Drive - Daniel H. Pink

This was actually a very fast read. (I feel like I might have overpaid for the hardcover version!)

Pink advocates for a rethink in the way we incentivise people. Currently, we use a combination of carrots and sticks to ensure that people perform their task well. However, Pink says that enforcing extrinsic forms of motivation would have side-effects that become more evident in our world today. Here are the key points that Pink makes:

1. Carrots and sticks work wonders for algorithmic tasks. Higher reward / stronger sticks --> higher productivity. However, for creative tasks, these traditional levers actually limit creativity. Nonetheless, a minimum amt of carrots is necessary for the individual to not be focused on the unfairness of the situation.
   
2. Tangible rewards kill intrinsic motivation. If-then rewards are especially potent and can lead to unhealthy expectations. The solution is to give rewards that are unexpected.
3. It can encourage unethical behaviour as the focus at hand becomes the reward (or avoidance of the punishment) and creates a win-at-all-cost mindset.
4. The solution is to focus on satisfying the fundamental human needs of competence, autonomy and relatedness. In competence, the system has to allow the individuals to develop areas of strength and grow. I think this also means that grooming one's team is especially important. In autonomy, Pink advocates giving people flexibility with when and where they want to work. I see it also as not micro-managing people. In relatedness, people want a sense of purpose to what they are doing. It is the leader's responsibility to keep on linking people's work to the larger picture and higher purpose.
   

Straight from the gut - Jack Welch

I enjoy reading Jack Welch's books - they are direct and cut straight to the chase. The book also gave me insights into how Jack made various decisions throughout his career, from simple ones to major business decisions. These were very useful. Overall, there were strong traits about Jack that stood out - he had immense drive, focus and an ability to sniff out opportunities. And of course, he also made a number of mistakes along the way. It was helpful to read about these as well and why they happened.

Here are some of the other learning points that I find most useful:

1. The importance of hiring good people and placing them in the right jobs. This point was raised again and again in the book, until it stuck in my head. Good people are fundamental to the organisations' outcomes and products. GE spent a significant amount of their time on its people, esp for the best - ranking them, putting them into the right roles, creating quality training facilities with significant investment. While I am not totally comfortable with the philosophy of removing the weakest all the time, I am quite convinced of the need to reward the best significantly.
2. Removing bureaucracy. In the ideal world, people are capable and take ownership for their work. As such, removing layers of bureaucracy would allow people to perform at their best as they would also be held fully accountable to those results. In particular, people closest to their work know it the best, and should be the ones making the decisions.
   
3. "Need to be hard in order to be soft". Jack states that making tough-minded decisions about people and projects is a pre-requisite to earning the right to talk about soft values. There has to be solid performance-based culture as the fundamental for the rest of the other issues to build on.
   
4. The 4 "E"s. Jack stated the following as traits of 'A' players: very high energy levels, ability to energise others around common goals, the edge to make tough yes or no decisions, and the ability to consistently execute and deliver on their promises.
5. Boundaryless. This is about creating a culture where innovation and ideas permeate freely around an organisation. GE promoted initiatives that facilitated the sharing of ideas.
   
6. Strategy has to be dynamic and anticipatory. Speaks for itself :)
7. Deep dives. Jack would get different teams to sit down and take ideas (concerning their departments) apart, in sessions known as deep dives. This seems like a useful thing to do, and one of my old bosses used to do it. It really does harness the intellectual capacity of all the talent on your team, and is a good tool for spotting new opportunities.