Some leaders run a sprint, while others participate in relay race in endless game!

Simon has based this book on the initial work by Prof. James p Carse (Finite and Infinite Games:  A vision of life as play and possibility), and clubbed it with otherwise known management work by likes of  Jim Collins, Brown Berne, Adam Grant, to put together a compelling narrative in support of Cause-driven, visionary leaders, who believe in organization building for long run (aka level 5 leaders). 

Simons’ basic premise is that leaders either operate with infinite mindset or finite mindset.   The book shows how the two kinds of leaders differ in their decision making, team building and managing change and there are leaders from corporate world used to exemplify both kinds.  

In finite game- the goal is to win before the game ends, in infinite game, the primary objective is to keep playing, to perpetuate the game.  Finite games are between known players, played with well-defined rules and with clarity on how will winner be decided? Infinite games are played between known and unknown players, within general broad conventions and broad boundaries and players are free to join in or drop out at any time. The game of business fits into the definition of an infinite game, while a particular organization may or may not play with infinite mindset.

Targeting a particular weight by a certain date is a finite game, while living a healthy life is an infinite game.  In first case intensity of effort (or sacrifices) will work, while in second case it requires a consistent choice over a long time- almost lifestyle commitment. 

Infinite-minded leader works to ensure that employees, customers and shareholders remain committed to contributing through effort, wallet and investments, allowing organisation to serve its stated just cause- the vision it strives for through every action.

Organisations led by Finite-mindset Leader depicts:  Obsessive focus on quarter results, winning over competition key motivation, negotiable ethics, non-cooperative suffocating culture, in-human managers & profits before everything else.  Finite-minded leader plays to end the game-to win.     

Finite-minded players worry about disruptions, infinite-minded players expect surprises and even revels in them, for the aim of the first is to develop a stable company, for the later a resilient company.

Some of the interesting combinations of finite and infinite mindsets: 

1   In combat- one player may be playing with finite mind-set and other by infinite one- The first one may win some games, but will eventually drop out of the game, while the later endures.  Example includes the combat between US and Vietnam!, or at some stage between Microsoft and Apple.

2.       Professional CEO with finite mindset- following founders’ tenure with infinite mindset- Initial bump in the shareholders returns, embraced by wall-street, till the good-will and resources garnered before are not exhausted and then desertion happens – starting with talent, customers and finally profits.

3. Once the infinite mindset leader wins a particular play, there can be temptation to switch over to finite mind-set.  This is where the leaders resolve is tested, against the lure of attention and goodies associated with winners coming from media, investors and other stakeholders.

4.       Its ok or must have finite mindset, if one is playing a finite game (of football!).

5.       What if you have an infinite mindset, but stuck with boss or investors with finite mindset? 

Simon has identified five essential practices that would help develop infinite mind-set: (why only five? Why only these – cant say!)

1.       Importance of associating with a Just Cause- Essentially it is about having and truly believing in the Vision or Purpose of existence of the organisation- wherein all choices, decisions and resources are directed to serve that cause.  There are enough ways to find out, whether the stated cause or mission runs in the veins of the organisation or used as seductive marketing slogan. Infinite mindset gets attached with the Cause to such an extent - self-interests gets subsumed.  Simon beautifully illustrates how the US Declaration that all men are created equal, has been reinterpreted to break all barriers over time including race, gender, geography, opportunity and sexual orientation and the perfect vision of equality is still work in progress.  Simon provides some suggestions on how to ensure that JUST CAUSE is defined right to have the necessary pull, tangibility and relevance over infinite time-horizon.  Redefining CEO as C-Vision-Officer with CFO and COO as associates is an interesting suggestion. If you know your why? (courtesy Simon earlier book) you would naturally gravitate to the associated cause or vision. 

2.       Infinite mindset involves selecting a worthy rival and use his/its existence to learn and improve oneself and once ahead, find another rival to stay motivated on the continuous evolutionary journey.  Instead of choosing a competitor who you want to win basis some outcome metrics (sales, market share, etc), worthy rivals may be a set of comparing organisations with each one doing particular things better and forces one to focus on multiple opportunities for improvement.  Simon mentions US predicament in managing rivals in Coldwar 2.0 in the form of North korea for nuclear threat, China for economic challenge and Extremism for ideological supremacy, requiring different response than earlier world of Coldwar, where USSR seems to be representing all rivalry folded in one competitor.

