When we first met more than five years ago, our conversation returned again and again to the disaggregation of the world's social and economic structures and the effect this volatility was having on organizations and people. That conversation, and the many that followed, were spirited, invigorating—and revelatory. We realized a few important things, which led us to create Potentialife and write this book:

• Today's disaggregated world creates space and offers individuals new opportunities and challenges: In an era in which people increasingly move from gig to gig, rather than job to job, leadership behaviors enable them to find and cultivate experiences that will allow them to grow and flourish. With the lifelong loyalties of the gold watch era on the wane, everyone must be an opportunity seeker. While this may seem like a lamentable development for organizations that want to retain talent, it clarifies a simple truth: Opportunities for flourishing and influence—for the joy of leadership—within the organization must be more attractive than those outside it.
• Our interactions have repeatedly shown the feeling of being happy and fulfilled and the ability to lead—to inspire others and make a meaningful difference—to be so strongly associated as to be virtually inseparable. Whether an organization's people are happy, capable, and energized is far more important to a company's success than the logic of its organizational chart or the discipline of its lines of authority. An organization full of passionate people, full of purpose, is a leadership organization, focused squarely on fulfilling its mission and achieving its goals. The losing organizations of the future will be those that dismiss this idea and try to reimpose the old order, seeking control, alignment, and compliance—which will inevitably suffocate the opportunities for expression and innovation the disaggregated world has created.
• Because leadership behaviors are a significant driver of productivity and performance, both personally and in teamwork, and because the old hierarchical structures are eroding, leadership is no longer a trait that stops being important at the level of middle management. For an organization to succeed, it's likely that most, if not all, of its people are going to have to lead at some point.
• The reason the joy of leadership is elusive to so many in the disaggregated world is that we're often stuck in the past. Many of us share outdated or simply wrong ideas, both about what makes an effective leader and about what makes people happy. We've discovered that before it's possible to develop a clear understanding of what our two fields of expertise—joy and leadership—are, it is imperative to explain clearly what they aren't. Before we can help people learn and grow as leaders, it's important to clear their minds of a few enduring myths.

MYTH: Good Leaders Focus on Eliminating or Overcoming Their Weaknesses

We've all been through the progress report, or performance review, in which the teacher or manager sits us down and gives us the list of things we need to improve, as if this were the most important takeaway. The traditional thinking is that people progress in life, and in their careers, by working on these weaknesses and making constant improvement.

Our own observations over the years coupled with a growing body of research suggests otherwise: Although no one should ignore his or her weaknesses, because energy is a limited resource, it's unwise and counterproductive to focus too much of that energy on remediating deficiencies. To do so is to put yourself in a hole that you may have trouble climbing out of.

Peter Drucker was among the most prominent thought leaders to turn away from the idea that the best way to grow is to shore up your weaknesses. “One cannot build performance on weaknesses, let alone something one cannot do at all,” he wrote in his classic book chapter, “Managing Oneself.” “Only when you operate from strengths can you achieve true excellence.”¹

Plenty of behavioral research and surveys back up the idea that people perform better when they focus on the things they're good at and enjoy doing: They're more creative, flexible, and adaptable.² They're more confident, more satisfied, and find more meaning in their work.^3,4 They grow and develop more quickly. A 2009 Gallup poll of more than 1,000 U.S. employees found that they felt far more engaged in their work when they used their strengths to achieve outcomes. Overall they are happier, have more energy, and feel healthier. And managers who focus on the strengths of team members experience better team performance and greater overall success.⁵

With these facts in mind, we developed a 10X leadership program that will help people and organizations create tasks and roles that match the strengths of individuals, rather than try to repair individual weaknesses to fit the defined tasks and roles of the organization.

MYTH: People Are Happiest and Most Productive When They Eliminate Stress from Their Lives

We all think we know what it means to say we feel stressed out, but it took scientists a while to find a decent explanation of what stress is, and to measure its affects on the mind and body. Endocrinologist Hans Selye was the first to offer a definition: stress was a “nonspecific” response of the body “to any demand placed on it.” Our definition has evolved somewhat; we now think of stress as a demand that exceeds the body's natural regulatory capacity, and we know that its effects are, in fact, pretty specific and involve changes in neurochemistry that stimulate certain abilities and processes.

