ManagingOneself

byPeterF.Drucker

HISTORY’SGREATACHIEVERS—aNapoléon,adaVinci,aMozart—havealwaysmanaged themselves. That, in large measure, is what makes them greatachievers.Buttheyarerareexceptions,sounusualbothintheirtalentsandtheiraccomplishmentsastobeconsideredoutsidetheboundariesofordinaryhumanexistence.Now,mostofus,eventhoseofuswithmodestendowments,willhaveto learn tomanageourselves.Wewill have to learn todevelopourselves.Wewillhavetoplaceourselveswherewecanmakethegreatestcontribution.Andwewillhavetostaymentallyalertandengagedduringa50-yearworkinglife,whichmeansknowinghowandwhentochangetheworkwedo.

WhatAreMyStrengths?

Most people think they knowwhat they are good at.They are usuallywrong.Moreoften,peopleknowwhattheyarenotgoodat—andeventhenmorepeoplearewrong than right.And yet, a person can perform only from strength.Onecannotbuildperformanceonweaknesses,letaloneonsomethingonecannotdoatall.

Throughouthistory,peoplehadlittleneedtoknowtheirstrengths.Apersonwasbornintoapositionandalineofwork:Thepeasant’ssonwouldalsobeapeasant; the artisan’s daughter, an artisan’s wife; and so on. But now peoplehavechoices.Weneedtoknowourstrengthsinordertoknowwherewebelong.

The only way to discover your strengths is through feedback analysis.Wheneveryoumakeakeydecisionortakeakeyaction,writedownwhatyouexpect will happen. Nine or 12months later, compare the actual results withyour expectations. I havebeenpracticing thismethod for 15 to20years now,and every time I do it, I am surprised.The feedback analysis showedme, forinstance—and tomy great surprise—that I have an intuitive understanding oftechnical people, whether they are engineers or accountants or marketresearchers.ItalsoshowedmethatIdon’treallyresonatewithgeneralists.

Feedback analysis is by no means new. It was invented sometime in thefourteenth century by an otherwise totally obscure German theologian andpicked up quite independently, some 150 years later, by John Calvin andIgnatius of Loyola, each of whom incorporated it into the practice of hisfollowers.Infact,thesteadfastfocusonperformanceandresultsthatthishabitproduces explains why the institutions these two men founded, the CalvinistchurchandtheJesuitorder,cametodominateEuropewithin30years.

Practicedconsistently,thissimplemethodwillshowyouwithinafairlyshortperiodoftime,maybetwoorthreeyears,whereyourstrengthslie—andthisisthe most important thing to know. The method will show you what you aredoingorfailingtodothatdeprivesyouofthefullbenefitsofyourstrengths.Itwill show you where you are not particularly competent. And finally, it willshowyouwhereyouhavenostrengthsandcannotperform.

Several implications for action follow from feedback analysis. First andforemost,concentrateonyourstrengths.Putyourselfwhereyourstrengthscanproduceresults.

Second,workonimprovingyourstrengths.Analysiswillrapidlyshowwhere

youneed to improve skills or acquire newones. Itwill also show the gaps inyourknowledge—andthosecanusuallybefilled.Mathematiciansareborn,buteveryonecanlearntrigonometry.

Third, discover where your intellectual arrogance is causing disablingignoranceandovercomeit.Far toomanypeople—especiallypeoplewithgreatexpertiseinonearea—arecontemptuousofknowledgeinotherareasorbelievethatbeingbrightisasubstituteforknowledge.First-rateengineers,forinstance,tend to take pride in not knowing anything about people.Humanbeings, theybelieve, are much too disorderly for the good engineering mind. Humanresourcesprofessionals,bycontrast,oftenpridethemselvesontheirignoranceofelementaryaccountingorofquantitativemethodsaltogether.Buttakingprideinsuch ignorance is self-defeating. Go to work on acquiring the skills andknowledgeyouneedtofullyrealizeyourstrengths.

IdeainBriefWeliveinanageofunprecedentedopportunity:Ifyou’vegotambition,drive,andsmarts,youcanrisetothetopofyourchosenprofession—regardlessofwhereyoustartedout.Butwithopportunitycomesresponsibility.Companiestodayaren’tmanagingtheirknowledgeworkers’careers.Rather,wemusteachbeourownchiefexecutiveofficer.

Simplyput,it’suptoyoutocarveoutyourplaceintheworkworldandknowwhentochangecourse.And it’s up toyou tokeepyourself engagedandproductiveduring awork life thatmayspansome50years.

Todoallofthesethingswell,you’llneedtocultivateadeepunderstandingofyourself.Whatareyourmostvaluablestrengthsandmostdangerousweaknesses?Equallyimportant,howdoyoulearnandworkwithothers?Whatareyourmostdeeplyheldvalues?Andinwhattypeofworkenvironmentcanyoumakethegreatestcontribution?

The implication is clear:Onlywhenyouoperate froma combination of your strengths andself-knowledgecanyouachievetrue—andlasting—excellence.