3.       Existential flexibility comes naturally to the infinite-mindset leaders as they are focused on serving their Cause and welcome any development that would helps accelerate achieving that vision and do course change without much lament about sunk cost, or wasted efforts.   This kind of flexibility in not easy to come-by leaders that are playing finite game to meet certain outcome metrics in predefined period- to them this is unwelcome distraction to be ignored or restrict its influence on the existing course.

4.  Leaders with Infinite mindset focus on building trusting teams- where members are open to share bad news, seek help and share variant perspectives, while feeling psychologically safe that their actions will not be used against them.  Finite leaders create a sense of fear and mistrust within team as each member acts to safe his back, often resulting in hiding information and avoidance of accountability.  Finite metrics as dominant part of performance system within organisations tend to promote finite mind-set, resulting in organisations often celebrating high performers who may have severe trust deficit within their teams and peer group.  Simon would prefer low performers with high trust than high performers with low trust score, while both sets may be worthy of coaching stint. 

  5.       Courage is the essential requirement for anyone interested in moving away from the established norms, prevailing paradigms or simply trying do something that would upset the present set-up.  Hence, Courage finds mention in almost all How-to and paradigm-redefining books, including this one.  

 Standard examples like Apple, Microsoft, Blackberry, Kodak, United Airlines etc- are so often used by almost all management thinkers to prove their hypothesis,. Clearly these success stories and failures are not likely to be attributed to one-thing they their leaders or these organizations did  right or not- although quest for simple explanation continues among thinkers and researchers.

In conclusion, the book may not be presenting any novel idea or incisive insights but is reassuring for those already leading with infinite mindset and for others, it provides enough provation to self-examine motives and realign ones' leadership intent. 

Dare to be Vulnerable, its worth and can be learnt!

Imagine if one knows how to manage and leverage Vulnerability (with its uncomfortable feelings), what would it mean to the way one builds connections, develops creative ideas, handles difficult conversations, leads teams…….amplifying boundaries!  Its worth it and it is doable- that is the big inspiration from the book, that Berne Brown would like us to takeaway. 

Some of the key insights that Ms Brown brings to light:

1.       Courage is not opposite to fear.  Instead it represents the set of behaviors and responses that one display, when in fear.  Courage can be built in all, and is not decided at birth. And yes, courage is contagious, too. 

2.       Courage is built on the individual’s ability to do vulnerability, live in sync with personal values, act and promote trust and finally ability to rise strong from set-backs (kick-ass) that are inevitable.

3.       Vulnerability is an emotional exposure, when faced with uncertainty and risk, and where the outcome is not in ones’ control.  Berne emphasizes the need for doing Vulnerability by the leaders in the organization context, that would go long way in connecting and closing with teams and ensuring openness, innovation, trust and enabling non-judgmental culture.  Neither Vulnerability is sign of weakness, nor is it license to indiscreetly sharing the personal experiences and emotions.   

4.       Contrasting Daring Leadership with Armored leadership indicates the difference in behaviors that go a long way in explain their effectiveness and impact on those led.  Armored leaders act as being a knower, chasing compliance & control, rewarding exhaustion as symbol of self-worth, and zig-zagging and avoiding conflicts.  Daring leadership is characterized by learners’ approach, shared purpose, cultivating commitments, straight talking and empathy, including self-compassion. Daring leaders work from the assumption that people are doing the best they can- leaders with ego, armor or lack of skills do not make that assumption. 

5.       Shame, that reinforces in us the feeling of not been generally good enough, is behind our love for embracing armor.  We need to guard our inadequacies as secret from the world, for the fear of being ineligible for their love and connections, if these gaps get known to the world.  This shame driven thinking is limiting, debilitating and leads to smallness of being and cheap behaviors (including blaming and shaking others or excessive comfort eating).  In contrast, feeling of guilt is a positive emotion, as it involves acknowledging the specific gap that is followed by commitment to actionable gap fulfillment plan.

