: What's the most IMPORTANT thing you've done this year? (This clarifies your values, as you sort through what makes something important to you.)

So, I thought a fun way to start this New Year is to invite you to answer the following two questions (publicly if you
dare, concisely if you can):

1. What's the most important thing you've done in the last year?
   
2. What's the most important thing you'll do in the next year?

Raw Meat for "Resolutions"

I may write more, even a lot more, about New Year's Resolutions. Or not. But when I sat down, quietly, to think about my stance toward 2006, a quote of Eleanor Roosevelt's drifted before my mind's eye: "Do one thing every day that scares you."

I don't know where I'll go with this, if anywhere—but it feels like a perfect, and in fact profound, stepping off point. (And I do believe that New Year's is indeed an opportunity-punctuation mark along life's path not to be missed or dismissed.)

Procrastination?

Were my poor planning habits the reason I was up two-thirds of Thursday night reworking (re-inventing!) my speech?

No. (I swear to that.) I had in fact prepped like hell for the RLG seminar mentioned immediately above. I had a "good speech" ready to rock-and-roll ... or so I thought.

But then the "10-hours to H-hour Factor" kicked in ... with a vengeance. Fact is (for me), there is an "eleventh hour" "connection with the audience" factor that kicks in. It isn't possible earlier—for me.

That is, as the opening bell approaches, my mind & soul enter an incredible, inexplicable zone. I am transported to the speech site. The plight of the audience stirs deeply within me in excruciating detail—more or less in High-definition Technicolor and with Dolby sound.

I feel myself in the conference room. I can "see," with remarkable clarity, individual audience members. I get inside their skins and feel their issues-plight with stunning, almost breath-taking intensity.

And that's when I madly start re-doing my speech ... regardless of the time of day or (usually) night. My "disease" is hardly one-of-a-kind. I've talked to dozens of "performers" in a wide variety of professions. Almost without fail they describe a like process of "getting [deeply!] in the zone"—which often leads to dramatic last-minute course corrections (or more).

I remain amazed at what goes on inside me, and surely can't explain it. But I know I'll hang up my spikes the moment it ceases to occur.

Ode to Joy!

I really like doing what I do. (I learned so much during my Italian presentation Friday—will share later, as I'm still digesting it.) Also, I realize that I enjoy the prep as much as the product. I've read a ton of stuff (such as George Leonard's Mastery) that says successful people—in sports, the arts, biz, and life—are those who most enjoy practice. Guess I'm one of the lucky ones.

Quotes of the Day

"If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." —John Quincy Adams

"I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy living, or get busy dying." —The Shawshank Redemption (Tim Robbins)

"Before you can inspire with emotion, you must be swamped with it yourself. Before you can move their tears, your own must flow. To convince them, you must yourself believe." —Winston Churchill

"[Heroine Margaret Schlegel was] not beautiful, nor supremely brilliant, but filled with something that took the place of both qualities—something best described as a profound vivacity, a continual and sincere response to all that she encountered in her path through life." —E.M. Forster, Howard's End (Three cheers for the "intangibles"—how about this for a hiring criterion?)

"The most successful people are those who are good at Plan B." —James Yorke, mathematician, on chaos theory in The New Scientist (I love this! Improv rules!)

"Tom, what have you done this year?" —Jessica Sutherland, IIR ME (Try answering that succinctly and persuasively—one of the best questions I've ever been asked.)

Titles That Bind

I'm fascinated with the idea of extreme organizational transformation, and I wonder what I would do if I could completely blow up the current model and totally re-invent the corporate workplace. I would focus on two primary areas: the physical environment and job titles. For example, perhaps the CEO and executive board would be on the first floor with the smallest offices and no view because they are seldom there to enjoy them.