Itisequallyessentialtoremedyyourbadhabits—thethingsyoudoorfailtodo that inhibit your effectiveness and performance. Such habits will quicklyshow up in the feedback. For example, a planner may find that his beautifulplans failbecausehedoesnot follow throughon them.Like somanybrilliantpeople,hebelievesthatideasmovemountains.Butbulldozersmovemountains;ideas showwhere thebulldozers shouldgo towork.Thisplannerwillhave tolearn that the work does not stop when the plan is completed. He must findpeopletocarryouttheplanandexplainittothem.Hemustadaptandchangeit

asheputs it intoaction.Andfinally,hemustdecidewhentostoppushingtheplan.

IdeainPracticeTobuildalifeofexcellence,beginbyaskingyourselfthesequestions:

“Whataremystrengths?”

To accurately identify your strengths, use feedback analysis. Every time you make a keydecision,writedowntheoutcomeyouexpect.Severalmonthslater,comparetheactualresultswith your expected results. Look for patterns in what you’re seeing:What results are youskilled at generating?What abilitiesdoyouneed to enhance inorder toget the results youwant?Whatunproductivehabitsarepreventingyoufromcreatingtheoutcomesyoudesire?Inidentifyingopportunitiesforimprovement,don’twastetimecultivatingskillareaswhereyouhavelittlecompetence.Instead,concentrateon—andbuildon—yourstrengths.

“HowdoIwork?”

Inwhatwaysdoyouworkbest?Doyouprocessinformationmosteffectivelybyreadingit,orbyhearingothersdiscussit?Doyouaccomplishthemostbyworkingwithotherpeople,orbyworkingalone?Doyouperformbestwhilemakingdecisions,orwhileadvisingothersonkeymatters?Are you in top formwhen things get stressful, or do you function optimally in ahighlypredictableenvironment?

“Whataremyvalues?”

What areyour ethics?Whatdoyou see asyourmost important responsibilities for living aworthy,ethicallife?Doyourorganization’sethicsresonatewithyourownvalues?Ifnot,yourcareerwilllikelybemarkedbyfrustrationandpoorperformance.

“WheredoIbelong?”

Consideryour strengths,preferredwork style, andvalues.Basedon thesequalities, inwhatkind ofwork environmentwould you fit in best? Find the perfect fit, and you’ll transformyourselffromamerelyacceptableemployeeintoastarperformer.

“WhatcanIcontribute?”

Inearliereras,companiestoldbusinesspeoplewhattheircontributionshouldbe.Today,youhavechoices.Todecidehowyoucanbestenhanceyourorganization’sperformance,firstaskwhat thesituationrequires.Basedonyourstrengths,workstyle,andvalues,howmightyou

makethegreatestcontributiontoyourorganization’sefforts?

At the same time, feedbackwill also revealwhen the problem is a lack ofmanners.Mannersarethelubricatingoilofanorganization.Itisalawofnaturethattwomovingbodiesincontactwitheachothercreatefriction.Thisisastruefor human beings as it is for inanimate objects.Manners—simple things likesaying“please”and“thankyou”andknowingaperson’snameoraskingafterherfamily—enabletwopeopletoworktogetherwhethertheylikeeachotherornot.Brightpeople,especiallybrightyoungpeople,oftendonotunderstandthis.Ifanalysisshowsthatsomeone’sbrilliantworkfailsagainandagainassoonascooperation fromothers is required, it probably indicates a lackof courtesy—thatis,alackofmanners.

Comparingyourexpectationswithyourresultsalsoindicateswhatnottodo.Weallhaveavastnumberofareasinwhichwehavenotalentorskillandlittlechanceof becoming evenmediocre. In those areas aperson—andespecially aknowledgeworker—shouldnottakeonwork,jobs,andassignments.Oneshouldwasteaslittleeffortaspossibleonimprovingareasoflowcompetence.Ittakesfarmoreenergyandworkto improvefromincompetencetomediocrity thanittakestoimprovefromfirst-rateperformancetoexcellence.Andyetmostpeople—especially most teachers and most organizations—concentrate on makingincompetentperformersintomediocreones.Energy,resources,andtimeshouldgoinsteadtomakingacompetentpersonintoastarperformer.

HowDoIPerform?

Amazingly fewpeopleknowhow theyget thingsdone. Indeed,mostofusdonot even know that different peoplework and perform differently. Toomanypeople work in ways that are not their ways, and that almost guaranteesnonperformance.Forknowledgeworkers,Howdo Iperform?maybeanevenmoreimportantquestionthanWhataremystrengths?

Like one’s strengths, how one performs is unique. It is a matter ofpersonality.Whether personality be a matter of nature or nurture, it surely isformed long before a person goes to work. And how a person performs is agiven,justaswhatapersonisgoodatornotgoodatisagiven.Aperson’swayof performing can be slightly modified, but it is unlikely to be completelychanged—andcertainlynoteasily.Justaspeopleachieveresultsbydoingwhatthey are good at, they also achieve results byworking inways that they bestperform. A few common personality traits usually determine how a personperforms.

