Bob Morris on How Breakthroughs Happen: A Book Review

How Breakthroughs Happen: The Surprising Truth About How Companies Innovate
Andrew Hargadon
Harvard Business Press (2003)

For many who read this book, it may well be a “surprising truth” that innovation succeeds “not by breaking free from constraints of the past but instead by harnessing the past in powerful new ways.” I am among those who agree with the prophet Ecclesiastes that there is nothing new under the sun; also with the Greek philosopher Heraclitus who asserted that everything changes…but nothing changes. I also agree with Hargadon’s emphasis on the importance of an innovation strategy that seeks to take full advantage of what can be learned from the past in order to create the future. His core concept is “technology brokering” which he introduces and then rigorously examines in Part I; next, in Part II, he describes the “networked perspective” of innovation, explaining how this strategy influences the innovative process within organizations, regardless of their size and nature; finally, in Part III, Hargadon provides specific and practical examples of how various organizations have designed and then implemented technology brokering strategies. Throughout the narrative, Hargadon explores in depth with rigor and eloquence his core premise: “that breakthrough innovation comes by recombining the people, ideas, and objects of past technologies.”

In this context, I am reminded of what Carla O’Dell asserts in If We Only Knew What We Know when discussing what she calls “beds of knowledge” which are “hidden resources of intelligence that exist in almost every organization, relatively untapped and unmined.” She suggests all manner of effective strategies to “tap into “this hidden asset, capturing it, organizing it, transferring it, and using it to create customer value, operational excellence, and product innovation — all the while increasing profits and effectiveness.” Almost all organizations claim that their “most valuable assets walk out the door at the end of each business day.” That is correct. Almost all intellectual “capital” is stored between two ears and much (too much) of it is, for whatever reasons, inaccessible to others except in “small change….there is no conclusion to managing knowledge and transferring best practices. It is a race without a finishing line.”

I think this is precisely what Hargadon has in mind when insisting that the future is already here, that the “raw materials for the next breakthrough technology may [also] be already here [but probably] without assembly instructions,” that decision-makers must find their “discomfort zones” rather than remain hostage to what Jim O’Toole calls “the ideology of comfort and the tyranny of custom,” and that they should build a “bridge” to their own strengths but also to their weaknesses because, as they perform, so will their organization. I agree with Hargadon that innovation must unfold at the ground level, “in the minds and hearts of the engineers and entrepreneurs who are doing the work.” Also, that — meanwhile — they and their associates must be guided and informed, not only by their own organization’s “beds of knowledge” but also by external sources of information concerning prior successes and failures of the innovation process elsewhere. In the final analysis, there is good news and bad news. First the bad news: “New ideas are built from the pieces of old ones, and nobody works alone.” Now the good news: “New ideas are built from the pieces of old ones, and nobody works alone.”

Habit #4: Think Win-Win

Think Win-Win.

I don’t know any advice any better than this.  This, of course, is one of Stephen Covey’s Seven Habits of Highly Successful People – #4 to be precise.

And if you think about “think win-win,” it reinforces a lot of “advice and counsel” from books we read nearly every day.  For example, today I presented my synopsis of the terrific book, Never Eat Alone by Keith Ferrazzi.  These quotes jumped out at me, and reminded me of Covey’s “think win-win” counsel:

Success in any field, but especially in business, is about working with people, not against them.
I learned that real networking was about finding ways to make other people more successful.
A network functions precisely because there’s recognition of mutual need…  first you have to stop keeping score.

Or, consider the concept of “generalized reciprocity” from the modern classic, Bowling Alone:  The Collapse and Revival of American Community by Robert D. Putnam.  In it, he writes about the appeal of generalized reciprocity:  “I’ll do this for you without expecting anything specific back from you, in the confident expectation that someone else will do something for me down the road.”

I think we need to trumpet this concept loudly and clearly in these tense days.  There seems to be such fierce competition with others; so many people who are so quick to find fault, to even question the motives of others.  It is as though there are people out there rooting for the failure of others.

And we forget that any one failure spells trouble for others – maybe for all.

I was recently re-reading part of Collapse:  How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared Diamond.  (One of those, “I really encourage you to read this book” books).  Here are a couple of quotes from near the end of the book:

Our own society opted long ago to become interlocked with the rest of the world…
In the Netherlands, we have another expression, ‘You have to be able to get along with your enemy, because he may be the person operating the neighboring pump in your polder.’

