Leadership BS audiobook

Good exploration of why leadership self-help is, in fact, bullshit. No barriers to entry in leadership industry, no credentials necessary or readily required, vague terms, little evidence, lots of inspiration that doesn’t mesh with reality. His final chapter offers some prescriptions for “how to face the reality of organizational life”—all advice that realists know if they’ve ever dealt with disappointing people or situations, but hard if you really want to believe the best. Incidentally, Pfeffer convincingly argues throughout the book WHY you might want to believe the best, but that that’s likely not to work in your favor.He seems to be much less cynical about medicine and medicine education than about the “leadership industry,” which is where I think he could afford to be MORE cynical: I think he accepts that there is a prevalence of “evidence-based” decision making in medicine when really, not so much. And medicine is subject to the same turf wars and narcissism as other industries: it just happens to enjoy a better reputation, probably because you can’t afford to criticize or second-guess or anger someone with access to a prescription pad or operating theater when you need a prescription or operation. One doesn’t need to search hard to find the same unflattering, difficult, sometimes mean and abusive characteristics in medicine as one finds in well remunerated and lionized “leaders.”I have to sort through some seemingly incommensurate ideas: narcissists are more successful as leaders, but being authentic (true to yourself) isn’t the best way to get ahead—how does narcissism (all about yourself) succeed where authenticity (“true” to yourself) doesn’t. This may be an issue of deception: a narcissist can deceive others about his “true” nature when that deception serves his own best interests. And Pfeffer’s first chapter cites detailed careers of leaders as evidence that “leadership industry” advice is very poor, but his final chapter cites multiple examples of long-term careers of crappy, abusive ineffective leaders.I appreciate his skewering of the idea that education and work should be “inspirational,” but that’s a tough charge to combat when you are expected to be the “inspirational” and accommodating buffer functioning in a middle space. Pfeffer’s best prescription of all: take care of yourself first.

Outstanding book! Would give it 10 stars if I could. Of course I'd expect nothing less from Pfeffer. In the spirit of some of his prior books (e.g., Knowing-Doing Gap, Half Truths and Utter Nonsense), Pfeffer uses the academic management /psychology/ social science literature to debunk many common myths about the world of management. In Leadership BS, he takes on the "feel good" leadership industry for prescribing a "feel good" approach to how leaders should act, rather than taking a hard look at how leaders actually act, and how leaders can be effective. This incongruency is the basis for so many people's frustrations with organizations and their leaders, particularly in their willfully ignoring the self-interested (as opposed to altruistic) motives of leaders. Pfeffer convincingly argues that unless people are willing to see things how they are, rather than some idealistic fantasy, there is little to no chance of leadership within organizations ever actually improving.

Loved this non-inspiring, real-politic survey of leadership. Particularly the attention paid to game-theory based analysis of incentives of leaders in various organizations. I found the book's approach of singling out exceptional companies, yet also illustrating consequences of assuming all organizations are exceptional - particularly easy to read and grasp. The world is filled with some amazing companies and leaders, yet most amazing leadership stories are written after-the-fact and omit any negative characteristics of the leader. This book dives deep into the flaws, making no assumption that leaders are virtuous, but rather down-to-earth people driven by ambition, greed and self realization

A very good book. Pfeffer, in the process of debunking "feel good" theories of what makes a good leader, sees the business world as it is, and the way it is is often nasty real-politik. Best to be clear-eyed about it. Pfeffer likes virtue but recognizes it does not prevail a good part of the time. I'm not sure what the percentage is but close to 50% of the time it doesn't. Be clear-eyed and realistic, he says. And even though you will be disappointed at the venality of lots of practices in the business world a better strategy is to see them clearly, and that means giving up illusions, always a good strategy. You'll be looking out for yourself and become a stronger person and a better leader (boss) if that is what you are called on to do, in the process. And probably richer, too.