AmIareaderoralistener?

The first thing to know iswhether you are a reader or a listener. Far too fewpeopleevenknowthattherearereadersandlistenersandthatpeoplearerarelyboth. Even fewer know which of the two they themselves are. But someexampleswillshowhowdamagingsuchignorancecanbe.

WhenDwightEisenhowerwasSupremeCommanderoftheAlliedforcesinEurope,hewasthedarlingofthepress.Hispressconferenceswerefamousfortheirstyle—GeneralEisenhowershowedtotalcommandofwhateverquestionhewasasked,andhewasabletodescribeasituationandexplainapolicyintwoorthree beautifully polished and elegant sentences. Ten years later, the samejournalists who had been his admirers held President Eisenhower in opencontempt.Henever addressed thequestions, they complained, but rambledonendlessly about something else. And they constantly ridiculed him forbutcheringtheKing’sEnglishinincoherentandungrammaticalanswers.

Eisenhower apparently did not know that he was a reader, not a listener.WhenhewasSupremeCommander inEurope,his aidesmade sure that everyquestion fromthepresswaspresented inwritingat leasthalfanhourbeforeaconferencewastobegin.AndthenEisenhowerwasintotalcommand.Whenhebecamepresident,hesucceededtwolisteners,FranklinD.RooseveltandHarryTruman.Bothmenknewthemselvestobelistenersandbothenjoyedfree-for-allpress conferences. Eisenhower may have felt that he had to do what his twopredecessorshaddone.Asaresult,heneverevenheardthequestionsjournalistsasked.AndEisenhowerisnotevenanextremecaseofanonlistener.

A few years later, Lyndon Johnson destroyed his presidency, in largemeasure,bynotknowingthathewasalistener.Hispredecessor,JohnKennedy,was a readerwho had assembled a brilliant group ofwriters as his assistants,making sure that theywrote to him before discussing theirmemos in person.Johnson kept these people on his staff—and they kept on writing. He never,apparently,understoodonewordofwhattheywrote.Yetasasenator,Johnsonhadbeensuperb;forparliamentarianshavetobe,aboveall,listeners.

Fewlistenerscanbemade,orcanmakethemselves,intocompetentreaders—andviceversa.Thelistenerwhotriestobeareaderwill,therefore,sufferthefateofLyndonJohnson,whereasthereaderwhotriestobealistenerwillsufferthefateofDwightEisenhower.Theywillnotperformorachieve.

HowdoIlearn?

Thesecondthingtoknowabouthowoneperformsistoknowhowonelearns.Manyfirst-classwriters—WinstonChurchill isbutoneexample—dopoorly inschool.Theytendtoremembertheirschoolingaspuretorture.Yetfewoftheirclassmates remember it the sameway.Theymaynothave enjoyed the schoolverymuch, but theworst they sufferedwas boredom. The explanation is thatwritersdonot,asarule, learnbylisteningandreading.Theylearnbywriting.Becauseschoolsdonotallowthemtolearnthisway,theygetpoorgrades.

Schoolseverywhereareorganizedon theassumption that there isonlyonerightwaytolearnandthatitisthesamewayforeverybody.Buttobeforcedtolearn thewaya school teaches is sheerhell for studentswho learndifferently.Indeed,thereareprobablyhalfadozendifferentwaystolearn.

Therearepeople,likeChurchill,wholearnbywriting.Somepeoplelearnbytakingcopiousnotes.Beethoven,forexample,leftbehindanenormousnumberofsketchbooks,yethesaidheneveractuallylookedatthemwhenhecomposed.Askedwhyhekeptthem,heisreportedtohavereplied,“IfIdon’twriteitdownimmediately,Iforgetitrightaway.IfIputitintoasketchbook,IneverforgetitandIneverhavetolookitupagain.”Somepeoplelearnbydoing.Otherslearnbyhearingthemselvestalk.

A chief executive I know who converted a small and mediocre familybusinessintotheleadingcompanyinits industrywasoneofthosepeoplewholearn by talking.Hewas in the habit of calling his entire senior staff into hisofficeonceaweekand then talkingat themfor twoor threehours.Hewouldraise policy issues and argue three different positions on each one. He rarelyaskedhisassociatesforcommentsorquestions;hesimplyneededanaudiencetohear himself talk.That’s howhe learned.And althoughhe is a fairly extremecase, learning through talking is by nomeans an unusual method. Successfultriallawyerslearnthesameway,asdomanymedicaldiagnosticians(andsodoI).

Ofall theimportantpiecesofself-knowledge,understandinghowyoulearnistheeasiesttoacquire.WhenIaskpeople,“Howdoyoulearn?”mostofthemknowtheanswer.ButwhenIask,“Doyouactonthisknowledge?”fewansweryes.Andyet,actingonthisknowledgeisthekeytoperformance;orrather,notactingonthisknowledgecondemnsonetononperformance.

