Nine Lies About Work – Book Review

 

 

The Book Review Series

 

 

When I saw this book at a used bookstore (probably my favorite store, to be honest), I knew I wanted to read it right away.

And like many of the other books I’ve reviewed on this website, I’m glad I did.

Written by Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall in 2019, this book promises to challenge tightly held beliefs that aren’t just uncomfortable – they are downright wrong.

At first glance, one might take it as aggressive or anti-work; after all, it does say “Nine Lies…” Give it more of a cursory read, however, and you’ll find that it brings common sense and plenty of data to back up the title. Moreover, their arguments aim to enhance work, rather than diminish it, unlike current practices/beliefs.

What follows, then, is a comprehensive book review, where I highlight notable portions along with my thoughts on this intriguing and fascinating resource.

 

Introduction

“We began the book with a paradox: Why do so many of the ideas and practices that are held as settled truths at work wind up being so deeply frustrating to, and unpopular with, the very people they are supposed to serve?… This paradox led to the core idea and audience of the book. The idea is this: the world of work today is overflowing with systems, processes, tools, and assumptions that are deeply flawed and that push directly against our ability to express what is unique about each of us in the work we do every day.” – Pages 2, 3 (Emphasis mine)

Right at the beginning, I highlight the above because it aligns with my own assessment – that HR departments (those company preservation tools that seek to dehumanize things by creating, implementing, and managing processes) prioritize uniformity over individuality. The more uniform a company is, the less individuality it has. This is believed to be a strength, but the authors view it as a weakness.

As do I.

Need more to confirm this? How about this:

“As you read, you’ll realize that these Nine Lies have taken hold because each satisfies the organization’s need for control.” – Page 4

I believe every word of that.

 

Lie #1 People care which company they work for

 

You cannot skip this chapter (not that you’d want to); to understand the remaining lies (chapters), we are introduced to eight questions referenced throughout. Moreover, each successive chapter seems to build on the others.

“When we push the data, and examine closely its patterns and variations, we arrive at this conclusion: while people might care which company they join, they don’t care which company they work for. The truth is that, once there,  people care which team they’re on.” – Page 24

 

A lengthy discussion ensues on company onboarding, culture, and team leaders. For my part, I appreciate the deeper dive the authors take into this particular lie. Two more interesting quotes before moving on to the next chapter:

“The biggest difference, of course, between cultural plummage and the real world is that the impact of plumage on how you and your team do your work every day is slight. That’s not what it’s for. It is a shared fiction, and it exists to attract a certain kind of person to join the company. And as with all shared fictions, the moment you all stop collectively believing in the plumage, it vanishes. Team experience, on the other hand (how you talk to one another and work with one another), has large and lasting impact on how you do your work, and it doesn’t require all of you to agree to believe in it.” – Page 29

“Teams aren’t about sameness – they aren’t, at their best, about marching in lockstep. Instead they’re about unlocking what is unique about each of us, in the service of something shared. A team, at its finest, insists on the unique contribution of each of its members, and is the best way we humans have ever come up with of harnessing those distinctive contributions together in the service of something that none of us could do alone.” – Page 30

 

Lie #2 The best plan wins

 

I found this chapter thought-provoking, notwithstanding, since I set goals every year and evaluate them monthly. No, it’s because it (rightly) allows us to see plans in a certain light:

“The amounts of time and energy it takes to make a plan this thorough and detailed are the very things that doom it to obsolescence. The thing we call planning doesn’t tell you where to go; it just helps you understand where you are. Or rather, were. Recently. We aren’t planning for the future, we’re planning for the near-term past.” – Page 37

 

“It’s not true that the best plan wins. It is true that the best intelligence wins.” – Page 42

Building on intelligence, the authors pivot to frequency, specifically noting that it trumps quality. Yes, you read that right.

