Anthony Panozzo's Blog

Title: How to Win Friends and Influence People Authors: Dale Carnegie Published: 1990 Length: 304 pages

Of the books that I have read recently, this one seemed to be a contentious one. I discussed this book with a friend who is in sales, and we came to completely different conclusions on the book's premise. His idea was that the book contained a bunch of ways to manipulate people to get what you want, whereas I felt like the book provided methods to better understand, empathize, and work with people.

Throughout, Carnegie displays quite a bit of humor and wit, and gives memorable anecdotes to drive the points he makes home. Some things are trite on the outside, but they are quite useful once internalized. Here are some of the major points.

In a comment on my last post, Matt asked several exceedingly thought-provoking questions. I was going to respond there, but I had too many thoughts for a single comment. I had to take off my hat because I was getting too warm while thinking about this…

Ah, but what to pick, Mr. Panozzo? The road less taken? The thing that you love? The thing that really could work? The thing you can make a living at? The thing you're rather disinclined toward but you're good at and know will have the greatest impact?

Knowing you can pick a couple, sure, but you yourself admitted to 500 possibilities. Maybe one of each, or something that answers more than one question?

What'd you pick?

These deeply resonated with me, as I have thought along similar lines. As an example, in October in some personal notes I wrote the question "What is the highest good man can accomplish?" It seems like some of the questions were along these lines, asking what is the best or highest thing that one can aim for. Can you make the best impact doing something that you are especially predisposed to do, or something that you really just want to do?

As far as "what'd you pick", I'm not sure if this should expand to "what would you pick" or "what did you pick." Either way, haven't quite gotten there yet. :) I'm still exploring these questions myself. With that said, I don't have answers, but here are some thoughts.

Viewing the questions and possible answers through the lens of existentialism applies almost perfectly here. There is the knowledge that you have limited time and that ideas cannot be implemented without using some of it. There is uncertainty in the value of a decision. What will it will be worth to you, and what will it be worth to other people? What are your weights for these values? There is angst because you realize that you are absolutely free to choose.

Recently I've noticed an interesting phenomenon. Someone starts talking about a new idea or group or practice or strategy or improvement, and someone else says, "hey, I thought of that six months ago, but no one seemed to think that it was a good idea."

In the past I read about the value of something being a function of the quality of the idea and the quality of execution. This makes a lot of sense to me. You can have the greatest idea in the whole world, but without effort and execution, there is no value. Even a medium quality idea done moderately well is useful.

I have about five hundred ideas right now. Some of them are pretty good, some are a little questionable, some old, some recent. Unfortunately, I am currently making $0.00 (that exchanges to 0.00 Euros) off of those ideas. That's $0.00 worth of value that has been created by these written down ideas. They certainly give me a sense of excitement when I look at them, so I guess they're worth something. I look back in fond admiration, and still think they're pretty good. Hmm… maybe I'm attached. :)

Mike Kelly posted to the IWST news group about two upcoming group meetings that are taking place in Indianapolis. I listed them in order of perceived relevance. The first one is free, and is a day long, similar to the excellent IWST that I attended in September. The second one is not free, and lasts two three days. The first one seems particularly useful, although the second might be as well.

I've edited liberally, so here goes…

Workshop on Regulated Software Testing

May 15, 2009

Title: The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives Authors: Leonard Mlodinow Published: May 2008 Length: 272 pages

After taking two quarters of statistics and two of probability, I wasn't sure that I would learn much by reading The Drunkard's Walk. Fortunately, the history of the evolution of thought regarding chance and the ramifications of randomness on everyday life were explained to the point where I gained new insights into this area. It reinforced and clarified existing views that I had as well.

The most important point that was made is that there are a large class of things that humans typically see as being based on skill but are more likely based a great deal on luck. While CEOs and Hollywood film producers are paid top dollar for their skills, there seems to be little correlation with actual skill for their positions. Many events that involve human decision are unpredictable to the point that they can be considered random. I enjoyed the discussion of reversion to the mean presented throughout the book. Essentially, we tend to praise someone and see them as smart or skilled when they succeed, and then tend to disparage the same person when they do not appear to succeed. Mlodinow explains that our approval or disapproval often has little to do with someone's next attempt because often the performance in the event is somewhat random. When I yell at someone, it is likely that they will do better than before. When I praise someone, it is likely that they will do poorer than before. Likewise, a mutual fund manager is likely to be lauded when she does well, and given the boot when she does poorly, even though picking stocks is a mostly random process.