AmIareaderoralistener?andHowdoIlearn?arethefirstquestionstoask.But they are by nomeans the only ones.Tomanage yourself effectively, you

alsohave toask,Do Iworkwellwithpeople,oramIa loner?And ifyoudoworkwellwithpeople,youthenmustask,Inwhatrelationship?

Some people work best as subordinates. General George Patton, the greatAmerican military hero of World War II, is a prime example. Patton wasAmerica’stoptroopcommander.Yetwhenhewasproposedforanindependentcommand,GeneralGeorgeMarshall, theU.S.chiefof staff—andprobably themost successful picker of men in U.S. history—said, “Patton is the bestsubordinate theAmerican armyhas everproduced, buthewouldbe theworstcommander.”

Somepeopleworkbestasteammembers.Othersworkbestalone.Someareexceptionallytalentedascoachesandmentors;othersaresimplyincompetentasmentors.

Anothercrucialquestionis,DoIproduceresultsasadecisionmakerorasanadviser? A great many people perform best as advisers but cannot take theburden and pressure of making the decision. A good many other people, bycontrast, need an adviser to force themselves to think; then they can makedecisionsandactonthemwithspeed,self-confidence,andcourage.

Thisisareason,bytheway,thatthenumbertwopersoninanorganizationoften failswhenpromoted to thenumberoneposition.The topspot requiresadecisionmaker.Strongdecisionmakersoftenputsomebodythey trust into thenumbertwospotastheiradviser—andinthatpositionthepersonisoutstanding.But in thenumberone spot, the sameperson fails.Heor sheknowswhat thedecisionshouldbebutcannotaccepttheresponsibilityofactuallymakingit.

Otherimportantquestionstoaskinclude,DoIperformwellunderstress,ordoIneedahighlystructuredandpredictableenvironment?DoIworkbestinabig organization or a small one? Few people work well in all kinds ofenvironments.Againandagain,Ihaveseenpeoplewhowereverysuccessfulinlargeorganizationsfloundermiserablywhentheymovedintosmallerones.Andthereverseisequallytrue.

The conclusion bears repeating: Do not try to change yourself—you areunlikelytosucceed.Butworkhardtoimprovethewayyouperform.Andtrynottotakeonworkyoucannotperformorwillonlyperformpoorly.

WhatAreMyValues?

To be able tomanage yourself, you finally have to ask,What aremyvalues?Thisisnotaquestionofethics.Withrespecttoethics,therulesarethesameforeverybody,andthetestisasimpleone.Icallitthe“mirrortest.”

In theearlyyearsof thiscentury, themosthighlyrespecteddiplomatofallthe great powers was the German ambassador in London. He was clearlydestined forgreat things—tobecomehiscountry’s foreignminister,at least, ifnot its federalchancellor.Yet in1906heabruptly resignedrather thanpresideover a dinner given by the diplomatic corps for EdwardVII. The kingwas anotorious womanizer and made it clear what kind of dinner he wanted. Theambassadorisreportedtohavesaid,“IrefusetoseeapimpinthemirrorinthemorningwhenIshave.”

That is themirror test.Ethics requires that you askyourself,What kindofpersondoIwanttoseeinthemirrorinthemorning?Whatisethicalbehaviorinonekindoforganizationorsituationisethicalbehaviorinanother.Butethicsisonlypartofavaluesystem—especiallyofanorganization’svaluesystem.

To work in an organization whose value system is unacceptable orincompatible with one’s own condemns a person both to frustration and tononperformance.

Consider the experience of a highly successful human resources executivewhose companywas acquired by a bigger organization. After the acquisition,shewaspromotedtodothekindofworkshedidbest,whichincludedselectingpeople for important positions.The executive deeply believed that a companyshouldhirepeopleforsuchpositionsfromtheoutsideonlyafterexhaustingallthe insidepossibilities.But her newcompanybelieved in first lookingoutside“tobringinfreshblood.”Thereissomethingtobesaidforbothapproaches—inmy experience, the proper one is to do some of both. They are, however,fundamentally incompatible—not as policies but as values. They bespeakdifferent viewsof the relationship betweenorganizations andpeople; differentviews of the responsibility of an organization to its people and theirdevelopment; anddifferentviewsof aperson’smost important contribution toan enterprise. After several years of frustration, the executive quit—atconsiderablefinancialloss.Hervaluesandthevaluesoftheorganizationsimplywerenotcompatible.

Similarly, whether a pharmaceutical company tries to obtain results by

making constant, small improvements or by achieving occasional, highlyexpensive,andrisky“breakthroughs”isnotprimarilyaneconomicquestion.Theresults of either strategymay be prettymuch the same.At bottom, there is aconflictbetweenavaluesystemthatseesthecompany’scontributionintermsofhelping physicians do better what they already do and a value system that isorientedtowardmakingscientificdiscoveries.

