Sticking it to United, Just a Little Bit

I am sitting in the Red Carpet Club waiting for yet another delayed United flight, and there’s a small thing bringing me a little extra joy. I recently started using Verizon’s Broadband Wireless service, which is expensive at $60/month, but awesome since it basically works anywhere and eliminates the need for hotel, Starbucks, and other Wi Fi hot spot fees (and for a great tutorial on how to use the service to power two computers at once, read Brad’s post here).

I’ve long been annoyed at United — and American as well — for both charging a pretty sizeable annual fee to belong to their airport clubs and then soaking me for another $10 every time I’m in one just to use their T-Mobile hot spot.  Many people, including Fred here, believe that Wi Fi should be free everywhere.  While I think that’s a great idea, I don’t think it’s a god-given right.  And I don’t mind that Starbucks charges me to use their hot spots, since I may only be spending a couple dollars with them.  However, airline clubs that charge a lot of money for membership should definitely include WI Fi as part of the deal.

So my great joy today was *not* giving yet another $10 to United for the privilege of using the Internet. Thank you, Verizon (not that I don’t also have various complaints about Verizon, but that’s for another day).

It truly is the little things…

I was the head coach of my two older kids’ little league team this past spring.  The whole thing was a little bit of an accident – I vaguely volunteered for something and ended up in charge.  The commitment was a little daunting, but I was ok with it since the season was only a couple months long, it was both Casey and Wilson, and both kids, especially Wilson, are really into baseball.  Other than helping out a bit here and there, I’d never coached a sports team before.

What started off as an unclear assignment ended up as one of the most fun and fulfilling things I’ve done in years.  I loved every minute of it, looked forward to our practices and games, was hugely bummed out when we got rained out, and never had a moment where I couldn’t make the time for it (though clearly the hours had to come from somewhere!).  Given some of the overlap between leading a sports team and leading a company, I thought I’d reflect on the experience a bit here.  There are some common themes between this post and something I wrote years ago, Parenting and Corporate Leadership, with the same caveat that no, I don’t think employees are children or children are employees.  But here are some things I take away from the experience and apply or compare to work.

We established a clear philosophy and stuck to it.  That’s a step that lots of coaches – and managers in the workplace – miss.  The other coaches and I discussed this before the first practice, agreed on it, and shared it directly with the kids.  For this age group in particular, we felt that we were there first and foremost to have fun; second to learn the game; and third, to play hard and fair.  Note there was nothing in this about winning, and that we were really specific about the order of the three objectives.  Even 7 and 8 year olds know the difference between “win at all costs” and “have fun and play ball.”  We reinforced this at every practice and at every game.  Being intentional about a philosophy and communicating it (and of course sticking to it) are key for any leadership situation.

We got lucky.  As I repeatedly said to the parents on the team, we had a group of awesome kids – happy and generally paying attention, and not one troublemaker in the bunch; and we had a group of awesome parents – responsive, supportive, and not a single complaint about what position a kid was playing or where someone was in the batting order.  I’d heard horror stories about both kids and parents from other coaches ahead of time.  It’s possible that the other coaches and I did such a good job that both kids and parents were great all the time…but I think you have to chalk most of that up to the luck of the draw.  Work isn’t all that different.  Having stakeholders who are consistently positive forces is something that sometimes you can shape (you can fire problematic employees) but often you can’t, in the case of customers or even Board members.  Luck matters.

Stakeholder alignment was a critical success factor.  Having said that, I do think the coaches and I did a good job of keeping our stakeholders aligned and focusing on their needs, not ours.  We put extra effort into a regular cadence of communication with the parents in the form of weekly emails and a current web site.  We used those emails to highlight kids’ performance and also let parents know what we’d be working on in practice that week.  We made sure that we rotated kids in the batting order so that everyone got to bad leadoff once and cleanup once.  We rotated kids so that almost every kid played half of each game in the infield and half in the outfield.  We took any and all requests from kids who wanted to play a specific position for a few innings.  Many of these basic principles – communicating well, a clear operating system, listening to stakeholders, a People First approach – are lessons learned from work as a CEO.

