Adam Smith - by surfstyle via Flickr
Among my interests outside of project management are economics and philosophy. Upon taking a break from project management and studying The Theory of Moral Sentiments (6th edition) by Adam Smith (1723-1790) I made a correlation to share with you, and get your take.
I’ll quote Smith here, give my interpretation, and talk a little about how the heck I tied this into project management.
From The Theory of Moral Sentiments
Part I, Section III, Chapter III
“… To deserve, to acquire, and to enjoy the respect and admiration of mankind, are the great objects of ambition and emulation. Two different roads are presented to us, equally leading to the attainment of this so much desired object; the one, by the study of wisdom and the practice of virtue; the other, by the acquisition of wealth and greatness. Two different characters are presented to our emulation; the one, of proud ambition and ostentatious avidity. the other, of humble modesty and equitable justice. Two different models, two different pictures, are held out to us, according to which we may fashion our own character and behaviour; the one more gaudy and glittering in its colouring; the other more correct and more exquisitely beautiful in its outline: the one forcing itself upon the notice of every wandering eye; the other, attracting the attention of scarce any body but the most studious and careful observer. They are the wise and the virtuous chiefly, a select, though, I am afraid, but a small party, who are the real and steady admirers of wisdom and virtue. The great mob of mankind are the admirers and worshippers, and, what may seem more extraordinary, most frequently the disinterested admirers and worshippers, of wealth and greatness.”
My Breakdown
Smith points out 2 paths that can be taken in the pursuit of respect by others. He laments that those who follow the first path languish in relative obscurity whereas “the great mob of mankind are the admirers and worshippers” of those who follow the second path. It is obvious to me that Smith saw himself as having followed the path of the wise, and was expressing some resentment over the famous and admired who, in his view, had produced no great works or benefit to be deserving of such status.
Path of the Wise
- study of wisdom and practice of virtue
- humble modesty and equitable justice
- correct and more exquisitely beautiful in its outline
- attracting the attention of scarce any body but the most studious and careful observer.
Path of the Ambitious
- acquisition of wealth and greatness
- proud ambition and ostentatious avidity
- gaudy and glittering in its colouring
- forcing itself upon the notice of every wandering eye
Of Managing Projects and People
Although Smith was speaking of rank and respect in terms of culture and wealth, I found a parallel in the realm of project and people management.
Seeking credit and attention as a project manager is counterproductive in my opinion. The best managers (project or functional) I’ve known focus on getting results from their teams, and over delivering to customers and stakeholders. A huge component of this is gaining trust from the teams and empowering them to do great work.
Ostentatious Avidity - by rappensuncle via Flickr
When a manager doesn’t strive to give (true) credit to her/his team whenever possible, that trust is degraded. I had a project manager who would speak in status meetings and elsewhere in terms of what they did, or just said “we did this.” I’ve probably had many actually, but one in particular stood out for me.
Instead, it would have been great if they had pointed out individuals, especially when some of the team members (like me) were sitting in the room. “Josh and Jack did a fantastic job on [abc] and designed it with foresight so this other task down the line should be much easier because they can just build on [abc]‘s functionality!”
That was a subtle example, but we’ve all known managers who seem to always be “brown nosing” and trying to steal limelight whenever they can. People distrust these managers and have much less reason to excel.
What are your experiences with this? Do you agree or disagree with me? Leave a comment below!
No related posts.
{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }
PMI started out on the path of the wise and switched to the path of the ambitious.
Today, we admire the ambitious. But the future remembers only the wise.
Interesting take on this…I had only considered this on the level of individuals and how others respond to their behavior.
I won’t argue for or against the PMI topic, but at first blush it seems problematic to apply this kind of attribute to any organization as a whole.
Perhaps it only seems that way because this is the first time I’ve considered it in this specific context…
PMI started out on the path of the wise and switched to the path of the ambitious.
Today, we admire the ambitious. But the future remembers only the wise.
Interesting take on this…I had only considered this on the level of individuals and how others respond to their behavior.
I won’t argue for or against the PMI topic, but at first blush it seems problematic to apply this kind of attribute to any organization as a whole.
Perhaps it only seems that way because this is the first time I’ve considered it in this specific context…
Hi Josh,
Hardworking people delivering results like Adam Smith do not need long and colorful tails. Facts speak for themselves.
As per honors, their value comes from who make them.
Well said, thank you for the comment Eugenio!
Nor are extended titles and certifications, nor long ago attributions of contribution. In our internet age, 15 years is likely equivalent to 10 generations of intellectual property.
An olde saw in the defense business is “that’s nice that you worked that program, wrote that book, solved that problem, but what have you done for me lately?”
An EXCELLENT point Glen! Like those I’ve worked with who pontificate about this or that program they worked on while at NASA…I’d let them go for a little while before pointing out that our conversation wasn’t doing anything to further our CURRENT project.
Teams and all stakeholders want your attention and leadership NOW, in the moment… it’s great to feel good about your past accomplishments, but resting on them is a great way to alienate everyone around you.
