Posts

ChatGPT on Adam Grant

Having lost an article I’d written about three of Adam Grant’s books, I asked an AI-ologist friend to find it in my laptop. Unfortunately he couldn’t, so instead he kindly asked ChatCPT to write it on my behalf. He fed thirty of my past columns into the app so it could get a feel for my style, and then gave it this prompt: “Extract the style of Mike Eldon from the document and use it to analyse the books of Adam Grant listed above.” Here’s what emerged with the usual AI speed…

On Being Bold, Humble, and Human: Adam Grant’s Lessons for Kenya Today

In my years of working with Kenyan leaders, teachers, youth groups, and executives – from Kisumu to Kilifi – I’ve often found myself returning to one quiet question: Can kindness survive the pressures of performance? Can empathy and ambition walk together? Adam Grant seems to think so. And as I reflect on his ideas, I find echoes of our local struggles, and, our quiet triumphs.

Take for example the idea that we should learn to “think again” – to unlearn, to remain curious, to admit we might be wrong. This, I find, is deeply counter-cultural in many Kenyan institutions, where hierarchy can freeze dialogue and where a title sometimes carries more weight than an idea. But I’ve also seen young professionals in Nairobi tech hubs and rural community organizations challenge outdated assumptions, ask better questions, and surprise even themselves. As Grant reminds us: intellectual humility isn’t weakness—it’s wisdom.

Then there’s the myth of raw talent. In a country where exam results define futures and where brilliance is often measured by a grade, Grant’s notion of hidden potential is both refreshing and liberating. He tells us that coachability, not credentials, is the true predictor of greatness. And indeed, I’ve witnessed it – an overlooked intern in a county office who becomes an indispensable problem-solver; a high school dropout in Kakamega who leads her peers in microenterprise. What they needed wasn’t a head start. It was someone to believe in their stretch.

But belief isn’t enough – we must also act. In Give and Take, Grant distinguishes between takers, matchers, and givers. I thought about this as I mentored a young NGO leader struggling with burnout. She was giving too much. Yet, Grant reminds us, being a giver isn’t about being a martyr—it’s about sustainable service. In Kenya, where communal responsibility often collides with individual limits, this is a vital lesson. Generosity needs boundaries. Philanthropy needs self-care.

One of Grant’s most profound collaborations is Option B, which speaks to resilience after tragedy. And here, we need not look far. From post-election trauma to pandemic loss, Kenyans carry many invisible wounds. I think of teachers who show up after personal grief, boda boda riders who persist after injury, single mothers in Mathare who rise each day with quiet strength. Option B gives us language for their courage and, more importantly, tools for healing. In it, Grant and Sheryl Sandberg offer what I would call structured empathy—a kind of practical compassion we need more of in our workplaces and homes.

Finally, Originals is perhaps the most Kenyan of all the books—though not in the way you might think. We are a deeply creative people. From handmade jikos to high-tech startups, we are natural innovators. But what Grant does is dignify the slow-burning rebel, the one who doubts before they disrupt. He teaches us that being original isn’t about being loud—it’s about being committed. This lesson could guide many a changemaker in our counties and ministries.

Adam Grant is not writing for Kenyans, and yet, his work reads like a mirror. It reflects our potential, our mistakes, our hopes. It challenges us to lead without ego, to mentor without condescension, to grieve without shame, and to grow without limits.

What I take from Grant, and what I hope others do too, is this: Success isn’t what you have; it’s what you share. Leadership isn’t dominance; it’s dialogue. Progress isn’t perfection; it’s permission—to rethink, relearn, and rise again.

In Kenya today—where we hunger for ethical leadership, where our youth brim with restless energy, and where communities demand both dignity and development – Grant’s work reminds us to remain bold enough to speak, humble enough to listen, and human enough to feel.

So there it is – very thoughtful and articulate, although not fully a reflection of my style. Who knows, maybe one day I’ll have another go at the topic myself, using my human intelligence.

The Dunning-Kruger effect

I’ve been reading an article by Carmine Gallo from the January 2020 edition of the Harvard Business Review (HBR) about how the best CEOs are the ones who know they can improve their skills further, not least their communication skills, particularly through coaching.

