Enjoyed the first half of book before the it’s due back at the library. Will try to borrow it again.
The book I read was the first edition from 1997. The disk drive industry case study was especially interesting because I lived through those days of evolution from 14″ down to 8″, 3.5″, and then 2.5″ and now 1.8″.

The author blames the customers for keeping the good company at the incremental improvement pace and not having the resources to invest in the up and coming disruptive cheap technology, that eventually become good enough and cheap enough to meet the new set of requirements. It’s not because of bad management. Instead, it’s the good management and the rigid supply chain that makes diversions from the existing course of action difficult.

It would take a different, smaller organization facing a different set of customers to make it possible, as recommended by the author. The author offers other possible avenues to be innovative.

Noted the phases of product competition: Performance, reliability, convenience and then price. The key principles of disruptive technology: 1. companies depend on customers and investors for resources, 2. small markets don’t solve the growth needs of large companies, 3. markets that don’t exist cannot be analyzed, 4. technology supply may not equal market demand,

Characteristics of disruptive technologies:
1. Weakness of disruptive technologies are their strengths.
2. Typically simpler, cheaper, and more reliable and convenient than established technologies, e.g. Quickbook vs. traditional bookkeeping software.

The case study of the electric car as an disruptive technology is still relevant and makes a strong point.

Lots of case studies and an interesting read and a must read for high-tech executives.

This book is all about Libertarian Paternalism or Nudges designed to steer people’s choices toward a desired outcome that’s good for the individuals. Certainly the same methods can be applied to commercial purposes.

The authors offer many ways to design the choice architecture such that people may end up choosing to save more for IRA (default to x%), donate to more organs upon deaths (default to donate organs and need to opt out), and etc.

An interesting solution proposed by the authors to the perennial conflict of same-sex marriage is to make marriages private contracts instead of the recognized statues by states, which are only required to issue Civil Union license. I think this is a great idea. It’s time to separate the religion from the state.

Another interesting idea is to make the high-school students fill out an application to colleges before graduation. This did increase the college enrollment by leaps and bounds for one state.

All these nudge schemes play into several of human natures: inertia (status quo bias, rules of thumb), anchoring (residual/subconscious thought from previous conversation), representativeness (bias), optimism and overconfidence, fear of loss more than the joy of gain, fear of unknowns, ignorance of underlying issues (solution: quick feedback like SmartMeter), following the herds, framing of the questions, spotlight effect (people are not paying attention to you as you think), and etc.

And all of the natures have to do with our reflective system (rational) vs. automatic system (fast and instinctive). This is an interesting read.

William Kamkwamba endured a year-long famine and survived but dropped out of secondary school due to lack of money. Recovering from the famine and not being able to go school, he took advantage of the free time and a small library and educated himself about power generation. Through his scavenger around the dump site, he created a windmill to power a 12V light-bulbs so that he could study and catch up with the class mates. More importantly, he wanted to use the windmill to pump water and irrigate the farms so that they will never have another famine and be hungry.

This memoir gives me a pretty idea of what it’s like to be living as farmers in Africa. They’re constantly under the threat of cyclical weather and natural elements like pests, but mostly from the corruption and incompetence of the government, who allowed its citizens to die of hunger without recognizing and owning the problem and Malawi is a very small country of only 14M people and 46K sq miles.

The famine story was especially gut wrenching. Hopefully, no one will have to go through that again in this world of abundance. The author’s hunger for knowledge and the tenacity to reach his goal of building the windmill should be inspiring to anyone. And anyone who complains life is hard in the United States or other developed countries should walk in his shoes for a while to appreciate how good of lives we live.

William got his fame from his participation in TED. As a result, he got all the attentions, gifts and help from people all over the world. Is this a beginning of the recognition that Africans may have what it takes to take themselves out of poverty, or is it just another western news-craze way to get the top story of the day and then move on? I hope it’s the former and William took advantage of that to get himself on the right track to become a future leader of Malawi.