In one sense, there is no such thing as an enemy, but only fellow planet users.  If your economy is weak, my economy is threatened.  If your city is polluted, my clean air is at risk.  “If the dikes and pumps fail, we’ll all drown together.’’ (Diamond).

Let’s put it another way:  to think and act “win-lose” is really to think and act “lose-lose.”  We really are in this together, and “win-win” may be the only path to “win” at all.

Bob Morris on Return on Learning: A Book Review

Return on Learning: Training for High Performance at Accenture
Donald Vanthournout, Tad Waddington, and Accenture’s Capability Development team
Agate B2; First Trade Paper Edition (2008)

To the best of my knowledge, this book offers the single best source for information and counsel on how to design a high-impact learning program that can be implemented and then sustained (with continuous improvement) at all levels and within all areas of the given organization. Better yet, as the contributors to this book (members of Accenture’s Capability Development team) explain, the ROI of such a program can be both quantified and verified.

In 2001, Accenture faced a number of major challenges that are best revealed and discussed within the narrative, in context. The fact remains that, led by Donald Vanthournout, Accenture’s Capability Development team began a “journey” that had to take those challenges into full account. What they learned provides the most valuable material in this book. The story of their journey is a business story: about how one company – Accenture – advanced toward high performance through learning, knowledge management and the transformation of its workforce. By extension, however, it is about how other organizations can do the same.”

In recent years, senior-level executives have been much more interested in knowing how to increase and improve the nature and extent of employee engagement: “how can they best tap into the collective intelligence of their people and engage them in their work, for their benefit and the benefit of he entire enterprise?” Vanthournout and the members of his team shared a business-centric perspective. They were determined to link human capital investments to business benefits, both for Accenture and for each of its clients; to put in place the governance and leadership structures that increase a learning program’s chances of success; to ensure that the actual classroom and electronic training create what the team characterized as “phenomenal” learning experiences; and to maximize the operational efficiency of learning. According to Vanthournout, he selected members to comprise a team that “was more of a team focused more on corporate education than it was an education team trying to have a business impact.”

Here are some of the key lessons that members of the Accenture team learned during their “journey,” each of which is supported by hard data rather than by firm (albeit sincere) convictions:

1. Enterprise learning must be driven with the end in mind: the business results to be achieved.

2. An enterprise should build a learning strategy founded on the core values of the organization, as well as its primary leadership values.

3. Through metrics and ROI analysis, learning investments can be linked to business performance outcomes.

4. When conducting an ROI analysis, organizations should focus on how learning improved a person’s performance on the job.

5. According to Kurt Olson, a team member, “Although it may be an overused phrase now, phenomenal earning was truly the `secret sauce’ for many of the outcomes we have accomplished with the learning transformation initiative at Accenture. Phenomenal learning was how all good planning and design came to life. It’s how the `thinking’ and the `doing’ all came together to produce phenomenal results.”

6. To address the increasing emphasis on business outcomes, today’s learning professionals must have strong business skills.

7. Because the lifespan of learning content is shrinking as the marketplace changes more rapidly, Accenture must develop the means for faster, continuous, and more efficient content production or revision.

8. A global learning infrastructure can integrate vital decision-support functionalities that help increase the impact of learning and keep it aligned with the most important business needs.

9. Companies should focus on differentiating their workforces, creating deep skills in people that can be brought to bear anywhere around the organization.

10. Increasing the engagement of employees is important not only to retaining them and improving productivity. It is important to growth and innovation by tapping into the collective intelligence of value workers.

It is worth noting that, as a result of the efforts of the Capability Development team, working closely with senior management and countless other associates throughout the firm, “for every dollar Accenture invests in learning, the company receives that dollar back plus an additional $3.25 in measurable value to its bottom line. – In other words, a 353 percent return on learning.” Literally, ROL = ROI. To repeat, Return on Learning is also about “how other organizations can do the same.” Or how they can at least “use learning programs for major business impact, and can run learning as a business.”

Who is Tad Waddington?

Tad Waddington

Here are a few of the awards he has received thus far: International Business Award Best Human Resources Executive of the Year, 2008. World Human Resources Development Award for Human Resources Leadership, 2009.

His formal education: Chicago Management Institute, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, 2005; PhD, Measurement, Evaluation & Statistical Analysis; Education; University of Chicago, 1995; MA, History of Chinese Religions, University of Chicago, 1990; BA, Psychology, Honors College, Arizona State University, Phi Beta Kappa, Moeur Award (for 4.0 GPA), 1986.