Proper expectations and a large dose of patience helped.  After the first couple games, we were 0-2, and I was very frustrated.  But I reminded myself that 7 and 8 year olds are just kids, and my frustration wasn’t going to help us achieve our objectives of having fun and learning the game.  So I recalibrated my expectations and took much more of a laid-back attitude.  For example, any time I saw one kid goofing off a little bit in practice, I gently got him or her back in line.  But when I saw multiple kids’ attention fading, I took it as a sign that whatever I was doing as a coach wasn’t working, called a break, and did something else.  This kind of “look in the mirror” approach is always helpful at work, too.

Reward and recognition were key.  We definitely adopted a Whale Done! approach with the kids.  We got the kids in the dugout fired up to cheer on batters.  First base coaches did big high fives, smiles, and literal pats on the back for every hit.  Post-game huddles and emails to parents focused on highlights and what went right for the kids.  One of my favorite moments of the season was when one player, who only had one hit all year and struck out almost every time at bat, had two hits, an RBI, and a run scored in our final game.  Not just the coaches, but the other kids and all the parents went absolutely BANANAS cheering for this player, and it brought huge smiles to all our faces.  I am 100% certain that the focus on the positive encouraged the kids to try their hardest all season, much as I believe that same philosophy encourages people to take risks and work hard at the office.

The biggest thing I take back to the workplace with me from the experience.  I was reminded about how powerful achieving a state of “flow,” or “relaxed concentration” is.  I recounted these principles in this blog post from a couple different books I’ve read over the years – Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s Flow and Tim Gallway’s Inner Game books – Golf, Tennis, and Work.  The gist of achieving a state of flow is to set clear goals that are stretch but achievable, become immersed in the activity, pay attention to what’s happening, and learn to enjoy immediate experience.  All leaders – in sports, business, or any walk of life – can benefit from this way of living and leading.

I loved every minute of coaching.  It helped that we ended up with a really strong record.  But more than that, building relationships with a bunch of great kids and great parents was fun and fulfilling and incredibly thankful and rewarding.  The “thank you ball” that all the kids autographed for me is now a cherished possession.  Working and getting extra time with my own two kids was the icing on the cake.  All I want to know is…is it time for next season yet?  I am ready!

This post is really for Coaches Mike, Paul, and Oliver; and players Emily, Casey, Lauryn, Mike, Josh, Holden, Hudson, Wilson, Drew, Kevin, Matthew, and Christian.

Counter Cliche:  I Know When I See One, Too

I haven’t written a counter to one of Fred’s VC Cliche’s of the Week for a while now, but today’s was too good to resist.  While I haven’t (and most entrepreneurs haven’t) worked with 200 VCs, I have seen, heard about, been one (sort of), and worked with enough of them to know enough to comment as follows:  as is the case with Fred and entrepreneurs, I’m not sure I can define what makes a great VC in one phrase, but I know one when I see one, and here are some of the characteristics they exhibit:

– Major pattern recognition — "I’ve seen this movie before, and I know how it ends…";
– Deep understanding of the market and/or customer set to add strategic value;
– Fundamental desire to be a product manager or marketing manager of your product, but also —
– Ability to stay out of the weeds with day-to-day details when the Board meeting ends;
– Always ready with a story or bon mot about other crazy investors or even crazier entrepreneurs to make you feel better about your own life;
– Complete transparency about the motives of his/her fellow GPs and LPs and ability/appetite for follow-on financings (and needless to say, no/limited blocking of transactions that are clearly in the company’s best interests but might run counter to his/her firm’s own short-term interests);
– Willingness to jump into a debate with the strongest of convictions, yet without 100% of the facts, since 100% of the facts are never available;
– Equal willingness to admit being wrong if a clear and compelling argument comes forth; and of course the most critical —
– No fear of yielding to Management when Management knows best!
– Note — note included — major rolodex (a nice to have, but not required)

The other part of the counter cliche is that I’m sure there are some great entrepreneurs who only exhibit a few of Fred’s list of traits…much as I’m sure there are some great VCs who only exhibit a few of my list above.