Also, William got a true friend in Gilbert, the chief’s son, who funded his project without hesitation and bought into his dream and supported him throughout. That’s true friendship. It’s good to know that William was able to repay him in return in Gilbert’s time of need.

This book is educational to all in the Western world that only heard and read about the Africans’ plight remotely. It drilled deep into the humanity in us to want to help and avoid the next famine for our fellow humans. It’s also hopeful to see there are Africans like William who take responsibility to make changes and refuse to be another victim. Good story!

It’s the battle of Multipliers vs. Diminishers, often within ourselves. This is a good read. Now I’m more equipped to see what types of leaders I’m looking at and what kind of leader I want to become.

Key concepts:
Multipliers get 2x productivity from people than Diminishers plus 5~10% more growth. “People are smart and will figure this out” vs. “They will never figure this out without me.”

Five disciplines of the Multipliers: 1. attract and optimize talent. (Talent magnet vs. empire builders) 2. create intensity that requires best thinking (liberator vs. tyrant). 3. extend challenges (vs. know-it-all). 4. Debate decisions. (debate maker vs. decision maker), 5. Instill ownership and accountability (investor – instill accountability vs. micromanager).

Common characteristics of Multipliers:
1. A Hard edge: Multipliers aren’t “feel-good” managers. They look into people and find capability, and they want to access all of it. They utilize people to their fullest. They see a lot, so they expect a lot.
2. A great sense of humor (George Clooney)
3. The accidental diminisher.

Deep dive into each of the disciplines:
1. Talent Magnet: a. Look for talent everywhere (appreciate all types of genius, ignore boundaries). b. Find people’s native genius. (look for what’s native, Label It. c. Utilize people at their fullest (connect people with opportunities, shine a spotlight). d. Remove the blockers (get rid of Prima Donnas, Get out of the way). Diminishers’ approach to managing to talent: acquire resources, put people in boxes, let talent languish. On becoming a genius watcher: 1. Identify it, 2. Test it, 3. Work it.(define 5 roles for that person)

2. Liberator: three practices: a. create space (operate consistently, level the playing field), b. demand people’s best work (defend the standard), c. generate rapid learning cycles (admit and share mistakes, insist on learning from mistakes. In contrast, Diminishers dominate the space, create anxiety, judge others. To become a Liberator: 1. play your chips (to count your interruptions), 2. label your opinions (soft vs. hard), 3. make your mistakes known (get personal, go public).

3. Challenger: 1. seed the opportunity (show the need, challenge the assumption, reframe problems, create a starting point), 2. lay down a challenge (mission impossible, extend a concrete challenge, ask the hard questions, let others fill in the blanks), 3. Generate belief (helicopter down, lay out a path, co-create the plan, orchestrate an early win. In contrast, the Diminishers’ approach to setting direction: tell what they know, test what you know, tell people how to do their jobs. To become a challenger: a. a serious case of curiosity, go extreme with questions, take a bus trip to see the real thing, take a massive baby step (en mass visibly together).

4. The Debate Maker: The decider vs. a team of rivals. a. frame the issue (define the question, form the team, assemble the data, frame the decision), b. Spark the debate (create safety for best thinking – the yin, demand rigor – the yang), c. drive a sound decision. To become a debate maker: 3 rules to share inquiry: discussion leader only asks questions, must supply support evidence to support their theories, everyone participates. Ask the hard questions, ask for the data, ask each person.

5. The Investor: a. define ownership (name the lead, give ownership for the end goal, stretch the role), b. invest resources (teach and coach, provide backup), c. Hold people accountable (give it back, expect complete work, respect natural consequences, make the scoreboard visible). On becoming an investor: 1.let them know who is the boss, 2. let nature takes its course (let it happen, talk about it, focus on next time), 3. ask for the F-I-X, 4. hand back the pen.

Lazy-way strategies: 1. work the extremes (focus your development on the two extremes – bring up your lowest low and take your highest high to the next level), 2. start with the assumption, 3. take the 30-day Multiplier challenge (pick one practice within one discipline and work it for 30 days.) To sustain momentum: 1. build it layer by layer, 2. stay with it for a year, 3. build a community.