Whetherabusinessshouldberunforshort-termresultsorwithafocusonthelong term is likewise a question of values. Financial analysts believe thatbusinessescanberunforbothsimultaneously.Successfulbusinesspeopleknowbetter.Tobesure,everycompanyhastoproduceshort-termresults.Butinanyconflict between short-term results and long-term growth, each company willdetermine its own priority. This is not primarily a disagreement abouteconomics. It is fundamentally a value conflict regarding the function of abusinessandtheresponsibilityofmanagement.

Valueconflictsarenotlimitedtobusinessorganizations.Oneofthefastest-growingpastoralchurchesintheUnitedStatesmeasuressuccessbythenumberof new parishioners. Its leadership believes that what matters is how manynewcomers join the congregation. The Good Lord will then minister to theirspiritual needs or at least to the needs of a sufficient percentage. Anotherpastoral, evangelical church believes that what matters is people’s spiritualgrowth. The church eases out newcomers who join but do not enter into itsspirituallife.

Again, this is not amatter of numbers. At first glance, it appears that thesecond church grows more slowly. But it retains a far larger proportion ofnewcomersthanthefirstonedoes.Itsgrowth,inotherwords,ismoresolid.Thisisalsonota theologicalproblem,oronlysecondarilyso. It isaproblemaboutvalues.Inapublicdebate,onepastorargued,“Unlessyoufirstcometochurch,youwillneverfindthegatetotheKingdomofHeaven.”

“No,”answeredtheother.“UntilyoufirstlookforthegatetotheKingdomofHeaven,youdon’tbelonginchurch.”

Organizations,likepeople,havevalues.Tobeeffectiveinanorganization,aperson’svaluesmustbecompatiblewiththeorganization’svalues.Theydonotneed tobe thesame,but theymustbecloseenough tocoexist.Otherwise, thepersonwillnotonlybefrustratedbutalsowillnotproduceresults.

A person’s strengths and theway that person performs rarely conflict; thetwo are complementary.But there is sometimes a conflict between a person’svalues and his or her strengths. What one does well—even very well andsuccessfully—maynot fitwithone’svaluesystem. In thatcase, theworkmaynot appear to be worth devoting one’s life to (or even a substantial portion

thereof).IfImay,allowmetointerjectapersonalnote.Manyyearsago,Itoohadto

decidebetweenmyvaluesandwhatIwasdoingsuccessfully.Iwasdoingverywell as ayoung investmentbanker inLondon in themid-1930s, and theworkclearly fitmy strengths.Yet I did not seemyselfmaking a contribution as anasset manager. People, I realized, were what I valued, and I saw no point inbeing the richest man in the cemetery. I had no money and no other jobprospects.DespitethecontinuingDepression,Iquit—anditwastherightthingtodo.Values,inotherwords,areandshouldbetheultimatetest.

WhereDoIBelong?

Asmallnumberofpeopleknowveryearlywheretheybelong.Mathematicians,musicians,andcooks, for instance,areusuallymathematicians,musicians,andcooksbythetimetheyarefourorfiveyearsold.Physiciansusuallydecideontheir careers in their teens, if not earlier. But most people, especially highlygiftedpeople,donotreallyknowwheretheybelonguntiltheyarewellpasttheirmid-twenties.Bythattime,however,theyshouldknowtheanswerstothethreequestions:Whataremystrengths?HowdoIperform?and,Whataremyvalues?Andthentheycanandshoulddecidewheretheybelong.

Orrather,theyshouldbeabletodecidewheretheydonotbelong.Thepersonwho has learned that he or she does not perform well in a big organizationshouldhavelearnedtosaynotoapositioninone.Thepersonwhohaslearnedthat he or she is not a decision maker should have learned to say no to adecision-makingassignment.AGeneralPatton(whoprobablyneverlearnedthishimself)shouldhavelearnedtosaynotoanindependentcommand.

Equallyimportant,knowingtheanswertothesequestionsenablesapersontosaytoanopportunity,anoffer,oranassignment,“Yes,Iwilldothat.ButthisisthewayIshouldbedoingit.Thisisthewayitshouldbestructured.Thisisthewaytherelationshipsshouldbe.Thesearethekindofresultsyoushouldexpectfromme,andinthistimeframe,becausethisiswhoIam.”

Successfulcareersarenotplanned.Theydevelopwhenpeoplearepreparedforopportunitiesbecause theyknowtheirstrengths, theirmethodofwork,andtheir values.Knowingwhere one belongs can transform an ordinary person—hardworking and competent but otherwise mediocre—into an outstandingperformer.

WhatShouldIContribute?

Throughouthistory,thegreatmajorityofpeopleneverhadtoaskthequestion,What should I contribute? Theywere told what to contribute, and their tasksweredictatedeitherbytheworkitself—asitwasforthepeasantorartisan—orby a master or a mistress—as it was for domestic servants. And until veryrecently,itwastakenforgrantedthatmostpeopleweresubordinateswhodidastheyweretold.Evenin the1950sand1960s, thenewknowledgeworkers(theso-calledorganizationmen)lookedtotheircompany’spersonneldepartmenttoplantheircareers.