It’s been a big break between posts – as many of you probably know, I moved to Board Chair and left the CEO role at Bolster last summer (it’s now in the very capable hands of my friend and co-founder Cathy Hawley), and I’m now CEO of a super cool AI company called Acrolinx.  So yes, that means I went through a job search – and I found my ultimate job as a result of an inbound cold email from a headhunter!  The rich irony in that as someone who founded an executive search platform is not lost on me.

So when a good friend of mine who is also between CEO gigs and looking at several opportunities asked me the other day “why is this process so slow, and what can I do about it?” I riffed with him on the theme for a bit and thought I’d share my thinking here. 

Why Executive Searches are Slow

My top three reasons on this are pretty varied – there’s no specific theme.

1. Boards aren’t efficient hiring managers. When hiring a CEO, even the best intentioned boards can be slow to move. Frequently they operate with a search committee, and even if there’s a lead director on the search committee or even no actual search committee, by design they need to operate with a high degree of consensus. Organizing five calendars to meet with or debrief on a candidate can take weeks. And a single loud voice saying “no” or “not sure” can paralyze a board. All this is true for a CEO search but can also be true when a less experienced CEO is trying to hire a CXO and needs a lot of Board involvement in the process. At Bolster, we’ve worked on mitigating this by getting the key decision-makers aligned on search criteria at the beginning of the search, prepping interviewers, and creating a scorecard for each candidate that is visible to all decision-makers, but sometimes that doesn’t matter.
   
2. Boards and CEOs often don’t know what they want.  Whether a company is hiring a role for the first time or replacing an executive, they often get to a generic job spec but don’t actually know what they’re looking for. Not all CEOs are created equal. Not all CROs have the same core competencies. At Bolster, we developed a description of role archetypes for each C-suite or Head-or role that helps with this process (eg for a CFO, do you want an Accounting type, a Finance/Ops type, or a Deal type?). But even if a Board or hiring CEO has this level of detail down, it can still be a murky picture, trapped between the company’s past successes and failures on one side and its future needs on the other. Processes move slowly because it take a while for the picture to become less murky – circumstances around the company evolve, or people see how the company operates without this role as others pick up the slack, and therefore the needs of the role shift or come into focus. Sometimes meeting a series of candidates is the only thing that can help drive this focus, and per the first bullet above, this just takes time. If a company has a strong search partner, that may speed things up via quick presentation of calibration candidates.
   
3. There’s no precipitating crisis.  Most companies and departments, most of the time, are not in crisis. A lot of companies can operate without a given executive, even a CEO, for quite some time. Some things done (don’t) get done. Other people rise to the occasion and pick up the most important items. Or the company has hired an interim or fractional executive as a stop gap measure. Without a specific and clear sense of urgency, searches often don’t have a driving force. Sometimes there’s a precipitating crisis like a system outage or massive customer churn or the company running out of cash that can provide that driving force, but that is not the norm.

What Can You as a Candidate Do About It?

The answer is probably “not much.”  But if my own search was any indicator, I’d give you the same advice I give people internally at my company when they ask me how to get a promotion.  My answer is “start doing the job today, don’t wait to actually get the job.”  Obviously a candidate for a CEO role or any other executive role can’t actually start doing the job as an existing employee could start taking on additional pieces of work.  But there are a lot of things you can do to “act as it” and get the hiring Board or hiring CEO’s attention.  For example:

• As a CEO candidate, be a management consultant.  Work on designing a strategy for the company you want to work for.  Do a tremendous amount of homework you can do from the outside – read analyst reports, get stealth demos, do market and customer interviews.  You don’t have to explain what you’re up to in terms of identifying the company.  You can say you’re interviewing for a CEO role in the sector.  Or even that you’re doing market research.  But proactively sending the hiring board a strategy deck and asking for the next meeting is a good way of differentiating yourself as a candidate and potentially accelerating a process.
  