I learned that phrase while a software developer at Fluor. We were developing a piping design system – one of the 1st using 3d collision detection.
The lead piping engineer informed us one day that he was tired of hearing all the wonderful things that were going to happen when we got the system to work. Since he had been designing piping systems for a few decades, and was a crusty construction engineer – what were we going to do for him today.
Forget the past, forget the future – how about this week?
It’s common in some circles for people to use their credentials as the lead in a conversation. And for others to tell me about the important contributions they’ve made to the discipline. But watching the program manager of the current manned space flight program – he’d say, just like the piping engineer of 30 years ago – “nice stuff, but what value do you bring to the table this week?”
Hi Josh,
Hardworking people delivering results like Adam Smith do not need long and colorful tails. Facts speak for themselves.
As per honors, their value comes from who make them.
Well said, thank you for the comment Eugenio!
Nor are extended titles and certifications, nor long ago attributions of contribution. In our internet age, 15 years is likely equivalent to 10 generations of intellectual property.
An olde saw in the defense business is “that’s nice that you worked that program, wrote that book, solved that problem, but what have you done for me lately?”
An EXCELLENT point Glen! Like those I’ve worked with who pontificate about this or that program they worked on while at NASA…I’d let them go for a little while before pointing out that our conversation wasn’t doing anything to further our CURRENT project.
Teams and all stakeholders want your attention and leadership NOW, in the moment… it’s great to feel good about your past accomplishments, but resting on them is a great way to alienate everyone around you.
I learned that phrase while a software developer at Fluor. We were developing a piping design system – one of the 1st using 3d collision detection.
The lead piping engineer informed us one day that he was tired of hearing all the wonderful things that were going to happen when we got the system to work. Since he had been designing piping systems for a few decades, and was a crusty construction engineer – what were we going to do for him today.
Forget the past, forget the future – how about this week?
It’s common in some circles for people to use their credentials as the lead in a conversation. And for others to tell me about the important contributions they’ve made to the discipline. But watching the program manager of the current manned space flight program – he’d say, just like the piping engineer of 30 years ago – “nice stuff, but what value do you bring to the table this week?”
Hi Josh, Glen and Bill,
Funny, but I too am a fan of Adam Smith’s form of economics, and I am having a hard time reconciling the exchange above with Smith’s “man within” and “man without” philosophies.
As I understand it, Smith believed we not only seek out the approval of others, but has some tension between what he approves of in other men……. (III.2.7)
Bringing this to PMI, and speaking only for myself, PMI (as an organization, and some people within the organization, but far from all of them) do not exemplify the values I subscribe to as a life-long project manager. By the same token, I neither need nor want recognition from this organization because I don’t respect what it has become.
One of my frustrations has been how people I do respect continue to support PMI?
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta
http://www.getpmcertified.com
Hi Josh, Glen and Bill,
Funny, but I too am a fan of Adam Smith’s form of economics, and I am having a hard time reconciling the exchange above with Smith’s “man within” and “man without” philosophies.
As I understand it, Smith believed we not only seek out the approval of others, but has some tension between what he approves of in other men……. (III.2.7)
Bringing this to PMI, and speaking only for myself, PMI (as an organization, and some people within the organization, but far from all of them) do not exemplify the values I subscribe to as a life-long project manager. By the same token, I neither need nor want recognition from this organization because I don’t respect what it has become.
One of my frustrations has been how people I do respect continue to support PMI?
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta
http://www.getpmcertified.com
Interesting, synchronicity. I delivered a presentation at PMI-Japan for the PMBOK Cafe Workshop On August 8th using Nonaka’s concepts of Tacit, Explicit and Connected Knowledge. In that presentation I discussed about connective knowledge or distributed knowledge using Stephen Downes Theories. From My Blog post on July 18 “Open, autonomous, diverse and connected networks produce more and better knowledge for organizations. Stephen Downes November 2008. Connectivism decreases the boundaries of projects.”
This type of knowledge is emerging more than ever with networking, it is not who you know anymore it is who in your network are you connected with. The implication is your network can know things that the individuals don’t. Which I tied it all back together as Old Knowledge with Adam Smith and his “Invisible Hand of the Markets”.
Interesting, synchronicity. I delivered a presentation at PMI-Japan for the PMBOK Cafe Workshop On August 8th using Nonaka’s concepts of Tacit, Explicit and Connected Knowledge. In that presentation I discussed about connective knowledge or distributed knowledge using Stephen Downes Theories. From My Blog post on July 18 “Open, autonomous, diverse and connected networks produce more and better knowledge for organizations. Stephen Downes November 2008. Connectivism decreases the boundaries of projects.”
This type of knowledge is emerging more than ever with networking, it is not who you know anymore it is who in your network are you connected with. The implication is your network can know things that the individuals don’t. Which I tied it all back together as Old Knowledge with Adam Smith and his “Invisible Hand of the Markets”.