Also: Global Senior Advisor, Asia-Pacific CEO Association; Worldwide Director, Performance Measurement, Accenture; Public Speaker (in English and Chinese) recently in Beijing, Cairo, Changchun, Kuala Lumpur, London, Mumbai, Nanjing, Nice & Singapore.

Q: What was your inspiration/motivation for writing this book, Lasting Contribution?

Nothing frustrates me more than wasted potential. I see many well-intentioned people in the world who are trying to do good work, but because they don’t understand economics, game theory, or statistics, they are not as effective as they could be. Since not everybody has the time or inclination to study all of these fields, I took an idea from the ancient Chinese philosopher Zhuangzi who said, “The fish trap exists because of the fish. Once you’ve gotten the fish you can forget the trap.” My goal was to bring the insights from various fields of study to more people so they could be more effective in their well-intentioned pursuits.

Q: Given the thinking in your book, if you could solve just one of the world’s problems, what would it be?

Energy. Besides addressing global warming, clean and cheap energy would allow you to desalinate and move water, which would go a long way toward solving problems with food and population.

Q: You have expertise in China, hermeneutics, education, and statistics. How does all of this fit together?

My knowledge of China is focused on language, culture, and philosophy, which inevitably lead to Confucius. He asked: How do you make the world a better place? By making people better, and you do that through education. That’s two topics. The other two are variations on the theme of, “How do you know?” One is qualitative and the other quantitative, but we live not in a multi- or poly-verse, but rather a universe. This means that the qualitative and quantitative approaches must converge. If they don’t, then you haven’t done enough work.

To put all of this differently, if I were interested in making money—good old capital—then I’d invest, which would involve a qualitative assessment of the management team and a quantitative assessment of the fundamentals. I’m interested in human capital, so I conduct qualitative and quantitative assessments of how to improve it.

Q: What is your lasting contribution?

Confucius said that to leave a legacy, you should have kids (I have a son) or write, but Socrates said that to leave a legacy you should have kids, write, or (what does this tell you about the difference between China and the West?) do something that has an enduring impact on the world. According to Accenture’s Chief Learning Officer, my contribution has been “to fundamentally change the equation for how companies think about investing in their people.” I proved that the return on investment in training is very high. Gary Becker, Nobel laureate and Presidential Medal of Freedom winner said, “In terms of human capital, [Tad’s work] is exactly what American businesses most need to be doing.”

Q: How did you do that?

I analyzed 261,000 employee records of per-person margin (how much people brought in minus how much we paid them), controlled for experience, inflation, and business cycles, to show that for every dollar Accenture spent on training, it received $4.53 in return, which is a return on investment (ROI) of 353 percent.

There are several features of this work that I think are worth pointing out:

Since the analysis focused not on soft data (Did you enjoy your hospital stay?), but on hard data (Did you survive your hospital stay?) and since it used rigorous statistical techniques (multiple regression that accounted for various confounds), the results had a high degree of credibility, so high that the work won half a dozen awards and was turned into the book Return on Learning: Training for High Performance at Accenture.

The approach forces people to focus not on training activities—hours of training delivered, percentage of workforce trained, and so on—but on results, a focus that forces you to speak the language of the organization’s leaders—the language of results.

The analysis took into consideration all of the training that everybody experienced as well as all of the costs associated with the training, including opportunity costs. One point is that this makes for a conservative estimate of ROI. But the more important point is that the analysis looked at the big picture of how all of the courses interacted with each other to add value, thus avoiding the common mistake of trying to explain how a particular course increased a particular skill, which has a particular ROI. The analysis showed that, because individual courses interact with each other, the whole effect of training is greater than the sum of its parts.

Daniel J. Isenberg on how to start an entrepreneurial revolution in six months

Daniel J. Isenberg

Here is an excerpt from an article written by Daniel J. Isenberg for the Harvard Business Review blog. To read the complete article, check out other articles and resources, subscribe to HBR at a deep discount, and/or sign up for a free subscription to Harvard Business Review’s Daily Alerts, please click here.

*     *     *

In the weeks since the Entrepreneurial Revolution article appeared in HBR [click here], government leaders, business executives, entrepreneurs, NGO directors, heads of institutes, university professors, and foundations have been asking me to help them instigate a revolution. Here is my advice to all of you on how to get started in just six months.