6.       Empathy seems to be the real antidote to shame.  Empathy is about connecting and staying with the emotions that other is experiencing than rushing to alter the emotions or fix the concern.  While Berne lists the empathy skills, what is more interesting is the empathy busters; fathom saying these quotes while empathizing:  It’s not that bad,  you are over-reacting, I have been through worse, I imagined you were stronger, and do this to fix it up! 

7.       We need trust to be vulnerable, and we need to be vulnerable in order to build trust. 

8.       More than half the population do not take conscious effort to define and recognize their personal Values- something that defines them and provides the filter to use while making tough calls.  Book provides the list of values as reference and for readers to identify their top two values, which requires deliberative and intense effort, especially when trading off between equally appealing values.  Once in touch with values, leaders are able to understand their reinforcing and contrasting behaviors and also their boundaries of acceptance.  Berne explains the concepts using her two values- courage and faith- with great alacrity and incisiveness.

9.       Importance of Trust has been written much about.  Berne brings to us set of behaviors that are learnable, measurable or observable, which would help build trust.  It includes being consistent in ones views on what is acceptable and what’s not, doing what one says, owning to ones gaps, and preferring courage over comfort.  Further it involve respecting confidentiality of stuff shared in confidence, not jumping into conclusions about other and finally being generous in assumptions about others behaviors, and intent (including self). 

10.   Finally how to rise from the fall- low feeling that we often experience in this journey.  Labelling the emotions right and precise, would mean half the job done. This is where having adequate level of emotional literacy becomes important. Can u consciously look at the uncomfortable emotion and call out it as jealousy, fear, hate, resentment, disappointment, anxiousness, frustrated, regret, hurt, or worried?  What is behind anger and sadness? Try this after you are feeling bad after a meeting that has gone well- you would get insight into your own self- values- emotions and help design more effective coping mechanism.  It works, indeed.  

While for those who have gone through other books by Brene, there may be some repetition- but for others, it has lot of fresh ideas and actionable suggestions.  If nothing else, it not only take topic like courage from the genes-attribution to learnable realm, and provides good start-up kit, provided one is ready to experiment.  

Book worth taking along as you retire for year end vacations and plan for courageous, bigger and bolder next year!

Liberalism or Democracy: A Choice, we are best to avoid making?

We are living in interesting times, where nothing can be taken for guaranteed, even if it is liberal democracy that has been existing in the country for long. The type of leaders emerging within democracies across the world, the tenure and content public discourse and the everyday challenges made to the established engagement norms, all point towards winds of change. 

It is this phenomenon that Mounk very lucidly and comprehensively explains in this book- explaining the emerging trend, the reasons behind these trends and what possible remedies to arrest shifts in the political systems prevailing in consolidated liberal democracies.

Author uses his academic astuteness and global experiences, mainly from North America and Western European Countries, to explain the threats to liberal democracies in a way, which is easy for layman with no political science background to not only understand fully, but pause to deliberate upon.   

Mounk presents several supporting surveys and trends to underline the declining appeal of Democracy:  Young are less interested in politics, growing appeal for strong leaders (2017: 33%-Germany, 48% France & 50% Britain) who may not bother about congress or elections, and living in democracy is not essential for large part of populace instead there is growing acceptance of army rule.  

The reasons for this democracy recession could be disappointment with present situation and also limited understanding of what it means to live in authoritarian society, among the younger population.

In this context, there has been rise of Populist leaders, who present themselves as strong leaders, with scant regard to democratic norms and institutions, and claim to be true nationalists.  Once in power, these Populists can take society away from being a liberal democracy to illiberal democracy and finally authoritarian rule, following almost a predictable trajectory. 

Mounk has almost presented almost a handbook, which explains the Populists winning behaviors and strategies, after studying across rise of Populist leaders across America and Western European countries (Turkey. Poland, Hungry, France, Germany, Italy, Greece eg.).

The Populist Handbook starts with:

Pitching for office……..