Stress is, simply put, the body's response to a challenge. Acute stress is often thought of as triggering the fight‐or‐flight response, in which the body adapts as if to confront a threat: The pulse and respiration rate increase; fat and oxygen are released into the bloodstream to fuel a sudden burst of activity; pupils and blood vessels dilate, and the person experiences tunnel vision. This is the first in a three‐stage model Selye developed that he called general adaptation syndrome. The last stage of the model, Selye said, could be one of two things: recovery, in which the body's compensations have allowed an organism to overcome a threat, or exhaustion, in which the body's resources are depleted in the continued presence of the threat.

Perhaps less well‐known are the studies demonstrating that short‐lived bursts of moderate stress can have a salutary effect on the mind and body. The purpose of our fight‐or‐flight response, after all, is to protect us. In 1975 Selye introduced a model dividing stress into eustress—stress that enhances mental and physical functions—and distress, which can lead to anxiety, withdrawal, or other disorders.

American folklore is rife with tales—many actually well documented—of “hysterical strength,” in which people in sudden emergencies experience surges of fight‐or‐flight hormones and, in bursts of superhuman strength, are able to lift heavy objects, such as automobiles. Nobody would argue that such experiences are good for a person's health, but research shows that short‐term, low‐level stressors can stimulate the production of brain chemicals—and even new brain cells⁶—that can boost productivity and concentration, increase the body's immune response,⁷ motivate people to succeed, and make people more resilient over the long term.⁸

In addition, several decades' worth of research points to well‐documented strategies for moderating stress with recovery and keeping it within the beneficial range: the cultivation of positive outlook and self‐confidence,^9,10,11,12 social support,^13,14,15 rest and physical activity,^16,17 and meditation or mindfulness training.^18,19,20,21

We believe in the power of moderate stress punctuated with periods of recovery. The 10X approach helps people and organizations develop long‐term strategies to channel stress into energy and inspiration.

MYTH: Peak Experiences Are Necessarily Rare, a Product of Special and Extraordinary Events

Abraham Maslow introduced the term peak‐experience as an umbrella term “for the best moments of the human being, for the happiest moments of life, for experiences of ecstasy, rapture, bliss, of the greatest joy.”²² When people are asked when they last enjoyed a peak experience, they often refer to a time when they were deeply moved by a work of art, experienced absolute unity with their lover, or were struck by a creative idea with profound personal or professional implications. Some (not all) women describe natural childbirth as a peak experience, and some describe reaching a significant personal milestone. For most people these are rare, extraordinary moments. And yet, Maslow believed that, especially for self‐actualized individuals, these moments could happen in the midst of ordinary surroundings— while waiting for the train, making dinner for the family, or working in an office, for example—which is exactly what we find in 10X leaders. These leaders experience numerous peak experiences, often for prolonged periods, and sometimes daily.

Just as 10X leaders can create and sustain peak experiences, so can you. Research on peak experience demonstrates that we can create these experiences and enjoy them more frequently in our daily lives. One of many to study the idea of peak experience is the psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, who came up with the concept of flow, a mental state of effortless concentration in which a person works toward a clear goal. During this “optimal experience,” as he called it in his groundbreaking 1990 book, Flow, people feel “strong, alert, in effortless control, unselfconscious, and at the peak of their abilities.”

The peak experience is achievable, Csikszentmihalyi says, “when we act freely, for the sake of the action itself rather than for ulterior motives.” He writes that “When we choose a goal and invest ourselves in it to the limits of concentration, whatever we do will be enjoyable. And once we have tasted this joy, we will redouble our efforts to taste it again. This is the way the self grows.”²³

We help produce 10X leaders by showing them how to taste this joy—how to step back, breathe, simplify, and increase the likelihood that they'll perform at the height of their powers. Not just on rare occasions, but day in and day out.

MYTH: The Most Important Tools for a Good Leader Are Power and Control

As we pointed out earlier, the institutional basis for authority has weakened at many organizations, as the command‐and‐control style of decision‐making has proved too slow and inflexible for today's world.