My bone to pick with job titles is this ... they are labels that confine people's ability to add value wherever and whenever possible. Titles are the reason people say, "it's not my job" or "what do you know, you're just a (fill in the blank)." A friend related her experience when she switched from HR to Marketing. It was a difficult transition—she was confronted with constant resistance and found herself having to jump through extraordinary hoops to prove herself. Her new boss was obviously willing to "take the risk" on her, but everyone else on the team wondered, "What could you possibly know about marketing, you're an HR person?"

When you become defined by your title, you become limited in terms of what you can do, or what others believe you are capable of. It is because of this that I gave myself the title "Transformation Architect" when I joined the Tom Peters Company ... people have to ask, "What do you do?" My title stays the same, but my answer evolves over time, as I do.

The Ultimate "PSF"!

As almost all of you know, I'm bonkers over the Professional Service Firm idea; I think it's a survival necessity, circa 2005. Think "PSF" (if you do, I dearly hope you do), and one is likely to think Accenture, TBWA/Chiat Day, and the like.

Well, hold on. I have a new "top candidate." Though, alas, I don't know his name.

Saw him/it at an I-91 Rest Area on the way from VT to Boston. (I know, I should have stopped.) That is, the most beautifully decorated, squeaky-clean, super-cool, "startling" Big Rig I've ever seen!

What a DRAMATIC DIFFERENTIATOR! We've all seen 'em, right? The trucks that the Drivers obviously spend hours a day and many a personal dollar on to keep in spectacular shape. (And, of course, the 98% who don't. Some are of the "get by" sort, some look like shit.)

Point: Sorry if I'm the last to get it, but what better Demo is there of my Big Three: Awesome "PSF," Brand You, WOW Project?

Hats Way Off to ... ____________ .

Fit In or Get Fired

I consider myself a survivor. I recently left one of the world's largest hospitality companies to join Tom Peters Company! and follow my dream of helping to re-imagine the business world. Why? So people can thrive and not just survive in corporate America. During my 7 1/2-year career, I endured as many as 5 "re-orgs" of varying degrees (so much for job-security). I often wonder how I was able to walk out on my own terms, when many others were escorted to the door. Over the years, many of my colleagues/friends were "let go" (as if being done a favor), not for the sake of cost-cutting or streamlining, but because they simply were not a "good fit," which raises the questions ... what does it mean and how important is it to corporate survival/success? Does being a good fit mean you do what you're told? Conform? Maintain the status quo? Keep your opinions to yourself? If that is the case, how do organizations ever survive and thrive?

As I was pondering these thoughts, I came across this:

Creative abrasion means harnessing the frictional energies released between distinct perspectives and work styles to generate new directions and novel solutions.

     —Jerry Hirshberg, The Creative Priority

Wouldn't we all be better off if corporate leaders/managers knew how to do this?

Misguided to the Point of Deadly

Article in today's Times (of London): "Forget Self-esteem and Learn Some Humility." It's an attack on the "self-esteem movement." To be sure, the "movement" sets itself up for caricature. But these authors perform a DEADLY mis-service. People with HIGH self esteem are not, as the article claims, egocentric to the point of egomaniac. TO THE CONTRARY. People with high self-esteem are instead the lucky ones who are "comfortable with themselves" ... hence no need for egomaniacal behavior. The egomaniacs (from Hitler to Harry next door) in fact invariably suffer from LOW self-esteem, and exhibit counter-productive self-centered behavior to compensate for how shitty they feel about themselves. The other LOW self-esteemers just cower because of their uncertainty about themselves. (Or, rather, their certainty that they are not worthy of anyone's esteem.) The article is a travesty, and dangerous.

Genuine low self-esteem is nothing to trifle with.

Comments (starting with you, Trevor)?

Job Love-Hate

I hate my job. (It's killing me. Literally.) I love my job. (I have the rare chance to change the world for the occasional person.) What do you think about that? (I.e., about your job?)

9:00-5:00 Mon-Fri

So many of us don't work a regular Monday through Friday job these days. So what about Saturday and Sunday? Are they still a time to change gears and slow down?

How do you distinguish your weekend days from your weekdays? Or do family members and friends around you define the "weekend" for you?

