Fixed vs. growth mindset: Examining Roger Federer

Roger Federer lost to Tsonga in yesterday's Roger's tennis cup final. As always, his critics have been quick to write him off, yet again. Why not quit while at the top, and leave in the blaze of glory? Why put yourself and your fans through those humiliating moments, when your strokes are a shadow of your hey days, and when younger and gutsier players beat you regularly?  But then, that's not how Federer thinks about tennis.

Carol Dweck in her book "Mindset", talks about the difference between the fixed mindset and the growth mindset, and the importance of the latter for sustained success. Those with a fixed mindset consider ability as static, and judge themselves and others by "results" or peak performance. Therefore, they avoid challenges which may tarnish their impeccable performance record, get defensive when faced with obstacles, don't believe that effort can enhance their already considerable talents, cannot handle negative feedback and feel threatened by the success of others.

Those with a growth mindset on the other hand, believe that ability can be developed, constantly embrace challenges, persist in the face of setbacks, see effort as a condition to mastery, learn from criticism and from the success of others, and thus reach ever-higher levels of achievement (Mindset, by Carol Dweck, page 245).  Dweck makes an important and interesting distinction between leaders with a fixed mindset and a growth mindset. The fixed mindset leaders may be high individual performers and stars, but do not prepare their firms to survive in their absence. Here is where the mighty Iacocca fails; Chrysler didn't survive after his departure, while it can be argued that Apple continues to buzz away, albeit in a lower key, even after Steve Jobs' passing.   

Back to Roger Federer. It is evident that he does not have to prove anything to anyone but himself. Why does he continue with his grueling tour and training schedule despite his ever growing family? What motivates him despite not winning a major since 2012? His  love for the game has to be the top reason, but how does he cope with not winning titles, and near misses, after his undisputed reign at the top for many years?

Federer definitely is a supreme example of a growth mindset. He is no fool to continue playing while his skills are waning across the board. As the grand old man of tennis at thirty three - an age when improving one's game seems improbable,- Federer's serve has actually improved and is the strength of his game today. He continues to train with his long term  physio-whiz, Paganini, who is angered at the talk of people wanting Federer to quit, because he knows Federer is still capable of a shot at the big titles. One mustn't forget that he is still the number three in the world.  Admittedly, even the unflappable Federer has gone through some -coming to terms- moments of being defensive, or even worse -crying- when he loses. But thankfully the growth mindset has truly established its presence now. No doubt winning titles is his ultimate goal, but not the only goal.

Using Dweck's criteria of a true growth minded leader, will Federer leave tennis a better place than it was since his arrival? The answer is a resounding YES. His seventeen grand slam titles don't seem so out of reach now for Nadal, or even Djokovic. But Federer, as even his rivals admit, has raised tennis to new heights, not just with his sublime talent, but with his global appeal, approachability and above all his growth mindset work ethic: an inspiration to all aspiring players. As his coach the great Stefan Edberg remarks "If Roger is in the game, it is great for tennis".

Another great man with an insatiable growth mindset -Tiger Woods- is now lying low, undoubtedly  working hard on recouping his physical and mental prowess. His detractors too have already written him off as incapable of winning another major, but sooner than later Tiger is bound to prove his critics wrong. 

The growth mind set is after all about running the marathon rather than the sprint.  

 

The importance of being a role model outside work

 While we stress the importance of leaders being role models at work with their work ethic, integrity, and compassion, we hardly pay attention to their influence outside the workplace. Perhaps we should. Thanks to the media, the symbols of wealth are now universal: expensive cars, clothes, holidays in exotic locations, and palatial homes. The continuing popularity of the bizzare Housewives series indicates our almost morbid interest in the lifestyles of the rich and famous. Who can resist the guilty pleasure of skimming through the Daily Mail's side strip chronicling the decadent lifestyles of celebrities, often relayed by the celebrities themselves through Instagram?  Unfortunately, slowly but surely,  the relentless media focus on the opulent lifestyles of the rich has skewed our perception -as a society- about what is valuable in life, and what it means to be successful.

In his engaging book "Delivering Happiness", Tony Hsieh of Zappos, talks about walking away from a contract with Microsoft resulting in a loss of 16 million out of a total of 40 million, because passion was more important than money. We may scoff that 24 million is not small change, but even these little examples add up to shift societal perceptions about wealth and the wealthy. There is no doubt that Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have strengthened the giving muscle in many of their peers globally, including those who have signed up for the remarkable Giving Pledge ,where billionaires pledge to give away most of their wealth.  When rich CEOs talk about not wanting their kids to be trust fund kids, they send implicit signals to others about the priority of values like hard work in success. Arguably, the most credible voice against inequality, in the documentary "Inequality for all," was that of  Nick Hanauer, CEO of Pacific Feather Company - because here was a wealthy man speaking out against inequality.    