• As a CRO candidate, go try to sell the company’s product.  Do it to a couple “friendlies” (e.g, people who are friends of yours, not active customers or prospects of the company you’re interviewing with) so you don’t tread on the actual business.  But create your own deck.  Get meetings.  Write up your experience.  Sending the CEO or board an email that says “Hey, I have a prospect already in the final stage of the funnel for you, can we work together to close her?” is a sure way to differentiate yourself as a candidate and potentially accelerate a process.

There may be a macro answer here as well.  The market is still choppy, and boards and CEOs are more conservative in most sectors and subsectors than they are in go-go times.  So that may be slowing things down in general and may even make it harder to act as-if.  But that doesn’t mean you can’t try.

Be Ruthless With Your Time

I have historically been very open with my calendar.  For most of my career, people who want to meet with me, both internally or externally (with the exception of random vendor solicitation), generally have gotten to meet with me.  Some of this is generosity, but I’m also a compulsive networker and have always made time proactively to meet with people just to meet them, learn more about different pockets of the industry or finance, meet other entrepreneurs and find out what they’re up to or help them, and connect more broadly from there.  I’ve also routinely been on multiple boards at the same time, as I’ve found that’s a very helpful part of my management routine.

But of late, I’m struggling more and more with calendar management.  There are more and more demands on my time internally as Return Path gets bigger.  There are more asks from people with whom I really don’t want to meet.  More travel, which sucks up a lot time.  A longer commute and more people who I want to see at home who have early bedtimes.  So I’ve taken to being more ruthless with my time.  I could probably do an even better job at it than I am now.

The main shifts I’m trying to make are to be proactive instead of so reactive; to cut meetings, shrink them, or group them when appropriate internally; to use videoconferencing instead of travel where possible; and honestly to just be a little more selfish and guarded with my time.  If the meeting doesn’t have something in it for me or Return Path — some promise of learning something or meeting someone either directly or indirectly helpful — I’m unlikely to do it any more as I once would, or I’m pickier about it (it has to be in my office so I don’t have to travel…it can only be 30 minutes long, etc.).

The two main tools I’m trying to use to manage my calendar proactively, mostly driven my brilliant executive assistant Andrea, might be useful to others, so I thought I’d share them here.

The first one is a networking list.  Andrea and I created a simple spreadsheet of everyone externally that I like to keep in touch with, and we prioritized it.  Every time I meet with someone on it, we mark the date.  Then when we meet to review my calendar periodically, we look at the list and figure out who I should reach out to in order to set up the next wave of meetings.  (I have one for internal check-in meetings with people other than my direct reports as well.)

The second is a time allocation model.  I am sure I got this idea from David Allen or Jim Collins or some other author that I read along the way.  First, we are religious about keeping an accurate calendar, including travel time, and we even go back and clean up meetings after they’ve happened to make the calendar an accurate reflection of what transpired.  At the end of each quarter, we download the prior three months’ worth of meetings, we categorize them, and we see where my time went.  Then we make changes to the upcoming quarter’s calendar to match my targets based on what I’m trying to accomplish.  For what it’s worth, my categories have changed over time, but currently, they are Free, Travel, Non-Return Path, Internal, Board, Client/External.  Pretty high level.  This exercise has been really helpful in keeping me proactive and on track.

I miss some of the more random networking that I used to do.  I am at least a moderate believer in serendipity, and the likelihood of serendipity goes down as I clamp down on my calendar.  And I will miss being on some outside Boards or helping new entrepreneurs figure out how to be first time CEOs.  But hopefully my combination of being selectively proactive and exercising good judgment about what inbound things to jump on will keep the machine humming.