[Isenberg offers seven specific recommendations. Here are the first three.]

• Revolutions start local. Start the revolution in one locale and spread it from there. Every ecosystem has its own idiosyncrasies, and skepticism is prevalent, so start with quick wins that make sense in that specific location. And make quick correctable mistakes. Once you get on the right track in one locale, you can spread the revolution quickly. You don’t have years to wait for measurable results before scaling up, just know you are on the right track.

• Revolutions need participants. The “shot heard round the world” will be a town-meeting-style, entrepreneurship stakeholder workshop to create excitement and commitment, and to learn. Convene representatives of banks, churches, universities, public schools, unions, cooperatives, entrepreneurs, the municipal and federal government, trade and industry associations, economic development organizations, some “foreign” Diaspora resources, and the media. Meet with them individually to prepare them, and learn about the assets and liabilities of the local entrepreneurship ecosystem.

• Engage the Private Sector from the Start. Government cannot build ecosystems alone. Only the private sector has the motivation and perspective to develop self-sustaining, profit-driven markets. Foe this reason, government must involve the private sector early and let it keep or acquire a significant stake in the ecosystem’s success.

The most important deliverable in these first six months is to engage, excite, and empower the entrepreneurship stakeholders, demonstrate commitment, and show your constituents that you mean business. This will set the stage for the next phase of new policies and programs to help hardwire the change into the fabric of the society.

*     *     *

To read the complete article, check out other articles and resources, and/or sign up for a free subscription to Harvard Business Review’s Daily Alerts, please click here.

Daniel J. Isenberg is a Professor of Management Practice at Babson College

James Kouzes: An interview by Bob Morris

Jim Kouzes

A former president, then CEO and chairman of the Tom Peters Company, Kouzes is the Dean’s Executive Professor of Leadership, Leavey School of Business, Santa Clara University. Along with coauthor Barry Posner they have written over a dozen books, including the bestselling and award-winning The Leadership Challenge, now in its fourth edition with over 1.5 millions copies sold, and A Leader’s Legacy. To date nearly 3 million leaders have used their assessment instrument, The Leadership Practices Inventory. They began their joint research over twenty-five years ago, and continue it with surveys, written case studies, and in-depth interviews to obtain evidence of how leaders energize others to produce exceptional results.

Here is an excerpt from my interview of him. To read the complete interview, please click here.

*     *     *

Morris: During the decades in which you and Barry have worked together, what have been the most significant changes in how effective leadership has been defined? Why?

Kouzes: The first change is that there’s no change in what people expect of leaders.  In 1982 people wanted leaders who were honest, forward-looking, competent and inspiring. In 2007 we found these same four qualities are at the top of the list worldwide.

Second, in spite of the Internet boom and the pervasiveness of virtual connections, relationship skills have proven to be the most critical variable in leadership effectiveness. Third, while the content of leadership has not changed much, the context sure has. The most important shift is to a global economy. With outsourcing, the explosion of the Indian and Chinese economies, and the connectedness of people around the globe, aspiring leaders have to learn to work with people from a variety of countries and cultures.

The other major contributor to contextual change is technology. The Internet has dramatically altered the “ownership” of information. Power is shifting from the organization to the individual.

Morris: Given your response to the previous question, what have been some of the most significant consequences of those changes?

Kouzes: The two most significant changes in context—the global economy and technological connectivity—have resulted in a curious dichotomy. While we are more connected, we are also more distant.  That distance is both physical and emotional.

The physical distance is obvious, but the emotional distance is more subtle. It’s just human nature to trust people more like ourselves, so when leaders and constituents are culturally different, the emotional connection is not as strong. Cultural diversity brings with it different perspectives on the same issue. Exemplary global leaders must be more broad-minded, open to others, and keenly interested in others.

Morris: One of the key points that you have always stressed is that leadership must be developed at all levels and in all areas of an enterprise. In your opinion, how can that best be accomplished?

Kouzes: The most important and influential leader role models in our lives are family members. For college students and young professionals, next on the list are teachers and coaches followed by community leaders. Only after we’ve been working for a while do business leaders become significant leader role models, and those leader role models are much more likely to be an immediate manager than the CEO. All this underscores how important it is that we understand that leadership is everyone’s business, not just the domain of those at the top of the pyramid.