Winning

Well, Jack Welch has a new book out, called Winning and you'd have to be living in a hole to have missed the massive press on the new leadership bible.

Since it's not REALLY available until April 5th, we wanted to note its eminent and imminent arrival, but save our critique until we've actually read it next week.

The American Brand of Baseball

We blogged here a few months ago about the way Chicagoans' impressions of Sammy Sosa's brand went from iconic to sardonic in only a few short years. Where he had once been a hero beyond reproach, poor performance and a bat corking led us to a point where his sneeze-induced back injury became a joke, and his trade into an orange Orioles uniform seemed about as tragic as Moe poking Curly in the eye.

And now ... let's expand the conversation to the entire brand of baseball. How has the steroid saga sapped strength from the national pastime's status as a national pastime? Will gate receipts fall, will players have to hock their Ferraris? (Before you jump to conclusions, try purchasing single game Chicago Cubs tickets for this season. Hard to find!) Will the game bounce back? Will anyone care about this stuff a couple of years from now?

Other questions: Will Sammy's, Mark's and Barry's 61+ home run seasons have asterisks bigger than Roger Maris's 162 game asterisk? Who looks worse, Jose Canseco for writing a book admitting to steroids, Sammy for denying it, or Mark McGwire for dodging the question? Will any of the sanctimonious Congressmen who took time off from fighting terrorism and fixing social security for the steroid hearings win even one more vote for having done it?

I'm a Loser, Baby

My previous post to this blog I thought would be my last, but, at Tom's urging, I am posting a bit on my thoughts on coming home after my 7 week trip through Cambodia and Vietnam (last posts here, here and here).Tom has been encouraging me to comment on my ... intestinal challenges ... since arriving in Vermont from Hanoi on Monday. Tom, let me just say the Tet Offensive was less offensive, and leave it at that.

Last night I went out to see The Samples, a local band that made good in the nineties and still sounds great. All my old friends from my small Vermont town were there. It gave me pause to think that among all of them, the guy on stage and I were the only ones who never graduated from high school yet we were living our dreams.

In the local school system I was branded a loser, a lost cause, and encouraged to drop out. But my bumpy road less traveled became literally my clear path ... my failures became the roots of my successes, at least for now ... and ultimately I have come to recognize that I have realized my dreams.

When I was a kid, Tom told me he preferred a bold failure to a mediocre success ...

Thanks, Tom ... I now know what you meant ... and I do, too.

Peters on Peters

My college fraternity brothers have a wonderful ritual. We have an annual newsletter that we all contribute to. (NB: As always ... ONE PERSON ... has kept it alive for 40 years, the estimable Mike Smith.) Many of my fellow 62-year-olds are in partial or total retirement. In my contribution to this year's newsletter, I vented about the "retirement bit":

"You've all doubtless heard the Churchill yarn. The old man was transiting the Atlantic by ship. An aid made a mental calculation and turned to WSC, 'Sir, I've calculated how much brandy you've drunk,' he said referring to the cavernous ballroom in which they were seated. 'It comes to about here [pointing to a spot about halfway up the wall].' WSC leaned in toward the chap, pointed to his marker on the wall, and purportedly said, 'So little time, so much to do.'

"I am a troubled 62. Why? SO LITTLE TIME, SO MUCH TO DO.

"I have no idea whether this brief missive will attract contempt or mere indifference. Just let me say that I am appalled by the idea of retirement ... or slowing down in any way, shape or form. I write from New Orleans. It's 5 a.m. I've been up for 3 hours, working on today's speech.

"I AM BLESSED. I HAVE A CHANCE [in just 4 hours] TO INFLUENCE 3,500 LIVES. I DARE NOT F*** IT UP.

"I am often tired (I'm 62, not 22), but I Love & Appreciate the Opportunities I've been granted to take part in the Universal Dialogue about the Meaning of Work & Life & National Purpose.