Part of creating the best place to work  is learning how to self manage – very, very well.  This is an essential part of Creating an environment of trust , but only one part.  What does self-management mean?  First, and most important, it means realizing that you are in a fishbowl.  You are always on display.  You are a role model in everything you do, from how you dress, to how you talk on the phone, to the way you treat others, to when you show up to work. 

But what are some specifics to think about while you swim around in your tank?

1. Don’t send mixed signals to the team.  You can’t tell people to do one thing, then do something different yourself
2. Remember the French Fry Theory of being a CEO.  My friend Seth has the French Fry theory of life, which is simply that you can always eat one more French fry.  You’re never too full for one more fry.  You might not order another plate of them, but one more?  No problem.  Ever.  As a CEO, you can always do one more thing.  Send one more email.  Read one more document.  Sometimes you just need to draw the line and go home and stop working!  (See my earlier post  here  on how Marketing is like French Fries for another example.)
3. Regularly solicit feedback, then internalize it and act on it.  Do reviews for the company.  Do anonymous 360s (I’ve written about these regularly here). Get people a review that has ratings and comments from their boss, their peers, and their staff.  Do them once a year at a minimum.  And do one for yourself.  They’re phenomenal.  Everyone needs to improve, always.  Our head of sales Anita always says “Feedback is a gift, whether you want it or not.”  Make sure you do them for yourself as well.  Include your Board.  If you don’t agree with the feedback you are being given that is likely a data point that you have a BLIND SPOT.  Being defensive about feedback is dangerous.  If you don’t get it/don’t like then do some more work to better understand it.  Otherwise you will forever be defensive and never develop in this area
4. Maintain your sense of humor.  It’s not only the best medicine, it’s the best way to stay sane and have fun.  Who doesn’t want to have fun at work?
5. Keep yourself fresh:  Join a CEO peer group.  Work with an executive coach.  Read business literature (blogs, books, magazines) like mad and apply your learnings.  Exercise regularly.  Don’t neglect your family or your hobbies.  Keep the bulk of your weekends, and at least one two-week vacation each year, sacrosanct and unplugged.  As Covey would say, Sharpen the Saw

You set the tone at your company.  You can’t let people see you sweat too much – especially as you get bigger.  You can’t come out of your office after bad news and say “we’re dead!”  You can make a huge difference by being a great role model, swimming around in your fishbowl.

The Beginnings of a Roadmap to Fix America’s Badly Broken Political System?

UPDATE:  This week’s Economist (March 17) has a great special report on the future of the state that you can download here, entitled”Taming Leviathan:  The state almost everywhere is big, inefficient and broke. It needn’t be,” which has many rich examples, from California to China, and espouses a bunch of these ideas.

I usually try to keep politics away from this blog, but sometimes I can’t help myself.  I’m so disgusted with the dysfunction in Washington (and Albany…and Sacramento…and…) these days, that I’ve spent more spare cycles than usual thinking about the symptoms, their root causes, and potential solutions.  A typical entrepreneur’s approach, I guess.  So here’s my initial cut at a few solutions.

I’m sure it’s incomplete, and it’s possibly overly simplistic.  While I think it’s a pretty pragmatic and non-partisan approach, I’m guessing people will have visceral political opinions about it.  Here are five things I’d like to see that I think will start us on the road to repair:

• Nonpartisan redistricting: All districts at all levels of government should be drawn by nonpartisan commissions.  There is no reason to create “safe” seats and uncompetitive elections that drive candidates to extreme positions in order to win primaries.  All of that is undemocratic.  I hope California’s proposition that creates this kind of solution works and is copied.
• Public finance of campaigns: This will have to come with a constitutional amendment limiting free speech when it comes to political campaigns, but we should be prepared as a society to limit freedom in that one narrow way in order to remove money from politics.  This topic just keeps coming up, from both the left and the right (think about the examples of Wall Street donations impacting financial reform on one side and public sector union political contributions impacting negotiations with states and cities on the other).
• Presidential line-item veto: Its constitutionality may be in question, but this would give the President a more granular form of one check-and-balance he already has and could greatly help reduce wasteful spending as well as simplify legislation (more on that in a minute).
• Auto-expiration of tax/spend bills: I found the debate over the expiration or extension of the “Bush tax cuts” to be enlightening.  Maybe some class of tax/spend bills — those over a certain dollar figure, those that create entitlements, though that involve government subsidies to industry — should be forced to be renewed every 5 or 10 years instead of being “evergreen” so that the debate can reoccur in light of changes in circumstance.  How many other things are “on the books” in ways that don’t make sense in today’s world?
• Simplicity of legislation: The health care reform bill was 1,990 pages long according to the pdf I just downloaded, and few if any in Congress actually read the whole thing.  They even admitted it AT THE TIME.  Is this a smart way to govern?  Whether voluntarily or via constitutional amendment, Congress should consider only passing single-issue bills and maybe even limiting the size of any given piece of legislation to something that at least THEY THEMSELVES ARE ABLE TO READ.

These things should do a lot to ease legislative gridlock, relieve bitter partisan rancor, and remove some of the silly parliamentary manoeuvrings that plague our government today.  Whether or not they can systematically deal with elected officials’ unwillingness to tackle hard problems and penchant for personal deal-making and runaway deficit spending is another question.

My personal belief is that country could stand some form of a new Constitutional Convention to critically review our society and its governance after almost 250 years.  I love our Constitution and think it was wisely laid out as the foundation for what has become one of the world’s greatest and most enduring nations…but that doesn’t mean that the Founders, who lived in a very, very different time, had perfect vision for all eternity.

Picking Professional Services Firms

One of the most important things you can do as an entrepreneur is to surround yourself with a great lawyer (as I mentioned in my posting on negotiating term sheets) and a great accountant.  Brad’s advice here is excellent:

Choose professionals carefully: It may be tempting to use your wife’s brother’s friend’s neighbor as your lawyer, because he will give you a great rate and you see him at the neighborhood barbecue, but you get what you pay for. The same is true for accountants and other services that your business will use. Find professionals who know what they are doing and have experience with young companies.

I echo that and would add to it a cautionary note about big, brand name firms.  Our experience at Return Path hasn’t been great with them.  It’s not that they’re necessarily bad, they’re just not compatible with startups.  They have lots of overhead and have to charge for it.  They put junior people on your account who don’t have the depth of experience you need to properly advise you.  Or you can work with a partner and pay $900/hour for him or her to come up to speed on your business since you’re not his or her million dollar account.

Some larger firms have “emerging company” programs with discount rates for young companies – I’d avoid those as well.  The rates always creep up over time, and you’ll still be a second-class citizen to them in the interim because their margin is lower when they talk to you.

Find a good boutique law firm that specializes in venture financings, M&A, and general counsel, where you can get a partner working on your account and good advice without paying a fortune.  (There are, of course, exceptions to this — one or two in Silicon Valley come to mind that are larger firms but with specialization in this kind of law.)  Find a second-tier accounting firm (not one of the big four, but the next rung down), where you aren’t in competition with Fortune 1000 firms for time and attention. You’ll be much happier in the end.

Complex Collaborations

I just read a new book entitled Business Without Boundaries:  An Action Framework for Collaborating Across Time, Distance, Organization, and Culture.  I happen to know one of the authors, Don Mankin, who was on our trip to Antarctica last year.  The book is a good, quick read for anyone running an organization that requires any degree of complex collaboration, whether in the form of multiple offices with a single company, close relationships with suppliers or customers or channel partners, or even a joint venture.