Then in the late 1960s, no one wanted to be told what to do any longer.Youngmen andwomen began to ask,What do Iwant to do?Andwhat theyheard was that the way to contribute was to “do your own thing.” But thissolution was as wrong as the organization men’s had been. Very few of thepeoplewhobelievedthatdoingone’sownthingwouldleadtocontribution,self-fulfillment,andsuccessachievedanyofthethree.

Butstill, there isnoreturn to theoldanswerofdoingwhatyouare toldorassignedtodo.Knowledgeworkersinparticularhavetolearntoaskaquestionthathasnotbeenaskedbefore:Whatshouldmycontributionbe?Toanswerit,they must address three distinct elements: What does the situation require?Givenmystrengths,mywayofperforming,andmyvalues,howcanImakethegreatestcontributiontowhatneedstobedone?Andfinally,Whatresultshavetobeachievedtomakeadifference?

Consider the experience of a newly appointed hospital administrator. Thehospitalwasbigandprestigious,butithadbeencoastingonitsreputationfor30years.Thenewadministratordecidedthathiscontributionshouldbetoestablisha standard of excellence in one important areawithin two years.He chose tofocuson theemergencyroom,whichwasbig,visible,andsloppy.Hedecidedthat every patientwho came into the ER had to be seen by a qualified nursewithin 60 seconds. Within 12 months, the hospital’s emergency room hadbecomeamodel for all hospitals in theUnitedStates, andwithin another twoyears,thewholehospitalhadbeentransformed.

Asthisexamplesuggests,itisrarelypossible—orevenparticularlyfruitful—tolooktoofarahead.Aplancanusuallycovernomorethan18monthsandstillbereasonablyclearandspecific.Sothequestioninmostcasesshouldbe,Whereandhowcan Iachieve results thatwillmakeadifferencewithin thenextyear

andahalf?Theanswermustbalanceseveralthings.First,theresultsshouldbehardtoachieve—theyshouldrequire“stretching,”tousethecurrentbuzzword.Butalso,theyshouldbewithinreach.Toaimatresultsthatcannotbeachieved—or that can be only under the most unlikely circumstances—is not beingambitious; it is being foolish. Second, the results should bemeaningful. Theyshouldmakeadifference.Finally,resultsshouldbevisibleand,ifatallpossible,measurable.Fromthiswillcomeacourseofaction:whattodo,whereandhowtostart,andwhatgoalsanddeadlinestoset.

ResponsibilityforRelationships

Veryfewpeopleworkbythemselvesandachieveresultsbythemselves—afewgreatartists,afewgreatscientists,afewgreatathletes.Mostpeopleworkwithothersandareeffectivewithotherpeople.Thatistruewhethertheyaremembersof an organization or independently employed. Managing yourself requirestakingresponsibilityforrelationships.Thishastwoparts.

Thefirstistoacceptthefactthatotherpeopleareasmuchindividualsasyouyourselfare.Theyperverselyinsistonbehavinglikehumanbeings.Thismeansthat they too have their strengths; they too have their ways of getting thingsdone; they toohave theirvalues.Tobeeffective, therefore,youhave toknowthestrengths,theperformancemodes,andthevaluesofyourcoworkers.

Thatsoundsobvious,butfewpeoplepayattentiontoit.Typicalisthepersonwhowastrainedtowritereportsinhisorherfirstassignmentbecausethatbosswas a reader. Even if the next boss is a listener, the person goes on writingreports that, invariably, produce no results. Invariably the boss will think theemployeeisstupid,incompetent,andlazy,andheorshewillfail.Butthatcouldhavebeenavoidediftheemployeehadonlylookedatthenewbossandanalyzedhowthisbossperforms.

Bossesareneitheratitleontheorganizationchartnora“function.”Theyareindividuals and are entitled to do their work in the way they do it best. It isincumbentonthepeoplewhoworkwiththemtoobservethem,tofindouthowtheywork,and toadapt themselves towhatmakes theirbossesmosteffective.This,infact,isthesecretof“managing”theboss.

Thesameholdstrueforallyourcoworkers.Eachworkshisorherway,notyour way. And each is entitled to work in his or her way. What matters iswhethertheyperformandwhattheirvaluesare.Asforhowtheyperform—eachislikelytodoitdifferently.Thefirstsecretofeffectivenessistounderstandthepeopleyouworkwithanddependonsothatyoucanmakeuseoftheirstrengths,their ways of working, and their values. Working relationships are as muchbasedonthepeopleastheyareonthework.

The second part of relationship responsibility is taking responsibility forcommunication. Whenever I, or any other consultant, start to work with anorganization,thefirstthingIhearaboutareallthepersonalityconflicts.Mostofthesearise from the fact thatpeopledonotknowwhatotherpeoplearedoingand how they do their work, or what contribution the other people are

concentratingonandwhatresultstheyexpect.Andthereasontheydonotknowisthattheyhavenotaskedandthereforehavenotbeentold.