 India's visionary and multi- millionaire businessman, Narayan Murthy, is known for his simple lifestyle. When a journalist expressed surprise at  Murthy's modest lodgings, Murthy responded by stating his belief that the rich should have modest private spaces, but build luxurious public spaces. Murthy's Infosys offices are a class apart in the amenities they provide. In a developing and populous country like India, where public spaces are often sub-standard, Murthy's credo is  inspiring. Compare this to another leading industrialist, Mukesh Ambani, whose  house is the tallest,  and perhaps -ugliest- structure in Mumbai. Even Ratan Tata, one of India's most venerable leaders, couldn't help questioning the appropriateness of Ambani's 27 storied house - which stands out like a sore thumb amongst the sprawling slums of Mumbai.  

A recent article about the super -shy, super-rich of Germany, illustrates the influence that modesty from the rich can have on shaping societal perceptions, and trends towards the loftier values in life. While leaders are free to decide how to spend their hard earned wealth, they should be conscious of their influence - positive and  negative - on public perceptions about wealth and success.     





Infosys' Pune office



Murthy at lunch with wife Sudha

 



What is success? The journey or the destination?

The Uluru/Ayers rock at sunset

I thought about this question during my recent visit to the Uluru/Ayers Rock; one of Australia's most recognizable symbols. The majestic Uluru is a natural sandstone rock formation dating over 500 million years, in Central Australia. Along with the neighboring Kata Tjuta rock formation, it is called the spiritual center of Australia, because of its spiritual significance to the aboriginal Anangu people who own the land, and still live in the area. The National park; a World Heritage site,  has been leased by the Australian Government, and is run with the active participation of the Anangu people.


The Uluru; while magnificent from afar during sunset and sunrise, when it gradually changes colors from a bright red to brown; is just breathtaking up close. The massive reddish brown 348 m high rock with a base of around 9.4 km, is awe inspiring, but in a quiet way. You feel in the presence of a gentle, wise giant, who has seen it all from a vantage point. It is not difficult to imagine why the Uluru holds immense spiritual significance for the Anangu people.

One of the contentious issues between the Anangu people and the Australian government is about allowing tourists to climb the rock. The Anangu consider the Uluru sacred, and not to be climbed; while the Australian government, citing historical accounts of explorers climbing the rock, is reluctant to put a stop to it because of the potential for tourism. Our guide encouraged us not to climb, and none of our group did. But people still climb, and often leave trash behind, and even defecate on the rock (although out of necessity rather than disrespect). The majestic beauty of Uluru is marred by the railing of the climbing track, and parts around the climbing track were visibly eroded. In fact, sadly, the Uluru is still advertised as a climbing trip in countries like Japan.

Sign in front of the Uluru

 

The Uluru offers immense peace, awe and joy all at once; but only if you let yourself be still to take it all in. Just walking along its expansive folds is a moving experience.   Aristotle lists "magnificence" as one of the desirable human virtues. Indeed the Uluru inspires you think big, and be magnificent. But why do people still climb the Uluru, despite being encouraged against it because of its spiritual significance? Is it just the refusal to believe in mythology, or is it due to an innate sense of equating success with reaching the pinnacle? The sign in front of the climbing track (see picture on the right) encourages tourists to think differently: is Uluru is a place to conquer or to connect with?

This is similar to the question discussed in the classic case of the "parable of a sadhu" where a group of mountaineers from the West, impatient to climb their peak in the Himalayas, are reluctant to help a dying sadhu they encounter on the way. Each group does the bare minimum,  and continue to climb after passing on the sadhu to other groups. The author, and one of the non- helpful climbers, Bowen McCoy, is wrought with guilt after, not knowing whether the sadhu lived or died. This leads him to question whether his trip was all about reaching the top, or whether it could have been about his experiences during the trip? His later visit when he spent time with the locals was more rewarding and enriching.       

The example of Uluru parallels our perception about success in the real world. Is it really about making as much money as possible, or it is also about the relationships, the experiences and the things we create along the way? As Steve Jobs rightly, and perhaps prophetically, pointed out - creating something wonderful was more important to him than being the richest man in the grave. Thankfully some shouts about the need to shift the focus from money to well-being, are now being heard above the din. 

Hopefully, the debate at the tranquil Uluru will be a settled soon, and it will be a place to be experienced by being, instead of conquering.   