This book can ruin most of self-serving, uplifting leadership advices. The author begins by showcasing that the current leadership "industry", how he calls all media produced around the topic, with numbers displaying everything we know: workplaces suck, and leaders suck harder.The author berates our emotional approach to understanding leadership according to anecdotes and its uselessness. That's when the book lost me a little. Don't get me wrong, I am all for data over anecdotes, but the way he simplifies all advices as emotional and uplifting, proactively ignores all the advice that is given based in research. Or even some motherfucker matter-of-factly advices, like Peter Drucker or Sheryl Sandberg. I dare you to read "The effective manager" and call it romantic. Sandberg's Lean In was so matter-of-fact (and surprisingly gender neutral) that some people just couldn't handle it. (In fact, the author itself gives points that prove her right in his book.)And if you take a shot at every time he writes "inspirational TED talk", you've got your night worked out for you.But, despite all of this, I can't express how eye opening this can be. I wish I could've​ read it in college. After experiencing all the hateous politicking in biz world, I began to ponder if some of my failures were not just mine after all. Everyone says this book is painful, whose reality dose really is, but for me it was strangely comforting. As a Business graduate, I have to come to terms with the fact that we are failing to provide good workplaces for people.

This book is quite provocative. It took me a few chapters to appreciated Pfeffer's writing style and the point he hopes to make with this book. At first, his precise definitions of the failing of today’s leaders and the leadership training industry sounds as though he’s advocating for dishonesty narcissism and inauthenticity. But I think his intention was more to say thing transparently so we can think of a strategy that works. Though he doesn't really define a strategy, he does offer some helpful hints like measuring and incentives along with making sure that you get honest feedback from folks who aren't as powerful as you.