All work organizations should offer leadership development programs to prospective leaders on the frontline before they are selected to be supervisors.  Schools need to make it part of the curriculum. But it’s not just about formal programs. We learn a whole lot from observation, so leaders at all levels must model the appropriate behavior.

Morris: Now please focus on The Leadership Challenge. How does the fourth edition differ from those that preceded it?

Kouzes: The primary difference in the fourth edition is a direct result of the globalization of the economy. Barry and I include many more cases from outside the United States. Today there is nearly universal acceptance of the notion that the world really is “flat” as Thomas Friedman so aptly describes it.  The newest edition of The Leadership Challenge reflects this shift.

Morris: For those who have not as yet the book, what are the nature and the extent of the “challenge” to which the title refers?

Kouzes: In essence, it’s “how to get extraordinary things done in organizations.” In fact, when we released the first two editions of The Leadership Challenge that was the book’s subtitle.

From the very beginning every single one of the cases we’ve collected involved change from the status quo. What’s significant about this finding is that we didn’t specifically ask people to tell us about how they dealt with a leadership challenge.  Rather, we asked them to tell about their personal best leadership experiences.  And when they were writing and talking about their personal bests, challenge was integral part of doing their best.

Morris: Why is credibility “the foundation of leadership”?

Kouzes: Because people will not willingly follow someone in whom they do not believe. For the past twenty-five years we’ve asked over seventy-five thousand people worldwide to select the leader characteristics that “you most look for and admire in a leader, someone whose direction you would willingly follow.”

What is most striking and most evident is that only four qualities have continuously received over sixty percent of the votes: honest, forward-looking, inspiring, and competent.  Three of these four key characteristics—honest, competent, and inspiring—are synonymous with what communications experts refer to as “source credibility.” Serendipitously, what we discovered in asking people about admired leaders was that what they most want is a person in whom they can believe. Simply put, credibility is the foundation of leadership.

Morris: For those who aspire to lead others, how can they establish such a foundation? And, what can an organization do to support those efforts?

Kouzes: To help answer that question, we asked people “What is credibility behaviorally? How do you know it when you see it?” The common phrases people use to describe behavioral credibility include “Their actions are consistent with their words” and “They put their money where their mouth is.” A judgment of “credible” is handed down when words and deeds are consonant.

This realization leads to a straightforward prescription for leaders and for organizations on how to establish credibility: DWYSYWD. That is, Do What You Say You Will Do. First, leaders and organizations must clarify their values and beliefs. Second, they must put what they say into practice—back up their words by devoting time, attention, energy and resources to the core values they espouse.

Morris: Change initiatives inevitably encounter resistance, often the result of what James O’Toole characterizes as “the ideology of comfort and the tyranny of custom.” What advice do you have with regard to overcoming such resistance?

Kouzes: The more dramatic the change, the stronger the resistance is likely to be. Even when the evidence for change is overwhelming, it doesn’t come quickly or easily. Exemplary leaders meet resistance with persistence.  They don’t give up, they don’t quit, and they don’t submit. One need only look to those leaders in history who have fostered positive yet radical change—Mahatma Gandhi, for example—to realize that it takes courage to lead a life of significance.  The willingness to suffer and sacrifice for the greater good is a requirement for overcoming the nay-sayers, skeptics, cynics, and others who resist positive change.

Second, people embrace change only when they can see how it benefits them. The best leaders know what motivates their constituents. They understand their constituents’ hopes, dreams, and aspirations. They are able to paint an image of the future in a way that people will say, “I can see myself in that picture.”

Morris: Much has been said and written about “empowerment” in the workplace. Your own thoughts?

Kouzes: Long before empowerment was written into the popular vocabulary, exemplary leaders understood how important it was for their constituents to feel strong, capable, and efficacious. Constituents who feel weak, incompetent, and insignificant are consistent underperformers. They want to flee the organization, and they’re ripe for disenchantment, even revolution.

Feeling powerful—literally feeling “able”—comes from a deep sense of being in control of one’s own life. When people feel able—have both the skill and the will—to determine their own destinies, then they persist in their efforts to achieve. Any leadership practice that increases another’s sense of self-determination, self-confidence, and personal effectiveness makes that person more powerful and greatly enhances the possibility of success.

*     *     *

To read the complete interview, please click here.

