If you only understood …

When a writer begins the introduction to his book with those words, he is opening a door. He is indicating to the reader that he wants to help you understand ... something.

I don’t think I fully got that about Anthony F. Smith’s book titled The Taboos of Leadership the first time around. I wrote a Game Plan column about it a few months ago, mostly because he challenged my pre-conceived notions about work-life balance (see Balance, Wherefore Art Thou?). That piece received some strong response and I felt a second interview with Smith might give us a chance to drill down on that and more. As it turned out, “more” included a discussion on, well, humanity.

“In its arguably most transformative and revelatory capacity, [imagination] is the power that enables us to empathize with humans whose experiences we have never shared,” J.K. Rowling said in her commencement speech at Harvard last week.

Empathy for our fellow human beings is, in fact, at the center of Smith’s message as well. Co-founder and managing director of the Leadership Research Institute, Smith shares in his book what he has figured out about leadership taboos and, ultimately, why those insights transcend leaders.

“My life is not about CEOs or executive coaching, or just very senior, rich, powerful people,” Smith said. “I really did use that segment of the working world [in the book] because it makes a point. I could have written a book on movie stars. [They’re an] easy target just because of the perceived immunity to life’s challenges. Because [people’s perceptions are] if you’re a movie star and you make a billion dollars and you’re famous and everybody loves you and your picture is in the newspaper every other day, then life must be OK.”

Just as overweight people think skinny people have nothing to complain about. Or unattractive people think pretty people have it made. Or people who live here vs. there are better off. Or leaders of big corporations have perks up the arm but no problems. The list goes on. But when did it all get so black and white?

One e-mail response to my work-life balance column was sparked by this quote by Smith that expressed a bit of the CEO mindset – “I know I should spend time with my kids, but I made this choice to run this company.” The e-mailer asked, “Does that mean he didn't make the choice to have kids? It sounds so totally irresponsible to me ... If I were their kid, I would view them as stupid, childish, and out of touch.”

Smith frequently hears this kind of response and it is precisely the mindset he is addressing in the book and, actually, in his life’s work. He points to three reasons for it – projection, cognitive dissonance and ignorance.

“We tend to project our own beliefs, wants, needs, aspirations on others and it becomes kind of the overriding criteria which we judge and react to things based on who we are,” Smith said. “So if somebody believes that ‘the greatest thing I can ever do as a father is make sure I’m there for my kids 10 hours a day,’ then they’re going to use that lens in judging anybody who is a ‘father.’ It’s unnatural to go and look for something that’s going to challenge that. You look for things to reinforce your own world view.

“If it doesn’t reinforce it, you’re going to do one of two things. You’re just going to say it’s not even worthy of my response … or I need to challenge that this person is absolutely wrong. The last point as to why people react that way, it’s ignorance in the sense of zero empathy of really understanding what it may be like to be in that person’s shoes.”

Smith is big on what he calls “pure thinking” or being consistent. For instance, consider the above mindset with regard to what being a good father means. Now take it away from the context of a Fortune 500 CEO and apply it to the military.

“If you think it’s the father’s job that if you chose to have kids that you need to be there, then you can’t judge a CEO and say he is terrible,” Smith said, “unless you also take that to a 22-year-old soldier who just had a little baby and say, ‘how could you have ever joined the military knowing that you might have to leave your baby?’ It’s the circumstances and the context that somehow color our thinking. I want to honor the soldiers who go off and say ‘God bless you, you’re giving up something,’ but the same thing for business people.”

In another piece of e-mail feedback, the writer said, “At the end of our lives, when the eulogies are being read, it is rare for someone to recognize your life first as a great boss or great employee. Rather, it is the mark you leave as a person on those closest to you, typically your family.” Another person wrote off leaders’ professional drive as workaholism.

Hmmmmm. Well, perhaps there is another way to look at it. Maybe leaders – and some of us who just love our work – aren’t hoping to be recognized as being a great boss or a great employee but as a great contributor. And maybe workaholism is about running from something to work in order to hide, whereas a healthy love of one’s work is nothing of the sort.

Which brings me to another Smith-ism: how blatant self-interest can be a positive driving force. Some call it “doing what you love” or “your passion” and those terms seem to be a little more societally acceptable, but Smith likes to lay it on the line.

“The secret in life is to find a place where you can pursue your own interests and somehow it has a lasting value, an impact to others,” Smith said. “[Mother Teresa] was totally driven by her self-interest. We can call it God ordained, that somehow she had this DNA that … she grew up thinking I’m going to serve God and take care of people on the streets of Calcutta. And people said, ‘you know, you could have more benefit because you’re this interesting character and this woman who’s become this icon.’ Nobody was going to thwart her from Calcutta. That was her self-interest. The good news there is she was driven by what turned her on and what she thought her raison d’etre was and it also helped others.”

Smith also used the example of Bill Gates, a computer nerd who had an idea about an operating system that he was going to pursue regardless of how much money he made. He was driven by his own self-interest and is now in a position with his foundation to share his vast wealth.

“That’s the perfect storm, where you can pursue your own self-interest because that’s your passion, you’re juiced every day and you’re also having impact in helping others,” Smith said.

So much of this comes back to the packaging, though, doesn’t it? Perhaps it’s OK to think of our passion as blatant self-interest if it’s for the greater good. Maybe we need to challenge ourselves more to read things that upend our thinking instead of validate it. Perhaps we shouldn’t assume that the pretty girl has a smooth life or that the powerful leader isn’t conflicted or hurting.

“We tend to put more emphasis on the packaging and not the contents and I think it transcends products and how we view people.” Smith said. “I’ve just come to believe, at least when it comes to human beings, that in the contents in the bottle or the jar there’s very little variance. We all have hearts, souls and minds, we all have hurts, we all have joys, we all struggle, we all have insecurities. And it doesn’t matter. It really kind of goes beyond all those other things.”

If only you understood …

I think I do.

Nancy Colasurdo is a practicing life coach and freelance writer. Her Web site is www.nancola.com. Please direct all questions/comments to FOXGamePlan@gmail.com.