This book is a blend of Leadership and Psychology, which is an enticing combo. But, it's also a tool which the author wields to hammer the feel-good beliefs which we harbour about leaders (i.e. leaders are kind, authentic, humble people who will “eat last” and save you when you are in the depths of despair)As evident from the title, Pfeffer has ranted on endlessly till the last chapter of the book. Although in the end, he has not given any conclusive solution (in the end he has merely mentioned that the world is not black and white), it serves as a reminder as to why (all) leaders are not the paragons of virtue.Summary:1. This book is a prequel to “Power”2. Want to be a leadership coach? You cango to an institute or enroll in one of many programs, ofvarying quality and rigor, that train coaches with varyingdegrees of skill, but you don’t have to even do that. You can bea coach tomorrow.3. Leaders fail their people, their organizations, the larger society, and even themselves withunacceptable frequency. Every day, in the news, are more stories of leaders failing4. Rant against transformational leadership (aka charismatic leadership)5. The feel good stories about leadership look good because we get “motivated”6. Moreover, for the leaders who talk or write or blog about their leadership experience, theproblem becomes even more pernicious. In telling their stories, leaders create and re-create theirown reality so often that soon it becomes almost impossible for them to distinguish the actual truthfrom what they recall as being true, even if they wanted to do so.7. Five attributes of a “leader” – modesty, authenticity, truthfulness, trustworthiness, concern for well-being of others8. ModestyMoreover, people are unlikely to work as hard for “your” project or “the boss’s project” as theyare for “our” project or, even better, for their “own” project. This fact derives from at least twopsychological processes. One process is sometimes referred to as implicit egotism. This idea refersto the principle that we like things that remind us of or are identified with ourselves. Implicitegotism is premised on the idea that because we like ourselves, we like things that remind us of orare associated with the self. In turn, projects will induce greater effort to the extent that theybecome identified with the individuals working on them.The second principle that suggests that people will prefer that which they feel ownership of isthe endowment effect. This phenomenon describes how and why we more highly value what wehave simply because it is ours.What about Women and Minorities?The fact that women and other ethnic minorities, such as Asian Americans, are on average moremodest and self-effacing and less narcissistic than typical white males, in part because of genderrole and cultural expectations, may help explain their worse career outcomesAsians admit that their culture inculcates them with different communication andnetworking styles, as well as a pronounced emphasis on performance and technicalcompetency… . Asian professionals are frequently held back from senior positions by theperception that they don’t have “executive presence,” a factor that similarly operates againstother minority groups in the workplace, including womenSecond, narcissism and self-aggrandizement and the behaviors associated with these constructsreliably and consistently predict the selection of leaders, the evaluations made after interviews, andthe selection of emergent leadership. And third, narcissistic CEOs seem to earn more compared withothers in the top management team, and last longer in their jobs—probably because they are moreready and willing to eliminate their rivals. Furthermore, narcissistic individuals are often superiorperformers in at least some dimensions; they are great at selling their ideas and vision, effective inattracting the support of others (particularly outside others), good at getting attention and itsattendant benefits, and often effective at getting things done. The many benefits of immodesty helpexplain why modest CEOs are so rare, the leadership industry’s blandishments notwithstanding.9. AuthenticityThe idea of authentic leadership epitomizes almost everythingthat I believe characterizes the leadership industry generally,much of which does not help either science or practice: (1) awell-intentioned, values-laden (2) set of prescriptions—lots of“shoulds” and “oughts”—(3) that are mostly not representative ofmost people in leadership roles, and (4) are recommendations thatare almost certainly not implementable and may befundamentally misguided.Moreover, as Gary Loveman has stated, there comes a time inyour career, as you move up, when critical relationships simplyhave to work. When you are in school, if you don’t like aparticular classmate, that is fine. Don’t hang out with that person;don’t even talk to the individual if you don’t want to. But if youare both senior executives in an organization in a relationship thatinevitably entails a high degree of interdependence, you cannotafford to not “like” the other person. Moreover, your personal feelings are largely irrelevant to your need to make therelationship successful..Here’s another problem with the prescription to be yourauthentic self: People change and grow all the time as a result oftheir work experiences. No one is born a doctor, lawyer, nurse,professional golfer, carpenter, or, for that matter, as a creature thatwalks and talks. We learn not only skills, but also the values andthe culture that surround our particular jobs and organizations.We become what we do, in terms of not just skills but alsopreferences and values. One of the more robust findings in socialpsychology is that attitudes follow behaviors.13 After you havebeen a doctor, or a tax accountant, or a professor for long enough,you probably come to like what you have to do every day, and inmany respects you also become the role you have been doing.10. TruthfulnessMany of those ubiquitous sources of leadership advice also advocate candor, honesty, andtransparency.4 The logic seems sensible, even unassailable. Leaders should be candid and open,because if leaders lie, then subordinates, the leaders’ own bosses, and the leaders’ peers presumablywon’t trust what the leaders say, and trust is important to effective leadership (a theme we willexplore further in the next chapter). Moreover, if leaders lie, others around them will do the same asthey model the leader’s behavior. If few people in a workplace tell the truth, then almost no one willhave accurate information about what is really going on. And valid information about what ishappening and the results of decisions is essential to both learn from experience and to make moreeffective choices. And if leaders lie, they will have committed a sin, reflecting negatively onthemselves and undermining their authority and credibility. Research shows that “people viewduplicity as one of the gravest moral failings.”5No one was better at the task of creating the perception of success and coolness than Steve Jobs.In the early 1980s, Apple Computer (as it was known then) faced an existential