1. Populist claims that there are common sense simple solutions possible for issues that bother the majority in the society- ban imports to create domestic jobs, ban immigration to improve security etc. etc. 
2. Further, Ruling dispensation is not willing to take these obvious steps, as they either want to protect the interest of special groups (cronies, financers, foreign friends) or have other priorities than serving the society at large.  The whole system is rigged by the economic elite, narrow interest groups and financers, at the cost of common man
3. There is another set of populace (ethnicity, social class, religion, or political conviction) who is gaining at the cost of majority, adding to the vows of common public.  They need to be contained and placed behind in the overall hierarchy of social and economic hierarchy.
4. I am your voice and true nationalist- anyone who opposes me is a traitor!  

And once in office…..

1. Reality of the complex situation and limitations of simplistic solutions become evident- It starts with blaming the guiding intellectuals and lamenting that situation is much worse than expected.
2. Discredit institutions that question solutions with biased loyalties to earlier establishment or foreign funders- limit foreign grants and funding to these institutions or bodies/NGOs.
3. Take stringent measures against independent journalists and build up a network of loyalist media that cheers every move and celebrate imagined accomplishments
4. Systematically fill the positions in independent institutions with loyalists and avid supporters.
5. Curtail the power of independent institutions including judiciary, who has the power to question or comment upon the actions of the Populist- as he is the sole and true representative of the will of people.
6. And if there are provisions like direct democracy possible – in the form of referendums, Populists are able to exploit their appeal to majority to inflict further constrains on the outsiders- immigrants, religions, communities, institutions etc.  

Three key causes behind the ascendancy of the appeal of populist strongmen type leaders

a.       Economic anxiety about the future, which is caused by globalization, technological advancements, especially among the masses who have seen prolonged period of economic stagnation and wherein the present generation is not relatively as better-off as their parents were at same stage of life. The prevailing disillusionment and anxiety is often translated into frustration and mistrust of the ruling politicians that often belong to liberal democratic cadre. 

b.      Demographic anxiety faced by the majoritarian natives (who were the original mono-ethnic groups that lived within the nation boundaries) of the increased influence and voice of the immigrants (and those who look/ wear and appear differently) in the resource sharing and decision making, exercising their democratic and legal rights, makes majority resentful of the present system and enhances the appeal populists, who promises recreating pure, monoethnic, blissful national identity of yesteryears (Make America great again!. Take back the control-UK).

c.       Virtual echo-chambers that social media offers to public be part of means that there is increased intensity and frequency of the conversations between the like-minded people about others, without much need to differentiate between the truth, perception and bias and also without need to make an effort to understand the others’ perspective. It is easy to coordinate and share the messages that questions establishment and organize revolts using the power of social media.  Populists leaders seems to be really effective in its usage, with their stronger messaging mixed with conspiracy theories, hatred laden quotes, and imaginary good-old-days.

If we have to save the liberal democracy remedies Mounk suggests:

a.       Stop populists from making further power grabs- oppose erosion of institutions and norms, embolden judges to question unconstitutional laws, support embattled media houses, and force international governments and organizations to put pressure. 

b.      Successfully avoiding reelection of the populists is the only and most effective remedy to save liberal democracy.  This would require opposition unity, alternate positive development narrative that would address real concerns, and to be communicated in the language of the ordinary people.  Only highlighting the failing of the populists isn’t enough.

c.       Liberal democracies need to define the economic reforms agenda that address real and imagined economic deprivation and sense of inequality. Some of suggested economic reforms include reforming taxation, reducing housing costs, enhancing workforce productivity and recommitting to state welfare obligations.  These steps would not only help  improve standards of living, but also convey to populace that the government is in control and not overly giving to forces of technological advancements and global competition and compulsions- the blame that populists fully exploit.

d.      Liberal democracies need to do better job in ensuring that principles are uniformly applied to all its citizens, whatever their ethnic or religious backgrounds.   This goes beyond passing laws to removing structural impediments and implicit discrimination, as is often seen in the children composition in different schools or employment in Corporate. Off-course, to address phobia against reckless immigration, liberal democracies need to establish clearer and appropriate norms on who gets to acquire citizenship in their land.

e.       It’s important the young and next generations have deeper understanding of political context and principles that influence their lives, so that they are fully engaged in the democratic processes.  Mounk laments the loosing importance of teaching Civic in schools and reiterates the need to strengthen the Civic coupe teachings that not only educates the young and would-be voters about their political system, but also present its evolution, strengths and gaps in a balanced positive manner.