Thisfailuretoaskreflectshumanstupiditylessthanitreflectshumanhistory.Untilrecently,itwasunnecessarytotellanyofthesethingstoanybody.Inthemedieval city, everyone in a district plied the same trade. In the countryside,everyone inavalleyplanted thesamecropassoonas the frostwasoutof theground.Eventhosefewpeoplewhodidthingsthatwerenot“common”workedalone,sotheydidnothavetotellanyonewhattheyweredoing.

Todaythegreatmajorityofpeopleworkwithotherswhohavedifferenttasksand responsibilities.Themarketingvicepresidentmayhavecomeoutof salesandknoweverythingaboutsales,butsheknowsnothingaboutthethingsshehasneverdone—pricing,advertising,packaging,andthelike.Sothepeoplewhodothesethingsmustmakesurethatthemarketingvicepresidentunderstandswhattheyaretryingtodo,whytheyaretryingtodoit,howtheyaregoingtodoit,andwhatresultstoexpect.

If themarketing vice president does not understandwhat these high-gradeknowledgespecialistsaredoing, it isprimarily their fault,nothers.Theyhavenoteducatedher.Conversely,it isthemarketingvicepresident’sresponsibilitytomakesure thatallofhercoworkersunderstandhowshelooksatmarketing:whathergoalsare,howsheworks,andwhatsheexpectsofherselfandofeachoneofthem.

Even people who understand the importance of taking responsibility forrelationshipsoftendonotcommunicatesufficientlywith theirassociates.Theyare afraid of being thought presumptuous or inquisitive or stupid. They arewrong.Wheneversomeonegoestohisorherassociatesandsays,“ThisiswhatIamgoodat.ThisishowIwork.Thesearemyvalues.ThisisthecontributionIplan to concentrate on and the results I should be expected to deliver,” theresponseisalways,“Thisismosthelpful.Butwhydidn’tyoutellmeearlier?”

And one gets the same reaction—without exception, inmy experience—ifone continues by asking, “Andwhat do I need to know about your strengths,how you perform, your values, and your proposed contribution?” In fact,knowledge workers should request this of everyone with whom they work,whether as subordinate, superior, colleague, or team member. And again,wheneverthisisdone,thereactionisalways,“Thanksforaskingme.Butwhydidn’tyouaskmeearlier?”

Organizationsarenolongerbuiltonforcebutontrust.Theexistenceoftrustbetweenpeopledoesnotnecessarilymean that they likeoneanother. Itmeansthat they understand one another. Taking responsibility for relationships istherefore an absolute necessity. It is a duty.Whether one is amember of the

organization, a consultant to it, a supplier, or a distributor, one owes thatresponsibilitytoallone’scoworkers:thosewhoseworkonedependsonaswellasthosewhodependonone’sownwork.

TheSecondHalfofYourLife

Whenwork formost peoplemeantmanual labor, therewas no need toworryabout the second half of your life. You simply kept on doing what you hadalwaysdone.Andifyouwereluckyenoughtosurvive40yearsofhardworkinthemilloron therailroad,youwerequitehappy tospend therestofyour lifedoingnothing.Today,however,mostworkisknowledgework,andknowledgeworkersarenot“finished”after40yearsonthejob,theyaremerelybored.

Wehear a great deal of talk about themidlife crisis of the executive. It ismostlyboredom.At45,mostexecutiveshavereachedthepeakoftheirbusinesscareers,andtheyknowit.After20yearsofdoingverymuchthesamekindofwork,theyareverygoodattheirjobs.Buttheyarenotlearningorcontributingorderivingchallengeandsatisfactionfromthejob.Andyettheyarestilllikelyto face another 20 if not 25 years of work. That is why managing oneselfincreasinglyleadsonetobeginasecondcareer.

Therearethreewaystodevelopasecondcareer.Thefirstisactuallytostartone.Oftenthistakesnothingmorethanmovingfromonekindoforganizationtoanother: the divisional controller in a large corporation, for instance, becomesthecontrollerofamedium-sizedhospital.Buttherearealsogrowingnumbersofpeoplewhomoveintodifferentlinesofworkaltogether:thebusinessexecutiveor government official who enters the ministry at 45, for instance; or themidlevelmanagerwholeavescorporatelifeafter20yearstoattendlawschoolandbecomeasmall-townattorney.

We will see many more second careers undertaken by people who haveachievedmodestsuccessintheirfirst jobs.Suchpeoplehavesubstantialskills,andtheyknowhowtowork.Theyneedacommunity—thehouseisemptywiththe children gone—and they need income as well. But above all, they needchallenge.