threat. After theApple II’s introduction, IBM had launched its own personal computer, and many people felt thatIBM would crush Apple. Then came the Lisa, Apple’s next product, which was not a very good—orsuccessful—product. So when Apple was to introduce the Macintosh in 1984, people would need tobe convinced that the product would be successful, so they would buy it, and developers of softwareneeded to be convinced that Apple would sell enough computers and survive long enough to make itsensible for them to develop the software that would make the computer useful—and thereby helpensure its sales. The Macintosh was introduced to a packed auditorium with much fanfare and thefamous “1984” advertisement, which ran only once on television, during the Super Bowl. Almost allindustry observers and analysts were captivated, and the Macintosh was a success. Jobs’s ability,honed and implemented over decades, to continually and convincingly make the case that Applewas the coolest company with the neatest products to all of the various company constituentsensured Apple’s success.Lincoln lied about whether he was negotiating with the South to end the war. . . . He alsolied about where he stood on slavery. He told the American public and political allies that hedidn’t believe in political equality for slaves because he didn’t want to get too far ahead ofpublic opinion11. TrustworthinessBill gates and Gary Kildall story12. Concern for othersLeaders eat firstA. Take care of yourselfregardless of your outstanding record and past contributions, you are, because of your age and career stage, the past, not the future. Like most workplaces, this one, too, needed to invest in the future, and therefore it intended to allocate scarce raise dollars accordingly.You may think your employer owes you something for yourpast contributions and good work—but most employers don’tagree. Whether it is paltry raises, painful rounds of layoffs, or costcuttingmoves to open-office plans, companies, and, for that matter,nonprofits and government agencies, look after themselves andtheir own interests to ensure their survival and prosperity.With respect to self-interest, as Adam Grant noted in hisbestselling book Give and Take, people who are “givers,” thosewho are generous with their time and with their help of others, areoften the most successful in building networks of support andtherefore in their careers.16 But Grant also summarized research,including his own, that found that givers were not only among themost successful individuals, they were also among the leastsuccessful, and he provided advice about how to be generouswithout being a patsy. But even more to the point, Grant noted that“in the workplace, givers are a relatively rare breed.”17 Thereforeyou should not expect to be surrounded by such people. Moreover,research suggests that cooperative cultures are quite fragile, as arecooperation and trust in prisoner’s dilemma games. Onceindividualistic values come to dominate,18 or once people defect inprisoner’s dilemma situations,19 trust and cooperation are difficultif not impossible to rebuild.Moreover, as Jim Collins pointed out in Good to Great, unrealistic optimism and a failure to seethe situation as it is can be not only unhelpful—it can be fatal. He called this the Stockdale paradox,after James Stockdale, a U.S. military officer held captive for eight years during the Vietnam war.Stockdale was tortured numerous times and had little reason to believe he would live to see his wifeagain. Although Stockdale understood his predicament, he also never lost hope that he might endureit and not only survive his ordeal but use it as a defining experience in his life. And here is theparadox:While Stockdale had remarkable faith in the unknowable, he noted that it was always themost optimistic of his prisonmates who failed to make it out of there alive. “They were theones who said, ‘We’re going to be out by Christmas.’ And Christmas would come, andChristmas would go. Then they’d say, ‘We’re going to be out by Easter.’ And Easter wouldcome, and Easter would go. And then Thanksgiving, and then it would be Christmas again.And they died of a broken heart.” What the optimists failed to do was confront the reality oftheir situation. They preferred the ostrich approach, sticking their heads in the sand andhoping for the difficulties to go away. That self-delusion might have made it easier on themin the short-term, but when they were eventually forced to face reality, it had become toomuch and they couldn’t handle it.1And, of course, such unfounded optimism often precluded taking action to deal with thesituation as best one could, which is precisely what Stockdale did.To work for Steve Jobs of Apple was to face the risk of at any moment being “Steved” as itcame to be called, berated and fired—with such firings sometimes being rescinded on the same day.When my Stanford colleague Robert Sutton decided to add a chapter on the virtues of being anasshole to his book The No Asshole Rule, he did some casual research to see whom to include.Sutton did a Google search pairing the term with the names of some prominent CEOs who might fitthe description. Steve Jobs came out on top, far surpassing Oracle’s Larry Ellison, who came insecond place.And speaking of Larry Ellison, he has patterned his management approach after medievalsamurai warriors. Ellison’s outbursts in meetings with his staff are famous not just for his use ofinvective but for their length—sometimes going on as long as an hour.10Jeff Bezos, the founder and CEO of Amazon is also famous for his outbursts of temper and hisput-downs of employees, including the line, “We are going to have to supply some humanintelligence to this problem.”11Paul Allen, who cofounded Microsoft along with Bill Gates, wrote that working with Gates waslike “being in hell.”B. How to face the reality of organizational lifea. Stop confusing the normative with the descriptive, focus more on what isb. Watch actions, not wordsc. Sometimes you have to behave badly to do goodd. Stop the either or thinking (i.e. don’t categorize as good/ bad)e. Forgive but rememberCONNECTIONS AND DISCONNECTIONSThe problem with leadership is at its core a story of disconnections:• the disconnect between what leaders say and what they do;• the disconnect between the leadership industry’s prescriptions and the reality of many leaders’behaviors and traits;• the disconnect between the multidimensional nature of leadership performance and the simple,noncontingent answers so many people seek;• the disconnect between how the leadership industry is evaluated (happy sheets that tapinspiration and satisfaction) and the actual consequences of leader failures (miserableworkplaces and career derailments);• the disconnect between leader performance and behavior and the consequences those leadersface;• the disconnect between what most people seem to want (good news, nice stories, emotionaluplift) and what they need (the truth);• the disconnect between what would make workplaces better and organizations more effective,and the base rate with which such prescriptions get implemented.