Jim cordially invites you to check out the resources at these websites:

http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/

http://www.leadershipchallenge.typepad.com/

http://www.ccl.org/leadership/index.aspx

http://www.marshallgoldsmithlibrary.com/

Bob Morris on Lasting Contribution: A Book Review

Lasting Contribution: How to Think, Plan, and Act to Accomplish Meaningful Work
Tad Waddington
Agate B2 (2007)

Frankly, I did not know what to expect as I began to read this book but soon realized that, accompanied by Tad Waddington, I had embarked on a journey of discovery to learn the answer to a very important question: How can I make a contribution that lasts? Waddington asserts that “lasting contributions are caused. Simply put, you cause a lasting contribution to happen. The problem is that the way people usually think about causality does not serve them well when it comes to thinking about taking action.” Waddington notes that some 2,300 years ago, Aristotle argued that it is useful to think in terms of four causes: material (i.e. of what a thing is made), efficient (i.e. how something is made), formal (i.e. what a thing is), and final (i.e. why a thing is). “This book was written to help you not in the way a hammer helps you to build a house, but in the way a blueprint does. It prepares you for action.”

Waddington devotes a separate chapter to each of the four causes, explaining its nature and functions, citing examples of it in all manner of situations, and suggesting its relevance to human experiences shared by most of those who read his book. The “blueprint” metaphor is especially appropriate because each person who embarks on the aforementioned journey of discovery is, in effect, preparing to serve as architect of his or her own life. Here is a selection of brief excerpts that provide at least some indication of this book’s scope and flavor:

“The efficient cause is concerned with taking action to get results, particularly in a complex and dynamic world such as ours…Effective action in a complex world requires considered action – knowing when and how to take action and when not to. But on what do you base your actions? The material cause addresses the issue of your most important resources.” (Page 18)

“The material cause involves the resources that you can use to bring about a lasting contribution…In many ways, the material cause is less concerned with your material assets than with how you cultivate yourself…Consequently, it is important to cultivate yourself so that you can seize the opportunities offered…Next, you need to make full use of your arête [i.e. your virtue or excellence in terms of perception, expertise, and mastery]. The formal cause is that way.” (Page 30)

“The formal cause is the DNA of action. It is the recipe for success, the rules of the game…the blueprint that tells you how to construct the causal chain from your values to your results. It is the road map that informs how to get from here to there. But where is there and why go? The why of action is addressed by the final cause.” (Page 44)

“The final cause embodies your values. It gives motive force, because it comes from what you value. The stronger the value, the greater the power of the final cause. The more clearly articulated the value, the better you can embody it through action…As the end (in the sense of goal), the final cause is, paradoxically, the beginning of how to make a lasting contribution. It motivates the entire process and raises your mundane actions to a higher level. But how can you be sure that the four causes are a sensible way to think about making a lasting contribution?” (Page 54)

Waddington addresses this last question in Chapters VI and VII, then shifts his attention to various empirical problems that are frequently encountered, and then to suggesting why making a lasting contribution to the world is a “worthy goal” and a “self-evident good.”

For me, some of the most valuable material is provided in the final chapter in which Waddington discusses six exemplary individuals. However their lasting contributions may differ in terms of nature and impact, all of them have the four causes working effectively together in combinations that (obviously) vary in terms of their respective values, objectives, and resources.

Norman Borlaug (awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970) is of special interest to me because of his efforts to triple wheat production in Mexico and achieve a 60% increase in wheat harvests in India and Pakistan. ” He then expanded his efforts to eliminate famine in Asia and Africa. According to Paddington, Borlaug’s lasting contribution was a “hardnosed pursuit of pragmatic results. His efficient cause was to work on his crops all day every day, year after year.”

Tad Waddington urges each reader to make a lasting contribution because it can teach the value of doubting (indeed challenging) conventional wisdom that insists such a contribution is impossible; also, because it will guide and inform ethical actions and give more meaning to one’s life. Most important of all, as Borlaug and others so convincingly demonstrate, such a contribution can have substantial and enduring impact on the lives of countless others.

Those who share my high regard for this book are urged to check out Ralph Waldo Emerson’s essay, Self Reliance, Henry David Thoreau’s Walden,  James O’Toole’s Creating the Good Life: Applying Aristotle’s Wisdom to Find Meaning and Happiness. Also, Michael Ray’s The Highest Goal, David Whyte’s The Heart Aroused, Eckhart Tolle’s The Power of Now and his more recent A New Earth, Bill George’s Authentic Leadership and True North, John Whitehead’s A Life in Leadership, and The Leader’s Legacy co-authored by James Kouzes and Barry Posner.