The secondway toprepare for the secondhalf of your life is to develop aparallelcareer.Manypeoplewhoareverysuccessfulintheirfirstcareersstayintheworktheyhavebeendoing,eitheronafull-timeorpart-timeorconsultingbasis. But in addition, they create a parallel job, usually in a nonprofitorganization,thattakesanothertenhoursofworkaweek.Theymighttakeoverthe administration of their church, for instance, or the presidency of the localGirl Scouts council. Theymight run the battered women’s shelter, work as achildren’s librarian for the localpublic library, siton the schoolboard, andso

on.Finally,therearethesocialentrepreneurs.Theseareusuallypeoplewhohave

beenverysuccessfulintheirfirstcareers.Theylovetheirwork,butitnolongerchallengesthem.Inmanycasestheykeepondoingwhattheyhavebeendoingall along but spend less and less of their time on it. They also start anotheractivity, usually a nonprofit.My friendBobBuford, for example, built a verysuccessful television company that he still runs. But he has also founded andbuilt a successful nonprofit organization that works with Protestant churches,andheisbuildinganothertoteachsocialentrepreneurshowtomanagetheirownnonprofitventureswhilestillrunningtheiroriginalbusinesses.

Peoplewhomanagethesecondhalfoftheirlivesmayalwaysbeaminority.The majority may “retire on the job” and count the years until their actualretirement.Butitisthisminority,themenandwomenwhoseealongworking-lifeexpectancyasanopportunitybothforthemselvesandforsociety,whowillbecomeleadersandmodels.

Thereisoneprerequisiteformanagingthesecondhalfofyourlife:Youmustbegin long before you enter it.When it first became clear 30 years ago thatworking-lifeexpectancieswerelengtheningveryfast,manyobservers(includingmyself) believed that retired peoplewould increasingly becomevolunteers fornonprofitinstitutions.Thathasnothappened.Ifonedoesnotbegintovolunteerbeforeoneis40orso,onewillnotvolunteeroncepast60.

Similarly,all thesocialentrepreneursIknowbegantoworkintheirchosensecondenterpriselongbeforetheyreachedtheirpeakintheiroriginalbusiness.Consider the example of a successful lawyer, the legal counsel to a largecorporation,whohasstartedaventuretoestablishmodelschoolsinhisstate.Hebegantodovolunteerlegalworkfortheschoolswhenhewasaround35.Hewaselectedtotheschoolboardatage40.Atage50,whenhehadamassedafortune,hestartedhisownenterprisetobuildandtorunmodelschools.Heis,however,stillworkingnearlyfull-timeastheleadcounselinthecompanyhehelpedfoundasayounglawyer.

Thereisanotherreasontodevelopasecondmajorinterest,andtodevelopitearly.Noonecanexpecttoliveverylongwithoutexperiencingaserioussetbackinhisorherlifeorwork.Thereisthecompetentengineerwhoispassedoverforpromotion at age45.There is the competent collegeprofessorwho realizes atage42thatshewillnevergetaprofessorshipatabiguniversity,eventhoughshemaybefullyqualifiedforit.Therearetragediesinone’sfamilylife:thebreakupofone’smarriageorthelossofachild.Atsuchtimes,asecondmajorinterest—notjustahobby—maymakeallthedifference.Theengineer,forexample,nowknowsthathehasnotbeenverysuccessfulinhisjob.Butinhisoutsideactivity

—aschurchtreasurer,forexample—heisasuccess.One’sfamilymaybreakup,butinthatoutsideactivitythereisstillacommunity.

In a society in which success has become so terribly important, havingoptionswillbecomeincreasinglyvital.Historically, therewasnosuchthingas“success.”Theoverwhelmingmajorityofpeopledidnotexpectanythingbuttostayintheir“properstation,”asanoldEnglishprayerhasit.Theonlymobilitywasdownwardmobility.

Inaknowledgesociety,however,weexpecteveryonetobeasuccess.Thisisclearlyanimpossibility.Foragreatmanypeople,thereisatbestanabsenceoffailure.Whereverthereissuccess,therehastobefailure.Andthenitisvitallyimportantfortheindividual,andequallyfortheindividual’sfamily,tohaveanarea inwhich he or she can contribute,make a difference, and be somebody.Thatmeansfindingasecondarea—whetherinasecondcareer,aparallelcareer,or a social venture—that offers an opportunity for being a leader, for beingrespected,forbeingasuccess.

The challenges ofmanaging oneselfmay seem obvious, if not elementary.And the answers may seem self-evident to the point of appearing naïve. Butmanaging oneself requires new and unprecedented things from the individual,andespeciallyfromtheknowledgeworker.Ineffect,managingoneselfdemandsthat each knowledge worker think and behave like a chief executive officer.Further, the shift frommanualworkerswhodo as they are told to knowledgeworkerswhohavetomanagethemselvesprofoundlychallengessocialstructure.Every existing society, even themost individualistic one, takes two things forgranted, if only subconsciously: that organizations outlive workers, and thatmostpeoplestayput.

Buttodaytheoppositeistrue.Knowledgeworkersoutliveorganizations,andtheyaremobile.Theneedtomanageoneselfisthereforecreatingarevolutioninhumanaffairs.

OriginallypublishedinJanuary1999.ReprintR0501K