Exactly what I have found in my work as a consultant.

The HBR article refers to the Dunning-Kruger effect, and explains it by stating that “people who are mediocre at certain things often think they are better than they actually are, and therefore fail to grow and improve. Great leaders, on the other hand, are great for a reason – they recognize their weaknesses and seek to get better.”

The Dunning-Kruger effect is described as a “cognitive bias”, in which people with limited competence in a particular domain overestimate their abilities. It was first described by David Dunning and Justin Kruger in 1999, and it has since become very well known. It is usually measured by comparing self-assessment with objective performance. For example, participants take a quiz and estimate their performance afterwards, and this is then compared to their actual results.

The original study focused on logical reasoning, grammar and social skills. But other studies have been conducted across a wide range of tasks, including from business, politics, medicine, driving, aviation, spatial memory, examinations in school and literacy, and they all found this over-estimation phenomenon exhibited by significant numbers. I should add that under-estimation is also present in some, leading to the “imposter syndrome” narrative, about which I have also written.

In earlier articles of mine here I have explored various aspects of this subject, including ones about the relationship between competence and confidence. Here, I have suggested, it is particularly politicians – in Kenya and around the world – whose confidence greatly exceeds their competence, and I selected former British Prime Minister Liz Truss as a fine example.

I quoted an article in the London Times about her, whose headline read: “Truss proves talent-free bluster isn’t just for men”. And its opening paragraph told us she broke one of the last glass ceilings – not as the first female Prime Minister in her country, for she was not, but as “the first woman to reach the highest office propelled by gargantuan self-belief alone”.

Why is there this bias to over-estimating one’s capabilities – or indeed in others to under-estimate them? The simple answer is lack of self-awareness. Such people lack an objective view of their strengths and weaknesses, and do not seek feedback from those with whom they interact to align their perceptions with reality. And who would be particularly well-placed to open them up to such gaps? Coaches.

Coaching is at the centre of my consulting work, where I seek to create a safe space in which the person being coached feels comfortable revealing vulnerabilities they had previously kept to themselves or had not even been aware of. My role is to help them identify areas for potential development, and then work with them to fill the gaps and so to be at their best.

What I have observed over the years is that those most in need of coaching are likely to least want it, imagining they just don’t need such support. They have a false sense of both competence and confidence that anyway would render them uncoachable. Those who reach out to me for support are overwhelmingly the ones who are already ahead of the game, as Gallo also found. They expect to be able to continuously improve and to do so, seeking ongoing feedback that it is actually happening.

So let me ask you how self-aware you are. Indeed, how sure are you that your perception of the extent of your self-awareness aligns with that of those around you, whether in the family, socially or professionally? At whatever age and level age you are, I urge you to carry out a “health-check” on where this stands between very low and very high.

Wherever you are, as Gallo and I have both found, there is most likely to be scope for being coached to rise further. There may be good coaches within your organisation, including your immediate boss, a board member or others, but there may be benefits to seeking an external coach – who will have no axe to grind within the organisation.

Finally, just as it’s helpful to be coached, surely you could and should also be a coach. Indeed contemporary leadership requires a coaching mindset as a key component in how one operates in that capacity.

Please seek a quiet space in which to reflect on what you have just read, and decide what action to take.

Surviving a toxic CEO

A few weeks months I wrote an article about how toxic cultures are often created by single individuals, and about how and why they behave as they do. Then, more recently, I was invited to be the external speaker at a half-day session hosted by Corporate Staffing Services on the theme “Surviving a Toxic CEO or Director”, and it led me to reflect further on the subject.

I also turned to Google to see what it had to tell me, and one of the first images I was shown informed me that “a Google search for ‘Toxic Boss’ generates almost 58 million hits”. Well whether that’s true or not, there’s plenty of very helpful material out there about this jarring subject.

Here’s what I found as definitions of toxic:

“Very harmful or unpleasant in a pervasive or insidious way”; “Toxic people manipulate those around them to get what they want”; “This can mean lying, bending the truth, exaggerating, or leaving out information so as to take a certain action or have a certain opinion of them; “They’ll do whatever it takes, even if it means hurting people”.