Formatted version of this review on my blogLeadership B.S. by Stanford University Professor Jeffrey Pfeffer (Book Review)Few books open our eyes by revealing truths hiding in plain sight. Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman is one. Leadership B.S. by Jeff Pfeffer is another.Many books, lessons, and word-of-mouth teachings about leadership are misleading, misrepresentative of real world experience, and based on feel-good ideals. There are five reasons why several things we are taught about leadership and management are wrong.1. Lack of Rigor — Many leadership lessons based on someone’s experience are not based on a systematic analysis of complete data, comprehensive understanding of circumstances, and other available options at the time. What worked for the winner may be simply chance (luck), weakness of the opposition, or insufficiently acknowledged help from others.2. Before and After — The behaviors that lead a person to a powerful leadership position are often not the same as the good qualities the person assumes later in life after they are already successful. Take the case of Bill Gates, who as a competitive businessman was a different person from the kind, caring philanthropist he is today.3. Delusion — Human beings have a positive, good impressions of ourselves that are often not accurate. Studies have shown that about 80% of people believe they are better car drivers than average, better looking than average, and better human beings than others. The Overconfidence effect and above average effect are well documented. How a successful leader feels they act (morally) is often quite different from what they actually do based on observation.4. Deception — Human beings, especially successful ones, lie, mislead, and often don’t give away their coveted secrets that given them their competitive edge. There is plenty of scientific evidence that lying is a common daily habit.5. Leaving a Legacy — Many leadership books and articles are written to make the author look good, to build a good reputation and brand for the leader, and to make money. They are not primarily written for the purpose of making other people successful, even if the author thinks so. This could be due to delusion, deception, or a little bit of both.For the above reasons, my friend Jeff Pfeffer and I sometimes say that most leadership books and products should be labeled like packs of cigarettes: “Warning: This information will make you feel good in the short term, but is likely to be harmful to your effectiveness, career, well-being.”So how should you minimize your time and effort wasted learning ineffective leadership and management methods that are likely to backfire?I highly recommend reading the excellent book Leadership BS: Fixing Workplaces and Careers One Truth at a Time by Professor Jeffrey Pfeffer of Stanford University. It was finalist for the 2015 Financial Times and McKinsey Business Book of the Year and Best business book of the week selected by Inc.com. This book will help you identify real and effective leadership and management lessons based on evidence that are more likely to work than platitudes.In full disclosure, in the acknowledgements section of this book, Professor Pfeffer wrote:This book was inspired in part by my interactions with Rajiv Pant. It was Rajiv who first used the phrase “feel-good leadership literature.” It was Rajiv who provided some of the stories and examples incorporated in this book. But mostly it was Rajiv Pant who helped me see how much damage was occurring because of the current incarnation of the leadership industry. Rajiv’s support and friendship mean a great deal, not only for this book but in my life.Pfeffer, Jeffrey. Leadership BS: Fixing Workplaces and Careers One Truth at a Time (pp. 221-222). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