“And if ever you become a leader of leaders, you’ll need to ensure that your leaders know that this check-in is the more important part of leading. Checking in with each person on a team – listening, course-correcting, adjusting, coaching, pinpointing, advising, paying attention to the intersection of the person and the real-world work – is not what you do in addition to the work of leading. This is the work of leading.” – Page 49

 

What the authors are doing is building. First, they provide evidence to dismiss the lie believed, and then present what’s truly important (in this case, better intelligence). Finally – and this is a theme throughout the rest of the book – they distill it down to something involved with teams and especially team leaders.

A broader way to view this is to remove importance from those who occupy higher positions and place it where it matters: those closest to the work.

 

Lie #3 The best companies cascade goals

Cascades are better left to waterfalls, not goals

 

“Well, every company is different, of course, and each makes its own calculus, but the three most common reasons put forth for all this goal-setting are, first, that goals stimulate and coordinate performance by aligning everyone’s work; second, that tracking goals’ ‘percentage complete’ yields valuable data on the team’s or company’s progress throughout the year; and third, that goal attainment allow companies to evaluate team members’ performance at the end of the year. So, companies invest in goals because goals are seen as a stimulator, a tracker, and an evaluator –  and these three core functions of goals are why we spend so much time, energy, and money on them.” – Page 54

 

“The best companies don’t cascade goals; the best companies cascade meaning.” – Page 62

 

“Whereas cascaded goals are a control mechanism, cascaded meaning is a release mechanism. It brings to life the content within which everyone works, but it leaves the locus of control – for choosing, deciding, prioritizing, goal setting – where it truly resides, and where understanding of the world and the ability to do something about it intersect: with the team member.

Our prevailing assumption is that we need goals because our deficit at work is a deficit of aligned action. We’re mistaken. What we face instead is a deficit of meaning, of a clear and detailed understanding of the purpose of our work, and of the values we should honor in deciding how to get it done. Our people don’t need to be told what to do; they want to be told why.” – Page 64

I really enjoyed the exploration of Chick-fil-A in this chapter; not only do they operate completely differently from Corporate America, but they are also the most profitable per-location quick-service restaurant, per store.

 

Lie #4 The best people are well-rounded

Well-rounded – what does that ultimately mean?

 

We’ve all heard it before: the more well-rounded you are, the better you’ll become – especially as an employee. We are told that we should focus on the areas where we are weak, devoting a lot of time, energy, and effort to making us “well-rounded.”

In fact, this is so popular it’s been repeated my entire life, literally.

But is it true?

“Which brings us to the second fact: the research into high performance in any profession or endeavor reveals that excellence is idiosyncratic. The well-rounded high performer is a creature of theory world. In the real world each high performer is unique and distinct, and excels precisely because that person has understood his or her uniqueness and cultivated it intelligently.” – Page 90

Not. At. All, it would seem. Furthermore, they write:

“In our theoretical world, in other words, we would pick and mix the qualities we thought preferable. But obviously, in the real world no one gets to do this, whether they’re a soccer player, a tennis player, or a team leader. In the real world each of us learns to make the most of what we have. Growth, it turns out, is actually a question not of figuring out how to gain ability where we lack it but of figuring out how to increase impact where we already have ability. And because our abilities are diverse, when you look at a great performance you see not diversity minimized but rather diversity magnified; not sameness but uniqueness.” – Page 91

Recall from the introduction, I highlighted how the authors lament the stamping out of individuality for conformity. This chapter, in particular, illustrates the truth of uniqueness. There’s a lot more to this chapter as it explores the theme, and it’s sure to resonate with you.

The authors get the last say for this chapter:

“Well-roundedness is a misguided and futile objective when it comes to individual people; but when it comes to teams, it’s an absolute necessity. The more diverse the team members, the more weird, spiky, and idiosyncratic they are, the more well-rounded the team.” – Page 103

 

 

Lie #5 People need feedback

 

 

I found this chapter absolutely intriguing for many reasons, but the main one is how counterintuitive it is to the cultural and work narrative. Not only have you been told that people not only need but also desire feedback, but mechanisms have been built to make this a reality.

