Quiet Leadership

Standard

Can introverts be successful leaders?

That’s one question that, in my opinion, Susan Cain seeks to answer in her incredibly fascinating book, Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking.

As an introvert, this question really resonated with me. I’ve always had an interest in business and politics – it’s a huge reason why I moved 5000 miles in order to be closer to the action. But after working in Corporate America for over a year, I’ve often questioned whether I’m cut out for the field.

The Extrovert Ideal

Cain begins by discussing modern society’s love affair with the Extrovert:

It’s the belief that the ideal self is gregarious, alpha, and comfortable in the spotlight. Introverts living under the Extrovert Ideal are like women in a man’s world, discounted because of a trait that goes to the core of who they are. Introversion – along with its cousin’s sensitivity, seriousness, and shyness – are now a second-class personality, somewhere between a disappointment and pathology.

Talkative people are rated as smarter, better looking, and more desirable as friends. Velocity of speech counts as well as volume: we rank fast talkers as more competent and likable than slow ones. The same dynamics apply in groups, where research shows that the voluble are considered smarter than the reticent.

In the world of business and politics, it’s not surprising that there exists a perception, fueled in large part by the media, that leaders are those with aggressive, brash and have a larger-than-life personality; i.e., Jack Welch or Donald Trump. You don’t hear about, at least in my opinion, leaders with opposing qualities: laid-back, reticent and understated.

The Power of Quiet Leadership

To my surprise, Cain’s book rattles off countless studies that debunk the myth of charismatic leadership. Three examples that I found noteworthy to research further were the following:

Preston Ni, a Communications Studies Professor, calls “soft power” as leadership “by water rather than by fire…Aggressive power beats you up; soft power wins you over. If the cause is just and you put heart into it, it’s almost a universal law: you will attract people who want to share your cause. Soft power is quiet persistence – in their day-to-day, person-to-person interactions.”

In his book, Good to Great, Jim Collins found that “the greatest companies were led by Level 5 Leaders describes by their employees as: quiet, humble, modest, reserved, shy, gracious, mild-mannered, self-effacing, understated. We don’t need giant personalities to transform companies. We need leaders who build not their own egos but the institutions they run.”

Adam Grant, a Management Professor at Wharton, found that “extroverted leaders enhance group performance when employees are passive; introverted leaders are more effective with proactive employees. Extroverts can be so intent on putting their own stamp that they risk losing others’ good ideas and allowing workers to lapse into passivity. Introverts – because of their inclination to listen to others and lack of interest in dominating social situations – are more likely to hear and implement suggestions.”

So Is It Possible?

Cain writes, “If there is only one insight you take away from this book, I hope it’s a newfound sense of entitlement to be yourself.” As an introverted aspiring entrepreneur and businessman living in an extroverted world, I can say with conviction that – yes – Cain has accomplished her goals. After reading her book, I do think it’s possible to rise above the chaos and noise to become a successful leader, even in business and politics, as an introvert.

Project Tech

Standard

After being inspired by reading about the single founder who can’t code, the possibility (through hard work and grit) of becoming a DIY technical co-founder, and realizing there’s no better way to learn than to dive straight in, learning how to code has become one of my top focuses for this year.

To say that I’m only now interested to learn how to code now would be a mistake. My research last year on the role of innovation in emerging markets, my involvement with GEN, and my interests in entrepreneurship and economic development were all leading me to believe with conviction that I needed to learn how to code. I’m calling this new endeavor: Project Tech. I’ve divided my plan into stages, each time-boxed and defined by a purpose and end outcome:

Stage

Name

Tools

Languages

Deliverable

Deadline

1

Familiarize

CodeAcademy

HTML, CSS, Javascript

N/A

28 Jul

2

Specialize

Udemy

Python, Ruby

N/A

25 Aug

3

Productize

Github,  StackOverflow

TBD

Web/ Mobile App

TBD

Obviously, everything in here is just a way for me to get introduced to all these programming languages. No way would I be able to reach a level of competency in all these languages in a couple weeks – far from it. The main thing at this point is really to discover and get better at doing something new.

At the heart of my desire to learn how to code is one thing: creation. The ability to create something that can potentially change the lives of others absolutely enamors me. Technology has been and will continue to be a game changer for society. As much as I love research, I want to be a part of this movement. After plugging away at this plan consistently for the past two months, I hope that my enthusiasm to code continues in the weeks and months ahead. Wish me luck!

Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Motivation

Standard

How do you stay motivated when the things that once motivated you no longer do?

I’ve been thinking a lot about this question of late. In his book, Drive, Daniel Pink looks at the motivations that drive people. One of the concepts he discusses is the comparison between those who are motivated by extrinsic factors, Type X’s, to those who are motivated by intrinsic factors, Type I’s.

For most of my life, I’d unequivocally consider myself a Type X. Until college, my goals were fairly straightforward: upward social mobility. A year after college, I felt like I had arrived.  I had achieved upward mobility. I wasn’t wealthy, but I certainly felt like I had come far since childhood. I hadn’t achieved any prestige or power, but these points seemed moot now that I was in a position of growing financial independence.

Having felt like I arrived, for the past year or so, I’ve been in a rut trying to figure out why I no longer had that “fire-in-the-belly” feeling I had while growing up.  Pink writes about an experiment that showed how using extrinsic motivators (such as those that propelled me) are not sustainable, nor do they lead to greater satisfaction:

“The people who had purpose goals and felt they were attaining them reported higher levels of satisfaction and subjective well-being. Those who said they were attaining their (extrinsic) goals – accumulating wealth, winning acclaim – reported levels of satisfaction, self-esteem, and positive affect no higher than when they were students. They’d reached their goals, but it didn’t make them any happier.”

I think for me, and perhaps for many others, extrinsic motivators are far more alluring because they are more tangible to conceptualize. It’s a lot easier to strive towards external goals than to be motivated purely by the intrinsic utility derived by the journey itself. Quite simply, extrinsic motivations such as attending a prestigious university or earning a high-income have visible results, whereas the results of intrinsic motivators may not be as apparent.  Although I can’t say I’m no longer a Type X person, I can say I am trying hard to be more of a Type I. My experiences over the past year have taught me that living a life of meaning is so much more fulfilling than a life striving for more fame and fortune.

That’s enough from me. I’d really like to know what your thoughts are on motivation. What motivates you? And more importantly, why?