Getting to Success (May 2009)

Discussions about ethics or character would be incomplete without a discussion of success. What do we define as success? What do we feel justified in doing to achieve success? Clearly, Bernie Madoff was not above lying and cheating and behaving illegally to achieve what he considered success. Similarly, the Palm Beach County (Florida) Commissioners who landed themselves in jail considered it acceptable to break the law in order to move themselves toward what they considered success. These folks seemed intent on taking short cuts to achieving power and gaining wealth, rather than putting in the work and time necessary. Further, national discussions about success at Guantanamo have focused Americans on what is acceptable in getting necessary information out of prisoners of war, and what will be considered torture. It seems that we may agree on the goals, but not always on the means!

But beyond what we shouldn't do is what we should do. I was struck last week by an article on "genius" that David Brooks wrote in the New York Times, in which he pointed to "genius" being the result of putting in hours and hours of practice in at a very young age. Rather than innate ability, he pointed to the substantial effort that distinguishes geniuses from their peers. He used Mozart and Tiger Woods as examples. He cited Daniel Coyle and Geoff Covin's review of the research on how genius comes about. For instance, in order to create genius, you would take a slightly above average child (in the desired area of genius), connect her or him with an expert mentor, with whom s/he might have an affinity (same race, religion, etc.), have her or him spend hours and hours reading about or studying the particular area of desired expertise, and then have her or him practice non-stop with an eye toward discovering and correcting errors. Finally, the mentor would provide a constant stream of feedback, correcting errors and making suggestions, in order to ingrain desired habits of thought.

He concludes, "The primary trait" when a person succeeds is not genetic hardwiring, "is not some mysterious genius. It's the ability to develop a deliberate, strenuous, and boring practice routine." It strikes me that doing so requires a great deal of determination. And I wonder where that determination comes from. Coyle and Covin indicate that various life traumas can create a sense of insecurity, which in turn drives people desperately to achieve and to thus be valued. Of course, trauma can just as easily defeat people. Being recognized early for one's talent might motivate one to put in the work necessary to bring it to full fruition. A spiritual calling - which doesn't have to be religious, merely the sense that one was put on this earth for a particular purpose - might motivate a person to put forth the effort. But early and long term effort seems to be the key! I think a lack of other options might also inspire a person to expend great effort - consider the basketball stars who have emerged from the ghetto.

Overall, I was pretty inspired by the article - it seems that when researchers actually look at genius, logging lots of practice hours, being deliberate, highly invested, and willing to go the distance, may play more of a role than dumb luck (the luck of the genes). That should leave most of us with few excuses!! I think we need to ask ourselves what really matters, and then we need to invest ourselves fully, knowing that there are few shortcuts, few easy solutions, and that the "nose to the grindstone" image has value in creating success. But it is success achieved by paying our dues, not by cheating. Whatever persuaded us that we should "get it all" easily? That things worth having can be accomplished without a good deal of effort? Well, perhaps that is fodder for a future discussion...