A person who uses power and control to manipulate underlings is pushing people, not leading them. A growing body of organizational research indicates that this style of leadership often becomes destructive for organizations—organizational psychologist Bennett J. Tepper at The Ohio State University, in 2007, estimated that abusive supervision was costing U.S. companies about $23.8 billion annually.²⁴ Other researchers have pointed out autocratic leadership's direct effects on work performance indicators, such as absenteeism and turnover, and even on subtle undermining or resistance behaviors.²⁵

Many researchers, in turn, have documented the effects of destructive leadership on individual workers: It increases stress, job dissatisfaction, and exhaustion²⁶ and even harms employees' family relationships when they bring this unhappiness home.²⁷

On the other hand, the benefits of leadership models that involve greater interaction and rely on the strength of relationships—democratic leadership, authentic leadership, ethical leadership, and transformational leadership, for example—have been well substantiated.

These benefits are obvious everywhere you look in today's world. On June 1, 2010, a year before his death, Apple CEO Steve Jobs appeared for an onstage interview at the D: All Things Digital conference in Rancho Palos Verdes, California, and claimed his multinational technology company was organized like a start‐up. He and his employees spent hours each day just talking, developing ideas, and solving problems. “We have wonderful arguments,” he said. “If you want to hire great people and have them stay working for you, you have to let them make a lot of decisions and you have to be run by ideas, not hierarchy. The best ideas have to win, otherwise good people don't stay.”²⁸

A 10X leader encourages great people to present the best ideas, and our program helps people cultivate these kinds of stimulating, healthy, productive relationships.

MYTH: The Key to Fulfillment Lies in Seeking and Finding the Meaning of Life

Finding the meaning of life suggests that we spend a great deal of time and effort looking for that thing that will fulfill us, the ultimate goal and purpose. In the context of the workplace, it is about finding our dream job. And once we find the dream job, we have arrived—we can live happily ever after.

When American psychologist Julian Rotter developed the concept locus of control in 1954, he differentiated between people who had an internal or external locus (Latin for place or location): A person with an internal locus believes she's in control of her own life. A person with an external locus believes his life and decisions are controlled by chance, luck, or environmental factors over which he has no influence.

If you're waiting for an employer to design the dream job that will supply you with meaning and purpose, and to somehow connect you with that job, you've conceived the external locus for yourself. And you might be waiting a long time.

Approaching your work with an internal locus, on the other hand, means you're actively engaged in supplying meaning and purpose for yourself—you're seeking and discovering, rather than waiting. The difference between these two approaches is stark enough that it has the potential to completely transform lives and careers.

It's an important revelation: It's usually not about the job. It's about you.

It's not always easy to find what we call the why of work: Why am I getting out of bed to do this? It's not always easy to find meaning and purpose, particularly in entry‐level jobs or rote tasks. But most tasks contribute in some way to a grander objective that serves people in a significant way. A 10X leader is able to shape her work experience in a way that allows her, at the end of the day, to think, I was meant to do this, more often than simply shrug and think, It pays the rent.

In her work, Dr. Amy Wrzesniewski, an associate professor of organizational behavior at Yale University's School of Management and lead author of a 1997 study, describes this difference in outlook as the difference between seeing work as a job and seeing it as a calling. People who see their work as a calling work harder and longer, simply because they view their work as rewarding.²⁹ It's an approach rooted in the idea of cognitive reframing, the psychological technique of identifying our negative perceptions of ideas and events and recasting them in a positive light that opens the door to better experiences and well‐being.

Wrzesniewski is among a number of organizational researchers investigating the possibilities for, and consequences of, an approach called job crafting, in which employers and employees work together to design work that's meaningful and purposeful.

Research shows that approaches such as job crafting—discovering and pursuing a greater sense of meaning and purpose in work—can improve performance, strengthen the bond between a person and an organization, and give workers a greater sense of satisfaction and well‐being.³⁰ Our 10X approach is designed to help people actively discover meaning in their work, and commit themselves to a more purposeful life.

MYTH: Achievement and Success Lead to Happiness and Fulfillment

When he was teaching a course on positive psychology at Harvard, Tal conducted an informal study among his students: He asked them whether they were somewhere between happy and ecstatic on the day they received their acceptance letters from Harvard. Most students responded with an enthusiastic yes.

