Skip to main content

Success and Risk

Over the last two weeks, I had a school reunion and I resumed my reading of David and Goliath - a book by Malcolm Gladwell. While I will post a longer review of the book at some point in time but, the meeting with the batch that we passed out made for some interesting thoughts.

Two things stood out in particular. One was that the best students in school - those who topped the exams, those who did well in studies - are all in one band. The band that does the 'predictable' stuff. Perhaps in marquee names, perhaps in the big companies, perhaps with the so called bigger destinations - but working on what I call as 'predictable' careers.

On the other hand, are those who were not 'great' at studies at school, but are following their passion and /or working on non-mainstream fields. These are the guys doing the unpredictable stuff. Those who took a leap of faith and found themselves rewarded in the end. Now not great does not mean bad in studies - and I believe there is no such thing - except perhaps bad measurement - but not great meaning that they were people who were the 'average' or the 'mid rangers' at school.

There are many other types and exceptions, but let us leave that out for now.

There is this part which Gladwell touches in his book - about people with apparent weaknesses - having to work extra hard to do something - and hence achieve a different type of success.

Putting two and two together, it strikes me that people who have early successes in school - and when I mean school, I mean, a kind of assessment based system that in hindsight seems to reward mainly compliance and obedience and low risk taking - are precisely those people who take lower risks and hence land up in predictable fields.

On the other hand, those who do have these early successes, explore more, ask more questions, perhaps are not so scared of 'failure' and 'trying' and 'knocking doors' - are the ones who end up taking more risk and usually better rewarded.

Which brings me to the second question - does greater success in early education lead one to take lower risk (and this is a question I have thought about often)?

And what if we connect this back to the organization and organization development?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The man who saved Pumpelsdrop

This was a story we had in college if I am not mistaken. Perhaps it was in school, but a delightful story it was. The story goes somewhat like this ( reproduced from here ), but the college version we had was slightly different from this.  I t was a dull, gloomy and a depressing morning in a town named Pumpelsdrop in northern England. The Great Depression had brought all the businesses to a standstill. The bored automobile dealer was spending time alone, as usual. But, this seems to be an unusual morning as an odd entity (customer) appeared on the horizon. A man in a bright suit walks up to the dealer and says, "I need to buy a Rolls Royce Phantom II. We have a business conference coming up and I need to impress my customers". Then proceeds to pay 10% of the deal with a single check for 2000 pounds. The rest he says will pay when he takes the delivery.   The auto dealer was stunned. He was delighted to hear that someone is holding a business conference of some kind and ...

Zero to One

Zero to One by Peter Thiel is a nice read. (Yes - if I sit down to write a book review - the book has to be worth it - and usually good - so most of my book reviews are about good books.You can stop here if that's the information you seek.) Where this book scores is in contrarian thoughts and contrarian questions that make you think. It starts with a four big lessons learned from the 90s dot-com crash that is, Make incremental advances, Stay lean and flexible, Improve on the competition and Focus on product, not sales. Just as you warm up to it, he says, the opposite rules are more correct - which are: It is better to risk boldness than triviality. A bad plan is better than no plan. Competitive markets destroy profits. Sales matters just as much as products. And finally leaves with a simple definition of contrarianism - it is not to oppose the crowd (or follow a smaller or newer or older crowd) but to think for yourself. "All happy companies are different"...

Playing to win

This bright green book with a yellow title has always caught my attention, but I had never read it.  Imagine my surprise that when I finally picked it up as part of a preparation for a workshop that it was such a fantastic book. Playing to win by Alan Lafley and Roger Martin is one of those books that is up there when it comes to learning about how strategy can be crafted and implemented in real business. There is much in the book - and unlike other books - this book is really a leaf out of P&G, but with frameworks and models that can be applied anywhere. Image from here . It is these 5 questions played in a loop (well, iteratively) that are the juiciest part of the book and as simple and obvious as they are, it is this place where the strategy play happens. So, yes, simply put a great book to be read by anyone who is anywhere close to strategy...