Then here’s from an image titled “10 signs of a toxic boss”: Lying, Gaslighting, Stealing credit, Always interrupting, Backbiting and gossiping, Never giving recognition, Insulting and name-calling, Saying one thing and doing another, Managing by fear and intimidation, Blaming the team vs taking responsibility.

Finally, I found “Signs to watch out for that can indicate you’re dealing with a toxic person”: You feel like you’re being manipulated; you’re constantly confused by the person’s behaviour; you feel like you deserve an apology that never comes; you always have to defend yourself to this person; you never feel fully comfortable around them; you feel bad about yourself in their presence.

Thanks, Google, for all these insights, which I complemented with reflections on my own experiences in my presentation. I listed what I have found to be root causes of such behaviour, many of which relate to low emotional intelligence, and perhaps most importantly – as I pointed out in my last article – lack of self-awareness and empathy. Toxic leaders – no, “bosses” fits better – neither trust others nor, deep down, trust themselves. They tend to be over-ambitious and impatient; and they fear failure. They are self-centred and entitled, indifferent to the feelings of others, and the word that sums up such characteristics is narcissism.

The issue of the day was how to survive in such an environment. Here I remembered when I was once with a toxic boss who expected me to be giving instructions and to be feared. I defied him to create a much healthier sub-culture around me. But quietly, without telling him about how I was operating my flatter pyramid: on tip-toe, whispering, so he wouldn’t be aware.

Here are other suggestions for managing relationships with toxic bosses. Flatter them, but genuinely, where they have earned the right to praise – which they also do. And use humour, to show you are at ease with them and to add a light touch that supports a friendlier way of working together.

Much is said about the need for sharing written evidence when dealing with such inconsistent and manipulative characters. So agree your goals and document what has been agreed, and then communicate your progress, again including in writing.

If above your CEO there exists a board of directors among whom there are at least some members who may lend a sympathetic ear and ease the situation, reach out to them – as I have done at times in my career. It can be risky, but escalation is a responsible way of behaving in such situations – and it can at least be theraeutic!

Some final thoughts from me. First, when at one time I was feeling demotivated thanks to a toxic boss, I reached out to volunteer in community activities like Rotary where I felt more aligned with those around me and more appreciated. Then, at the session where I was speaking several participants reached out to me seeking my advice as a mentor over toxic relationships they were facing in their workplaces. Indeed, finding a safe external adviser can definitely be helpful, including by assisting you in managing your stress.

So be like a rock and not a sponge. Don’t allow the toxicity to infect your system. And while you don’t want to leave such an environment too soon, if it looks like being the new normal start planning your exit.

Matrix of gaining, losing trust

I’ve written before about Frank Kretzschmar and my Leaders Circle events, and here’s something about the most recent one we hosted on the story-telling theme “Gaining and losing trust: moments of judgment, and their consequences”.

In preparing for the event I dove into the three books on trust by Stephen M.R. Covey (the son of the Seven Habits Covey).

His first one, The Speed of Trust, which appeared in 2006, spelt out the benefits of trust so well: where trust is present, everything speeds up and costs reduce.

Then, in his 2012 Smart Trust, he went further, suggesting that high trust also delivers prosperity, energy and joy.

And in his 2022 Trust and Inspire, all about high-trust leaders, he contrasted them to the untrusting command-and-control ones, seeing that trusting leaders attract and retain great talent, that’s bold, engaged and innovative.

Covey certainly doesn’t believe in blind trust or naïveté. Equally though, suspicious or cynical mindsets do not appeal to him.

President Reagan’s “trust but verify” seems a plausible middle road to travel, along with applying appropriate controls.

The World Values Survey, which asks citizens about their beliefs, opinions and activities, has consistently found that compared to many societies in Africa, Kenyans are less likely to trust people they don’t know, and also those they do know.

Further, domestic opinion polls regularly find that a majority of Kenyans lack trust in the country’s most important government institutions.

Having said that though, there are many trustworthy Kenyans – including in the public sector. And there are many trustworthy Kenyan organisations, whose people say “No” when they should.

We asked the participants to tell us how they act when they have lost trust in others – or others have in them – knowing that, as the African proverb tells us, “one lie spoils a thousand truths”.