Hmm. This book has a lot of shocking takes on leadership, but with interesting examples. When you look at examples like Steve Jobs and Conan Mc Gregor who displayed over-confidence and narcissistic traits, it kind of proves what this book is talking about. Part of the reason why people love, admire and respect these personalities is because they exude such personalities, the other half being they put their money where their mouth is.What I have taken, and think most people should take from this book, is to not take any business advice you see from business leaders or articles as the truth. Take it with a grain of salt, even this book.Find a leadership style that suits you, your team and your culture.

First reads win Goodreads. I wrote a review but downy know what happened to it. I liked thus book very informative. I got a lot from it and it let me see things in a different light. I think everyone should read it leader, supervisor or general emoloyee.

Finally someone said it! All those trainings, all the inspirational photos with sunsets and pretty fonts, all of them are BS. Leadership is dirty business and many times all you want to do is punch your higher-up. While I've been pretty lucky in this department and actually dealt with caring people, who preferred to take a blow in to protect employees, these very nice people were also never invited to leadership conferences. Yes, the reality of leadership can get a bit depressing. But as the author says, it's even more depressing if everyone pretends everything is just fine. To sum this book up, I'll use one of my experiences with leadership conferences. As a student I used to train at many such conferences as part of an organization (I was not training on Leadership, but particular skills). Each conference had a chair, whose role was to inspire and put all the knowledge into context. I saw so many inspirational chairs with inspirational stories. Everyone clapped and went home. The end. But once, we had this guy, I can't remember one inspiring thing he said. He just came to me during one break and suggested I applied to international conferences, easily breaking all my excuses for not doing it: "worst case they say no and you've just wasted 2 hours". So I did and got accepted immediately. And there's inspirational leadership for ya, it just doesn't work beyond the classroom, just get people to do things. And don't be a d*ck to them.

I took a course at Harvard called “Power and Influence in Organizations” and everything in the class was written by Professor Jeffrey Pfeffer, the longtime Stanford prof who teaches Paths to Power. A rare example of a Harvard class going off market. It felt like drinking a smuggled Coke in the Pepsi head office. Anyway, this book paints a dystopian portrait of the state of corporate culture and the leadership “industry” (which he somewhat vaguely defines as the billions spent on training and developing leaders.) His point is that nothing’s working. Lies, deceit, arrogance – these are the traits of those at the top and he explains why those traits actually help them get ahead even if we pretend they don’t. If you’re struggling in a corporate gig this is a great read because it demystifies who gets power inside companies and every statement is underpinned by a quality research study. What can we do about it? A bit thin at the end but it advocates for leaderless systems and built in self-interest inside organizations. Setting those up is the tough part.

Do you like being inspired to become a better leader? Do you think that leaders should tell the truth and only truth? Do you think leader should eat "last"? Don't. It's not true.In this book Pfeffer deals with "feel-good leadership". Courses or literature of this kind is filled with happy stories of inspired fragile leaders moving company in the right direction. As the author points out, it's not the case. Feeling inspired and good has nothing to do with being a good leader.All the above was written from the author perspective. Is there something positive in this book or does it only presents the ugliness of the leadership world? The ugliness is strongly connected with regular old-fashioned hierarchies, which leaves some space for new companies arising without the burden of a regular top-bottom approach. One should design for it, as it won't happen on its own.This book provides a lot of good examples and counterbalance the "happy path" leadership literature. I recommend it, especially if you are a leader