Tal then asked the students whether they believed, when they received their acceptance letters, that they would now be happy—or at the very least, much happier than they had been until that moment—for the rest of their lives. Again, most students answered that they did. After all, for most of them, getting into Harvard had been a dream come true. They might not have enjoyed school up to that point—the constant pressure to excel, to be elected to leadership positions in school government or clubs, and to make a varsity sports team—but it had all been in service to a cause that would presumably ensure a lifetime of achievement (and consequently, happiness). They were told, and truly believed, that getting into a top university would set them up for life, and that once this goal was achieved, their stress and struggles would disappear.

Tal's final question to the students was whether they were happy today. Most students said no. They'd failed to predict the impact of their success, as many of us do.

In his 2006 best seller Stumbling on Happiness, Harvard social psychologist Daniel Gilbert reveals the systemic misperceptions people have when imagining a future state of happiness. In his research, he asked assistant professors who were being evaluated for tenure how they would feel when they found out whether they'd received it. Not surprisingly, the professors predicted they would be significantly happier if they got tenure. But in follow‐up surveys conducted six months after the tenure decision, there wasn't any difference in reported happiness among those who had and hadn't received tenure—both groups had readjusted their expectations for the future and reverted to their original levels of happiness.³¹ Gilbert's conclusion from this and other studies was that successes and failures lead to temporary, rather than permanent, shifts in our levels of well‐being.

Research such as this, as well as most of our observations, interactions, and personal experiences, have confirmed the idea that the common perception—Success (the cause) leads to happiness (the effect)—is in fact a misperception. In fact, the relationship is the other way around: Happiness (a cause) leads to success (an effect). Psychologists Sonja Lyubomirsky, Laura King, Ed Diener, and many others have consistently demonstrated how happiness leads to better relationships, better marriages, higher income, better performance, higher levels of resilience, and better physical and mental health.³²

This isn't a new idea—it's everywhere in the writings and teachings of Eastern and Western thinkers alike. The Vietnamese Buddhist monk, scholar, and peace activist Thich Nhat Hanh, who travels the world teaching what he calls “the art of mindful living,” has distilled it for us: “There is no way to happiness,” he says. “Happiness is the way.”

You might be thinking: Fine. But what if I don't know the way? The good news is that science says you can find a way. “Happiness,” says Daniel Gilbert, “can be synthesized.” Investigators such as Gilbert and Lyubomirsky, have shown us how it's possible—and shown that it's really not that complicated, unless we continue to insist on making it so.³³ In her book The How of Happiness, Lyubomirsky establishes that fully 40 percent of a person's level of what we call happiness is determined not by genes or by circumstances, but by the choices he or she makes.³⁴

The 10X leader lives knowing that the discovery of fulfillment and happiness is the path to success—and throughout the rest of this book, we offer discrete strategies for finding and staying on that path.

Becoming SHARP

“If we want to know how fast a human being can run, then it is no use to average out the speed of a ‘good sample’ of the population; it is far better to collect Olympic gold medal winners and see how well they can do. If we want to know the possibilities for spiritual growth, value growth, or moral development in human beings, then I maintain that we can learn most by studying our most moral, ethical, or saintly people.”

—Abraham Maslow³⁵

We began the design of our 10X leadership approach by examining each of the above myths in turn and doing some reframing of our own: If these ideas were provably wrong, what was the right way to become an effective leader? How do we boost happiness, and consequently success?

We turned our attention to how the most fulfilled and successful people have done it. Instead of looking at the average, as most research does, we took a page from Maslow's book and looked at the Olympic‐level performers in leadership, and over time we discovered the differentiators that make 10X leaders and organizations stand out.

If you look closer at the myths listed in this chapter, you'll notice each of the first five reveals a misperception related to one of the performance multipliers—strengths, health, absorption, relationships, and purpose—we focus on in our leadership program. Thus, out of a study of what most people get wrong about leadership and success, and what a handful get right, that the strengths, health, absorption, relationships, and purpose (SHARP) framework was born.

SHARP synthesizes the science, and reveals the seeming magic, behind the productivity, well‐being, and ultimate success of 10X leaders. In the chapters that follow, we'll revisit each of the myths in this chapter as we show how understanding and implementing SHARP can help realize the potential for flourishing that exists within each of us.

Our examination of the sixth and final myth in this chapter, about the relationship between achievement and happiness, led us to what we view as the radical idea behind everything we do at Potentialife: The best way to lead, and to succeed, is to be happy—and not the other way around. We're about to show you both why this is and how you can prove it to yourself.