There can be debate on the exhaustiveness or the relative significance of the three reasons for the decline of liberal democracies, and also the applicability of proposed remedies in all contexts.  But there is convincing case made against the growing appeal of Populists and threat to Liberal Democracy, and hence the need for the concerned populace to actively work towards arresting and possibly reversing the trend.    

Choosing to live between “Democracy without Rights” or “Rights without Democracy” is not an easy one, especially those who have lived better part of their lives in Liberal Democratic system. 

Evolving and serving Tech solutions, with ethical, empathetic and engaged spirit: The Microsoft Way

Rarely, you get a chance to get perspective on impact of Technology innovation on societies by a legal counselor, who understands both the nuances and capabilities of new technologies and also different perspectives and concerns around these technologies seen from wide range of stakeholders. 

What, if government asks for an enterprise data from tech company, at the same-time restrict the tech company to let the concerned enterprise know about the request?  What if the government asks of global tech companies, for information that resides in data-center located in another country? The bigger question is that shall as owner of my face, do I deserve to be asked by tech companies before using my facial signature for whatever purpose, especially when I fear this may lead to bias or discrimination?

Brad smith brings to life, with help of instances, the balancing acts tech companies have to ensure, between individual and enterprise privacy rights and governments rights to know for genuine reasons of preventing or investigating crimes or public safety, for example.  He goes on to describe the evolutionary path tech sector has gone through to help address these challenges situations in a principled, legally supported (CLOUD ACT), technology enabled (say encryption) manner, and also given the Microsoft’s stand on some of the contentious concerns.

The initiatives and demands made by some governments (Denmark, NZ or EU) often forces global tech companies to develop solutions that would become easy to be offered across the globe.  Microsoft commitment to offer same level of protection to all customers irrespective of their location across the globe, means that the most demanding customers or stringent regulations define the base level for privacy for all, across the globe.  

Similar set of interesting questions and relevant lessons from history are raised around Cybersecurity, rural broadband, social media, public safety and use of AI. 

Brad presents a very balanced assessment of likely impact of AI on workforce, using impact of introduction of automotive and replacement of horses as historical disruption that created new industries (eg. Consumer credit) and decimated existing ones (farms producing horse feeds, eg.).   Yes, in the intermediate, there would be economic losers and winners, but in the long run technological advancements leads to overall improvement in quality of life for all.  Most important question, and most difficult to answer, is how soon will AI type of technologies become mainstream! Agreed.

As Bill gates puts it, BRAD SMITH offers a clear view of the questions raised by new technologies- and yes, also his suggestions of path forward, that needs considered deliberations among the stakeholders- Governments and Company Management. 

Governments, especially within democracies, needs to act fast to match the pace of technology innovation.  Brad suggests that governments approach towards regulation needs to be similar to introducing minimum viable product (regulations) and then build up as more data, experience and understanding comes their way.  Waiting to understand technology in its full nuances and its impact in totality, in quest for comprehensive fool-proof regulation may not work. 

As Technology companies are global, their effective regulation would require multi-lateral comity of nations coming together to design and agree to global standards and principles for regulations- which in increasingly complex world is difficult to achieve.  Brad has hope on the part of the 75 odd democratic nations to form coalition of the willing, to develop some common regulatory provisions and principles, with US taking the necessary lead.     

Self-regulation within companies, are within the control of Companies Boards and can provide necessary support in gaining and retaining stakeholders trust.  Brad proposes principles based approach to handling issues then case-to case handling of instances and then sticking to principles, whatever be the cost help retain trust.  Microsoft, own decision by its ethics committee to refuse selling facial recognition technology to Government, on citizens liberty concerns, is a case in point. 

Brad has very well brought forth the issues and concerns facing linked to technology innovation and the increasing might and responsibilities of global tech companies in defining better future for the globe, working with stakeholders in a proactive, engaged and enlightened manner.

Off-course- this book is of interest to all, besides lawyers and tech-professionals for whom it falls in must-read category. Don’t read too much in its title though!