Mankin and his co-author Susan Cohen present three case studies:  John Deere, Radica, and Solectron.  They then tie their learnings together into a solid framework that’s almost a how-to checklist for organization leaders to follow.  While the writers take an academic approach, the learnings and framework steps presented are anything but academic — they place a huge premium, for example, on relationship building and communication patterns.  These are all things we’ve worked through over the years at Return Path, whether managing employees across multiple offices  or in working with some of our reseller partners or clients.

All in, it’s a good read — and not just because I hung out with this guy in an igloo for two weeks!

The Phoenix Project:  a novel about IT, DevOps, and Helping Your Business Win, by Gene Kim, Kevin Behr, and George Spafford  is a logical intellectual successor and regularly quotes Eli Goldratt’s seminal work The Goal and its good but less known sequel It’s Not Luck.

The more business books I read, the more I appreciate the novel or fable format. Most business books are a bit boring and way too long to make a single point. The Phoenix Project is a novel, though unlike Goldratt’s books (and even Lencioni’s), it takes it easy on the cheesy and personal side stories. It just uses storytelling techniques to make its points and give color and examples for more memorable learning.

If your organization still does software development through a waterfall process or has separate and distinct development, QA, and IT/Operations teams, I’d say you should run, not walk, to get this book. But even if you are agile, lean, and practice continuous deployment, it’s still a good read as it provides reminders of what the world used to be like and what the manufacturing-rooted theories are behind these “new” techniques in software development.

I am so glad our technology team at Return Path, led by my colleagues Andy Sautins and David Sieh, had the wisdom to be early adopters of agile and lean processes, continuous deployment many years ago, and now dockers. Our DevOps process is pretty well grooved, and while I’m sure there are always things to be done to improve it…it’s almost never a source of panic or friction internally the way more traditional shops function (like the one in the book). I can’t imagine operating a business any other way.

Thanks to my long time friend and Board member Greg Sands of Costanoa Venture Capital for suggesting this excellent read.

I was honored this week to be in a small group “fireside chat” with Angela Duckworth, author of the book Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance, and to meet her and ask a question.

I want to hit on one theme here from the book and dialog, but I’ll start by sharing a 2×2 matrix (remember, I’m an ex-consultant, I think in frameworks) that we’ve used at home with our kids periodically. For the most part, we use it to talk to them about why they should work harder on math homework, but it’s had other use cases as well. Hopefully it makes sense on the face of it…

…but essentially the framework teaches that if you are talented AND work hard at something, you can achieve great things. If you have talent and slack off, you can get by perfectly fine. If you have no talent but work your butt off, you can get there…but it’s hard. And if there’s an area of life where you have no talent and don’t work at it, so be it, but you’re punting on that whole thing.

In the book, Duckworth takes this to a whole new level by adding a simultaneous second equation:

• Talent x Effort = Skill
• Skill x Effort = Achievement

This makes the statement that “your first bit of talent, combined with effort increases your skill level. Your increasing skill, multiplied by effort, leads to achievement. That means effort counts twice. Once for skill and once for achievement. But that doesn’t mean it’s twice as important. If you substitute the skill equation into the achievement equation, you end up with

• Talent x Effort x Effort = Achievement, which means that 
• Talent x Effort² = Achievement.

Or in other words, “Your effort is exponentially more important than how talented you are.”

All I have to say is that while I won’t create a second graphical explanation of this and probably won’t go back and amend my 2×2 for my kids, I think Duckworth is right, with one caveat. If you don’t have a certain baseline of talent in a certain area, it just doesn’t matter how much effort you apply – your achievement has some kind of natural governor to it. When I was a kid, I would dearly have loved to be the shortstop for the San Diego Padres, but between being a lefty, a kid, and not what you would call overly athletic, it wouldn’t have mattered if I spent every waking hour of a decade working at it…I never would have gotten there. Having said that, those cases may be edge cases, and again, I find that the emphasis on effort on top of my framework is a very worth application.

But go read Grit. It’s much better and more detailed than this blog post!