"PUT SIMPLY, 'RETIREMENT' TO ME MEANS BEING DRAGGED OFF A STAGE AND SLIPPED INTO A SIMPLE PINE BOX INSCRIBED WITH THESE WORDS: 'HE GAVE A SHIT.'"

A Dedication!

I never (or at least rarely) "dedicate" a presentation. But I will today, and for the foreseeable future.

The slide following my title slide will read: "For Ray."

This weekend Susan & I watched on DVD the movie Ray.

To be sure, it is a marvel. But the excellence of the movie per se is not the Inspiration for the Dedication.

My point: Ray Charles is the embodiment of the Spirit of Re-imagine! Time and time and time again he chose to Invent & Go His Own Way, to spit in the face of his prior winners, his assured cash flow, his powerful advisors ... and march in the totally new musical direction his Spirit willed him to march.

Surely the movie is a marvelous story of overcoming adversity, from blindness to race to drugs to fame itself. But for me it was, above all, a ... Matchless Tribute to the Power & Glory of Gutsy, Lonely Re-imaginings!

To Ray Charles!
(Check it out!)

(NB: I'm no great movie aficionado, but Jamie Foxx as Ray surely seems Oscar-worthy to me.)

How Fast a Brand Can Lose Its Power!

Rewind the clock to 1998, the home run race between Sammy Sosa and Mark McGuire. Even considering The Tribune, The Sears Tower, Billygoat Tavern, Steppenwolf Theater, Michael or Da Bears, Sammy Sosa was just about the biggest, most meaningful brand in Chicago.

And it continued on—from 1998 through 2002 Sammy hit 292 homers while batting .306 with a .649 slugging percentage. He is the only player in history with three 60+ home run seasons. And, he had a great personality—the fans loved him.

Fast forward to today: News of Sammy's trade to Baltimore. Fans interviewed on TV saying they're happy to see him go. The Cubs are paying a big chunk of his $17 million salary next year—for him to play on another team.

Things started to tail off in 2003 when Sammy was caught with a corked bat and suspended for 8 games, after which his performance suffered. This past season he missed a month with back problems caused—embarrassingly—by sneezing. (By then he'd lost the sympathy of the fans, and the sneezes became a joke.) Then he walked out of the clubhouse and left the ballpark before the last game of the season started, because he was unhappy that he was dropped to a lower position in the batting order.

Beyond baseball, what's the lesson here? If the Brand Called Sammy can go from hero to persona non grata, just think what can happen to your company if you stop performing ... or get caught corking your bat!

MY WORK = MY LIFE

Here's a comment I posted, FYI:

I WANT TO "COME CLEAN" ON THIS ONE. IT'S A SET-UP OF SORTS. I LOVE MY WIFE, DEARLY. I LOVE MY 2 BOYS. (AND, FOR THAT MATTER, MY MOM & 3 DOGS.) BUT, FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE, MY "WORK" IS MY "PLAY"—THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF MY "AUTHENTIC" (NOTICE I STUCK THAT WORD IN THE POLL) HAPPINESS. I WAS ON THE WAY TO THE "COUNTRY STORE" TO PICK UP MY SUNDAY PAPER, AND SOMEONE GOING ABOUT 25 MPH WAS AHEAD OF ME. I PASSED. (DOUBLE YELLOW LINE.) THIS PERSON ALSO WENT INTO THE STORE. SHE SAID TO ME, "WHAT'S THE HURRY?" I DIDN'T MEAN TO BE RUDE OR ARROGANT (WAS I BOTH?), BUT I SURPRISED MYSELF WHEN I REPLIED (NOT "SNAPPED"), "I'VE GOT TO CHANGE THE WORLD." WELL, ARROGANT OR NOT, I DO. MY WORK MAY NOT MATTER, BUT IF NOT IT WON'T DAMN WELL BE FOR LACK OF TRYING! (AND, YES, THAT MAKES ME LUCKY.) (AND, PER STEVE Y, IT'S A CONSCIOUS CHOICE!)