The Uluru at sunrise

The importance of nurture for creativity

In his new book "Focus", Daniel Goleman offers ample evidence for the importance of nurture - as envisioned in this blog- , especially for creativity. He rightly points out that today, when information is no longer a scarce resource, organizing it in unique and creative ways will give one the edge.  Goleman discusses the importance of serendipitous associations and novel combinations in creativity. These arise when our brains are in that sweet spot of  "open awareness": free to wander, but also involuntarily under our control where the connections among our existing knowledge is being tapped into. In some ways this is similar to the state of "flow". For example, sportsmen often attribute their success to their being in the - zone. This is a state when they are fully focused on the opponent, and yet are unconsciously and effortlessly drawing upon the skills and knowledge  acquired over their years of practice, to come up with creative ways to beat their opponent and match their every move.

The ability of our brain to be in a state of open awareness diminishes both when we are hyper focused or hyper distracted . Information overload creates mental fatigue, because of the effort needed to focus amidst the din, and also due to the distractions of our environment even when we are not engaged in a specific task. The brain therefore needs rest to rejuvenate. Here again there is a difference between "switching off" by watching a TV show and immersing ourselves fully in something enjoyable. The former is disengagement, and is just the first step in rejuvenation. Drawing from Stephen Kaplan's "attention restoration theory", Goleman discusses why a walk in a park is more rejuvenating than a walk in a busy street - we still need to focus to navigate our way through the streets.

This immersive experience - positive absorption- where we are focused yet passive, allows the top down system of our brain; the one most involved in focus and problem solving, to rejuvenate. Creating protected periods of time -creative cocoons- is essential for creativity.
     

Taking the bite out of leadership: Suarez's $120 m sale to Barcelona

Suarez and his bite victim Chielini

Just weeks after FIFA's bold move imposing a comprehensive four month ban on Uruguayan football star, Suarez , for his biting incident; he has been traded to FC Barcelona for a whopping $120m. And this is just the transfer fee. His current team Liverpool apparently let him go with a heavy heart, while Suarez himself apologized to his Liverpool fans, citing family reasons for shifting to Spain.  As the NYT noted, this is a not a story that should be used to inspire aspiring footballers. As usual, media reports have adopted views across the board. Some headlines suggest that Liverpool finally let him go because of the biting incident, while others suggest that Liverpool has lost Suarez after all. Predictably, none of the concerned parties mentioned the elephant in the room - the ban which prevents Suarez from even entering stadiums to practice, until October.  

What kind of a message does this sale send? Sports after all is more than just performance. It is about courage, fairplay and passion. What lessons can the public, especially children learn from this incident? That you can get away with almost anything as long as you "perform" ?  The FIFA has been reduced to a governing body whose actions do not have any effect beyond the letter of the law. What is the point of a four month ban when it is likely that, Barcelona's prize catch will be "presented" to the fans the very next day after the ban ends?   

Sadly, sports is another business, and money trumps. Short term tangible gains in ticket sales overshadow the long term gains of reputation and the ability to create a positive change through the sport. In my previous post a couple of days ago I mentioned how lucky tennis fans are to have  worthwhile role models at the top, who are true global ambassadors for the sport. David Beckham's global appeal is also because he comes across as a nice and approachable bloke; rather than just his achievements and good looks. Messi's almost prophet like appeal lies in his quiet passion and humility. Suarez can never dream of that kind of appeal; he will always be remembered for his boorishness, regardless of his achievements. Remember Zidane whom we remember more for his infamous head-butt than for his stellar play?    

Everyone, including Suarez deserves a second chance, except that this will be his fourth. Let's hope that FC Barcelona will have the courage to adopt a zero tolerance policy for future offences by Suarez. It owes it to sports.  

Rev John Flyn: The Australian outback's visionary

The Royal Flying Doctor's museum in Alice Springs

Even today the Australian outback is one of the remotest places in Australia. I did not see a single soul or sign of human activity during my day long journey by the Ghan train from Darwin; the capital of the Northern territory, to Alice Springs; the heart of the outback. It was just vast stretches of arid red land and desert vegetation - beautiful to the eye, but arduous for those living there.

An unexpectedly inspiring stop in the charming  town of Alice Springs is the Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia museum. Its founder, Rev John Flyn, began his missionary work in the Australian inland after World War 1, and soon realized the extreme isolation of the people living there, especially in terms of medical care. Only two doctors served the whole of the northern territory (almost 1,5000,000 sq. km). Any serious illness meant death because of the lack of timely access to medical care. Flyn understood that communication and aviation were key in reducing the people's isolation, but both were in their infancy in the early 1900s.

