| |
|
Tuesday, September 10, 2002
|
|
The Mediocrity of Meritocracy
"I think the world is run by 'C' students."
-Al McGuire
Any line so attractive and quoted by Adam Curry deserves
our
attention.
I'm nitpicking to observe that it's probably not true, but the world's
certainly
controlled by C students. Modern organizations demand a grasp of
scores
of dynamic components - finance, legal, regulatory, marketing, etc. To
run
such an operation is one of the most demanding roles ever attempted, and
Adam would probably concur. In most enterprises, what matters is whether
you deliver the goods, not whether the Board thinks you walk on water.
The
notable exceptions we've seen this year are not the majority of
businesses.
CEO jobs aren't popularity contests, except of course for
the
biggest, toughest job on
earth,
but Dubya probably wouldn't have received many C's either without his
connections.
(Digression of the day: "Dubya was born on
third
base and thinks he hit a triple.")
Who are those guys?
Ken Werbach looked at
the
copyright fight and saw two distinct personality types:
Herein lies the conflict between Hollywood and the
technology
industry in a nutshell. One sees content as the critical
resource, and
data networks as simply another mechanism to deliver it. The
other sees
connectivity as the essential factor, with movies being one of many
resources
that can travel along those connections. Hollywood sees a moral
dimension
in protecting its property and the creative works of its
artists, as
well as a nobility in bringing entertainment to the masses. The
tech
industry thinks bits are bits, and the only moral value that really
matters
is freedom.
Werbach is really on to something here. What looks like a
straightforward
difference of opinion may reveal a deep and fundamental distinction in
how
people see things and act on what they see. To put a label on them, you
might
say the content people are part of a type called Pushers and the
tech
people are Pullers. The Pushers see markets and consumers as
targets
to be captured and held, a grand game of capture the flag. Pullers pull
together
the details that fascinate them and don't think too much about the
pecking
order they're trapped in. More interestingly, it looks from here like
the
Pushers have been running things for-frickin'-ever.
If these are indeed distinct personality types, and Pushers have been
running
things forever, what if the Pullers are beginning to supplant the
Pushers
in the power structure? How will it affect the way decisions are made,
how
resources are allocated, what the society considers fair or not?
Organizations are run by the middle managers who look like they
are
doing their job and so are promotable. But
there's
no task-level quality metric in an organization, so the test is whether
an
employee is liked and admired by management - a highly personal choice.
Who
gets picked? The same 'C' students who've been picked since Junior High.
The cool kids.
Be Cool to your School
Remember high school? I recall a fundamental division among my peer
group
of adolescent males - the cool guys and the rest. The cool guys got the
girls
and the rest wondered how they did it. The difference was their
confidence
that they had all the answers that mattered and their mastery of
socialization
skills and the pecking order. We, on the other hand, made no pretense at
being clued in to everything, because we were interested in how things
really
work, whether it was computers or rockets or math or literature or
western
civilization, geeky interests that lowered the cool factor. That would
be
most of the people writing and reading blogs.
Remember how disengaged the cool kids were? They seemed to avoid the
details,
maybe because it's a full time job being cool. It requires a kind of
social
genius and real attention to a vapid but disciplined repartee. Many of
the
coolest kids really did nothing more than date, drink and all the rest.
Their
primary discipline was to remain cool, so everything served that
expediency.
Even when they were very smart, they couldn't afford to deal with
complexity,
since their priority was to emerge from every encounter with their
coolness
enhanced. That's why they deal in OR logic, not AND logic.
I believe we adopt these archetypes early and they stick with us
forever.
Think about your own classmates and how they ended up. The coolest
guys, if
they don't get sidetracked by booze, drugs or rock 'n roll, seem to
move up
the corporate or political ladders with an easy grace beyond
comprehension.
Their true organizational genius is to get people to do their bidding,
which
is no mean feat. They're usually surrounded by can-do Pullers who love
being
close to His Coolness. Those are the people who actually get things
done.
At some deep, tribal level, we resonate with certain personalities and
do
what they want, whether or not it's in our own best interest. Those are
the
personalities who easily engage bosses, senior partners, directors,
bankers,
analysts and all the other people whose nod puts a career on a fast
track.
They also fascinate political party workers and voters. They were at the
Hamptons this summer and Pullers weren't.
Revenge of the Nerds
In Mindwalk, Liv Ullmann
plays
a nerdy nuclear scientist who fears we'll destroy the world because
leaders
don't think through the implications of their initiatives - that we
need to
think about systems, not expediency. Sure enough, the web erupted four
years
later and started requiring people to think about systems and how
things work
under the surface. The Pullers who were good at that designed the
Internet
and now it's caught the attention of the Pushers, who don't have a clue how it works, but have
directed
the Pullers who work for them to figure out how to dominate their fair
share
of the Internet.
It may not be possible for Pushers to co-opt the Internet. If that's
true,
it could precipitate yet another shift in the personality types that
dominate
the economy. Each era favors certain leadership archetypes.Todays leaders are nothing like their warlord predecessors, so is it possible the Internet age could change the type again? How could that
happen?
Each phase of history has its natural leaders, though I can't think of
any
that weren't Pushers. Monarchies arose due to the divine right
of thugs.
Leadership of the medieval church went to those who could be
simultaneously
pious and manipulative, with no relationship to physical strength. The
Industrial
Age asked for some technical prowess, but no more than the horse- or
swords-manship
required of an earlier aristocracy. Today's middle managers are those
with
a leaning toward finance and corporate structuring, but no more than is
required
to inspire the Pullers who get things done.
The principle of Procedural
Disadvantage is also the principle of Procedural Advantage. In an
Internet
world, systems people understand how to get things done and their bosses
are hostage to the systems the Pullers put together and only the Pullers
can maintain. Since creaturtes started organizing for mutual advantage,
there's
never been a feedback quality loop so the group could see if their
leaders
were making good decisions. The good leaders' groups prevailed and the
bad
leaders' groups died off. Darwinism is a powerful invisible hand, but
it's
workings are not obvious to the participants.
With the growth of Procedural Advantage as a visible force, the dynamic
has
changed forever. When systems fail, we all see it immediately: the
switchboard
lights up, the web orders stop and the damage is visible to every
analyst,
shareholder and customer that's plugged into the system.
Good news for Geeks, Nerds and Pullers everywhere: the Pushers will never stuff the Procedural Advantage genie back in the bottle.
1:49:50 PM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2006 Britt Blaser.
Last update: 4/17/06; 11:25:53 PM.
|
|
|