From companies to social media entities, large corporations to media, the mantra is parroted everywhere you turn.

The authors, however, dispel this through qualitative data, and examples, then state:

“The truth, then, is that people need attention – and when you give it to us in a safe and nonjudgmental environment, we will come and stay and play and work.” – Page 116

 

Tackling various types of feedback, they note:

“Because of your genetic inheritance and the oddities of your early childhood environment, your brain’s wiring is utterly unique – no one has ever had a brain wired just like yours, and given the brain’s complexity, no one ever will.” – Page 119

 

“In other words, positive, future-focused attention gives your brain access to more regions of itself and thus sets you up for greater learning. We’re often told that the key to learning is to get out of our comfort zones, but this finding gives the lie to that particular chestnut – take us out of our comfort zones and our brains stop paying attention to anything other than surviving the experience. It’s clear that we learn more in our comfort zone, because that’s our strengths zone, where our neural pathways are most concentrated. It’s where we’re most open to possibility, and it’s where we are most creative and insightful.” – Page 121

 

Lastly, I’ll highlight one more little nugget as it reinforces what I’ve said for years now:

“The difficulty for you is that people aren’t processes, nor are they machines – what works for processes and machines doesn’t work for men and women.” – Page 122

Precisely. You lead people; you manage a process (or policy, if you prefer). Explore The Leadership Series here at The Wealthy Ironworker for a more in-depth examination of this theme.

 

Lie #6 People can reliably rate other people

 

Addressing this pervasive lie, the authors write:

“It is going to bother you to learn, then, that in the real world, none of this works. None of the mechanisms and meetings – not the models, not the consensus sessions, not the exhaustive competencies, not the carefully calibrated rating scales – none of them will ensure that the truth of you emerges in the room, because all of them are based on the belief that people can reliably rate people. And they can’t.” – Page 139

 

“What the Scullen, Mount, and Godd research reveals is that Lucy’s [the example] pattern of ratings does not change when she rates two different people. Instead her ratings stay just about the same – her ratings pattern travels with her, regardless of who she’s rating, so her ratings reveal more about her than they do about her team members. We think that rating tools are windows that allow us to see out to other people, but they’re really just mirrors, with each of us endlessly bouncing us back at ourselves.” – Page 141

 

From discussing the Idiosyncratic Rater Effect to data insufficiency, to personal experiences and remarkable examples that illustrate why this is true (while defining what constitutes good data), the authors do a fantastic job of dispelling this particular lie in this chapter. Following this, they write:

“And it is based on this truth: although we are not reliable raters of others, people can reliably rate their own experience.” – Page 154

 

 

I’ve always thought this wasn’t true, and the authors detail in this chapter why it isn’t. BUT before we explore that, I’m left to wonder why it’s so heavily included in our work. I’d like to offer my own take on this before moving on.

First, recall that the authors spoke of the organization’s need for control. Control can be achieved in numerous ways (without sacrificing quality), but the quickest and easiest way to obtain it is to stamp out individuality and enforce uniformity.

Second, recall HR departments are company preservation mechanisms, and the way they’ve approached this is to create, implement, and enforce an ever-growing number of policies designed to dehumanize the workplace.

These two combined foster the environment for companies to continue with this; not only does it give them the “policy-rich” aura they have curated over decades, but it also allows them maximum protected flexibility while allowing them to get rid of any employee via/for “undesirable ratings.” In other words, they have successfully stacked the deck in their favor, allowing them a “humanized” path in their “dehumanized” oasis.

 

Lie #7 People have potential

Are people blank slates?

 

This is one of those chapters where you look at the title of it and begin to wonder, “What direction will it go?” On the face of it, we nod along to the assessment that people have potential. We want to believe we have it, numerous people we know/work with have it, and we can definitely identify those who don’t.

But, as the authors illustrated in the previous chapter, we are not able to rate others reliably. Not only should this intrigue us, but it also reinforces the sequential chapters.