Flyn first made his case by publishing an article written by a young medical student, Clifford Peel, who was killed in WW1. Peel argued that air transport, especially for ambulance work, was crucial for the outback. Peel's letter became the foundation for Flyn's relentless campaign for an aviation based medical emergency service for the area. Luck is opportunity meeting preparation, and Flyn had two fortuitous instances. The first was a generous fund provided by his long time supporter, H.V Mckay; the second was the support from Hudson Fysh, the founder of QANTAS. The first flying doctor flight finally became a reality in 1928.

Prototype of the interior of the Flying Doctor's plane

The final crucial link: communication, was provided by Alfred Traeger, with his pedal operated generator to power a radio receiver; the pedal ensured that the operators hands were free. People could now call in for emergencies. Later transistor radios allowed doctors to consult with their patients in remote areas. 

While the flying doctor service in itself was a monumental achievement, Flyn wanted to ensure that the medical care provided was of the highest quality. He enlisted the support of trained nurses, and Sister Lucy Garlick, came up with the innovative body chart where the different parts of the body are numbered, making it easy for the patient to convey their symptoms. A standardized medical chest with numbered medicines was also created for patients to begin treatment before the doctor arrived. The former prime minister of Australia, Robert Menzies, called the Royal Flying Doctor's service "the greatest single contribution to the effective settlement of the distant back country we have seen in out time."  

Today the accessibility of the outback to medical care is much improved, but the Flying Doctor services continues to play an important role in the area by providing regular clinics for the people of the outback, in addition to its emergency services. It has also expanded its activities beyond the outback with most of its revenues today coming from transferring patients between hospitals in cities. But the pioneering work of John Flyn continues to be inspirational. His vision, however improbable at that time, was clear, and born out of deep love for his people. This enabled him to persevere through the technological and financial challenges - it took more than ten years for his vision to be realized. Rev John Flyn's story set against the backdrop of the vast and isolated outback is a reminder of the power of ideas and determination.
  

Flyn commemorated in the Australian 20 dollar note. The body chart is also visible here.

Queen Elizabeth using the Flying Doctor's radio services to address people in remote areas during her 1963 visit

Is aggression more appealing than being nice?

The recent strangers slapping each other video has gone viral with over seven million hits (no pun intended) on the heels of  its predecessor: the strangers kissing video. Director of both films, Max Landis, calls his slap video a social experiment, and argues that violence without aggression is like a hug. I am  not sure they are mutually exclusive except on film. But is aggression more appealing than being nice? Leaders often struggle with this question. Should they be feared or liked? Perhaps, the sporting world can shed some light on this topic.

Federer and  Nadal off court

Tennis fans will agree that we are living in  exciting times, when at least two contenders for the greatest ever of all time (GOAT) title - Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal - are playing at the same time. Both are fiercely competitive on court, but supremely courteous off it. Even their rabid fans have now cooled off against each other after seeing their heroes' congeniality. Other contemporary top tennis players like Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray are also equally cordial. Djokovic's -in your face- family are now conspicuous by their absence from their box. Compare this with the hey days of Borg, McEnroe and Jimmy Connors when there was no love lost among them on or off court. Or even more recently when the bad blood  that continues to exist between Agassi and Sampras, was revealed most embarrassingly in a goodwill match, as Federer and Nadal watched uncomfortably.

Naysayers call the current crop of top tennis players boring without the aggression and drama among  them. The press tries to blow up even the slightest hint of disagreement among them to epic proportions. Thankfully, the players have realized that the others may be quoted out of context, and are rarely provoked. Roger Federer, off court  is the epitome of class and etiquette, while Nadal is humility personified. There are no tantrums or airs. Quite the contrast from star athletes of the past who seemed unapproachable. So how do the fans react to these humble, down to earth champions? Arguably, never before have tennis champions had global appeal. Federer could rouse the Colombian crowds like an orchestra conductor, and even a very poor Federer look alike could get the Chinese fans falling all over him for autographs. Both players endorse global brands, and are global ambassadors of their sport. 

Recent research by Adam Grant also indicates the value on being nice in organizations. Being nice does not mean finishing last. It is going to be a challenge to wipe out years of drumming down of the  Ninja warrior approach to leadership, but the change is happening. As business goes global, a leader's reputation precedes them. People trust those they like. But ultimately it's about being true to one's nature. The point being that, being nice need not be swept under the carpet any longer, and can be flouted as a rare skill instead.