So, what does this mean?

“Butg sadly, somewhere along the line, companies by and large recoiled from this natural diversity, seeing it as simply too varied and too individualized to make sense of, and decided instead that the most pragmatic approach would be to invent a generic quality called ‘potential,’ rate every person on it, and then invest most in those who have lots of it, and much less in those who don’t. As with all the lies we’ve addressed in the book so far, the lie that people have potential is a product of organizations’ desire for control, and their impatience with individual differences.” – Pages 167, 168

Hear, hear –  I heartily agree.

After using Havard Business Review’s definition of high potential, they reply:

“Not only is this unlikely, but more to the point, who among us actually aspires to this sort of Jack-of-all-trades-ness? If we were to have this quality it would imply, surely, that we were not unique and distinct, but instead were empty learning vessels, blank slates waiting for our settings and circumstances to define us, adept at learning, but featureless. How depressing.” – Page 169

In my opinion, the authors are somewhat more lenient when it comes to company motives. They believe they are well-meaning – I am convinced it is intentional. In any case, the perspective that employees should be – and indeed are – blank slates to reprogram is widespread in the workforce today.

 

“Therefore we know a) that the ability to learn exists in us all, b) that it shows up differently in each of us, and c) that while we can all get better at anything, none of us will ever be able to rewire our brains to excel at everything. More simply, we can all get better, and we will all get better at different things, in different ways, and at different speeds. So there is no such thing as having potential. Or rather, there is, but it doesn’t mean anything. Or rather, it doesn’t mean anything beyond being a human. To say that you have potential means simply that you have the capacity to learn, and grow, and get better, like every other human.” – Pages 170, 171

With a cheeky example using one of the most successful people on Earth, they dismantle the notion that people have potential.

 

And finally, speaking to the corporate mindset when it comes to “potential,” they simply state:

“It’s not true – or, indeed, useful – to think that people have potential. Instead, the truth is that people have momentum.” – Page 176

Momentum is…well, I’ll defer to the authors – which means, you need to get the book – and you can purchase it here.

 

This is a great chapter, building on the previous ones, that you should read with a pencil to highlight key points.

 

 

Lie #8 Work-life balance matters most

Balance is difficult, if not impossible

 

I admit I took umbrage when I first read the title. After 20+ years in the trades, I’ve not only wrestled with the “balance,” but I’ve written about it, too. What’s more, you’d think I would have understood the direction of the book, but alas, it highlights our nature to defend things quickly, even if irrationally.

“Work, our experience teaches us, is toil – a stressor, a drainer of our energy – and if we are not careful, it can lead to physical exhaustion, emotional emptiness, depression, and burnout. It’s a transaction – we sell our time and our talent so that we can earn enough money to buy the things we love, and to provide for those we love. Indeed, the term we use for the money we earn in this transaction is compensation, the same word we use for what we get when we’re injured or wronged in the eyes of the law. Our wages are not just money, then: they are money to make up for the inherent badness of work – a bribe, of you will, to tough it out.” – Pages 183, 184

 

Of course, they even postulate whether we can achieve a work-life balance, which is a static concept, whereas things are always in a state of change. They conclude:

“We need a new way of thinking. About work. About life.” – Page 187

 

---

Related: Read Work Backwards – Book Review

 

---

 

The authors, however, believe that love-in-work matters most.

 

“What we wrestle with every day in the real world is not so much work and life as it is love and loathe.” – Page 202

I agree with that assessment, and you can’t tell by now, I’m recommending you explore further by purchasing the book. It’s definitely worth it.

 

Lie #9 Leadership is a thing

Leaders – or followers?

 

The last chapter, at first glance, had me scratching my head. While reading, I was given more to think about than in many of the other chapters, not because it presented more information; instead, it’s mainly because of my exploration of leadership here at The Wealthy Ironworker. But like other chapters, the more I read, the more I found convincing.

 

First up is their assessment that the ability to lead is rare:

“The fact that we lionize those who have this speacial ability; the fact that we spend so much time looking for it and trying to get more of it; and the fact that it plays such a prominent role in how we think about our organizations: these point not to its ubiquity but to its scarcity – and this scarcity, in turn, belies the supposed ease with which we’re all meant to be able to get better at it. If leading were easy, there would be more good leaders. If there were more good leaders, we might be just a little less focused on it.” – Page 212

In the business world, you will hear/read that leadership can not only be learned, but that it should be THE focus of everyone. What’s more, it is rare for a person or article to acknowledge that some people seem to be born with a higher capacity for it. And yet, by stating that it is rare, the authors seem a little more aligned with my own personal beliefs. I found this perspective refreshing to say the least.

 

While we’re at it, let’s take a look at another counterculture statement:

“This is the true lesson in leading from the real world: a leader is someone who has followers, plain and simple. The only determinant of whether anyone is leading is whether anyone else is following….Followers – their needs, their feelings, their fears and hopes – are strangely absent when we speak of leaders as exemplars of strategy, execution, vision, priority, relationships, charisma, and so on. The idea of leadership is missing the idea of followers.” – Pages 214, 215

To be sure, the vast amount of research confirms this: followers are conspicuously absent.

What I find particularly interesting is how simple this seems to be – even if the rest of the business world has lost sight of it. I’m reminded of something Peter Drucker said all the way back in 1974:

 

---

“There is only one valid definition of business purpose: to create a customer.“

 

---

 

It isn’t the company’s mantra, employing people, or even profit, as seductive an answer as it has been for the masses. This simple yet mistaken understanding of business is very similar to leadership. So simple, in fact, it should make you wonder how so many have been wrong all these years.

 

“More specifically, we follow leaders who connect us to a mission we believe in, who clarify what’s expected of us, who surround us with people who define excellence the same way we do, who value us for our strengths, who show us that our teammates will always be there for us, who diligently replay our winning plays, who challenge us to keep getting better, and who give us confidence in the future.

This is not a list of qualities in a leader, but rather a set of feelings in a follower.” – Pages 215, 216

And just like that, the authors have taken on the vast leadership discourse of today.

 

Lastly, I’ll highlight this:

“We encounter leaders, in life, emotionally. In our leadership training, the first thing we do – in our attempt to understand leadership – is to wring the emotional life out of the thing.

Because what never, ever happens in any of these courses is our starting with the question: Who are you? Not, who are you in comparison with some model involving abstract words in little boxes, but who you are as a living, breathing, growing, worrying, joyous, uncertain, loving, striving, messy, and yes, spiky human being?” – Page 223

I hesitate to say with absolute certainty, but I’ll state here that this has quickly become ONE of my favorite leadership chapters I’ve ever read, thanks to the departure from the status quo.

 

They conclude the rest of the chapter by discussing Martin Luther King Jr. and appealing, once again, to the emotional and human connection that is essential to leadership. Again, I say, for the thinker, this book belongs on your shelf.

 

Conclusion

 

Phenomenal, thought-provoking, a decided break from the norm – all words I’d use to describe Nine Lies About Work.

I’ll end Nine Lies About Work – Book Review by asking a question: Why haven’t the truths in this book become more mainstream?

I suspect there are numerous reasons: organizational control is one, entrenched beliefs are another, and yet another is that people often live in echo chambers, seeking validation from like-minded individuals. For my part, I am reminded of something Mark Twain once quipped:

 

---

“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”

 

---

 

To that end, don’t judge a book by its cover – or the lies, as it were; instead, read it with an open mind and allow it to challenge not just the paradigms that currently reign in culture today, but also yours, too. You may just be surprised.

 

 

If you liked this article/book review, feel free to leave a comment, or you can go to the Contact Page and send me an email. I’d love to hear from you.

 

Oh, be sure to Subscribe and follow 👇