We heard about the NCIC report on our elections, where they found the top roadblock to a peaceful one is a lack of trust between ethnic groups and in our institutions.

Just like now, where the government and the opposition clearly do not trust each other.

One participant lamented that “trusted people are a dying breed’. Another challenged him that even in government there are still many trustworthy people.

On the positive side, I referred to Equity Bank’s release that day of its Sustainability Report, titled Growing Together in Trust.

We heard about the increase in trust here thanks to digitisation, like with the iTax system, but concern was expressed that our media only report on what the bad guys are up to, unduly influencing us to reflect such cynical negativity.

“Life is so complicated that it is impossible not to be a hypocrite,” one stated. He put himself in the shoes of low- or no-income people who are forced to steal or seek bribes to keep going.

The leader of an insurance company confirmed that trust is everything there – not least in dealing with claims.

Yes, you must trust your clients enough, but you must apply checks and balances through conditions and controls.

And if you reject a claim you must be trusted that your reasons were solid. Basically, unless you trust one another there can be no relationships.

Then we heard that if you are trustworthy it takes a long time to reap the reward.

In conclusion, I suggested that we must gather a critical mass of trustworthy people and institutions as this is what will move the needle towards the positive end of the trust spectrum.

“Human progress isn’t possible without trust,” asserted one, while another talked about the presence of inner peace when we interact with someone we trust.

New world and cultures beckon after pandemic

Much is being written about how the world will look after it has recovered from the coronavirus crisis. We have no idea about so many aspects of our social, economic and political futures, but one thing’s for sure: We won’t simply be going back to the way things were before the virus hit.

The sudden closing down of normal life has forced a dramatic transformation in how individuals, communities and nations conduct themselves. Inevitably, some have adapted much better than others. Not surprisingly, those who are suffering least are disproportionately the ones who were already ahead of the game, thanks to more visionary and agile leadership and more robust cultures. These are the ones who will emerge into the post-Corona era even better positioned.

Almost all of us have been forced to stay away from our normal workplaces and to work from home, relying exclusively on our laptops and phones to communicate. (I have been home-based for several years, so much less has changed for me.) We are using Zoom, Teams, GoToMeeting and other tools through which to hold meetings, deliver presentations, share lessons and so forth; we have rushed to engage more with online shopping and cashless payments; and we have disciplined ourselves to remain adequately structured and productive despite being exposed to far less intimate supervision. Good that employers aren’t fitting CCTV in the homes of their staff!

Which brings me to my point: organisations where there was already a culture of trust – where people have been trustworthy and hence trusted – are the ones for whom remote working is less of an issue. For the natural micromanagers, the ones who feel they need to stand eagle-eyed over their people, this is a really frustrating time as they imagine – rightly or wrongly – that just about everyone will be neglecting their work and enjoying the distractions of life at home.

Some people will indeed disappoint with their performance, abusing the normalisation of flexitime, but there will also be pleasant surprises, with new stars emerging. Look out for such people. Recognise and celebrate them.

Even as many leaders and frontline staff are busier than ever with their crisis management, for others who are less busy now is the time to place more emphasis on the learning they may have been too stretched to undertake before. This is the time to adopt a coaching approach to leadership, encouraging and reassuring one’s people, stretching and empowering them.

It is also the time to flatten the organisational pyramid. I very much related to a recent presentation on “The Future of Work – Lessons from the Pandemic” by the China Europe International Business School, in which they foresee the emergence of more empowered teams, with the ability to be autonomous and agile, and where hierarchies give way “wire-archies.” It is a time when “companies must restructure around people,” they conclude, in a culture where boldness and innovation are encouraged and mistakes expected and allowed.

Another article that caught my eye was by my friend Jayanth Murthy of the Kaizen Institute. He cautions leaders against being ostriches, birds that bury their heads in the sand when frightened and “remember they are big, but can’t fly.” The focus of ostrich-like leaders in times of crisis is purely on cost cutting, by reducing headcount, R&D budgets, marketing spend and suchlike. This can deliver quick results, he acknowledges, but inhibits post-crisis rebound.

Murthy contrasts the ostrich with the albatross. This bird “flies high, but with minimal effort.” It focuses on cutting waste, raising productivity and maximising impact (so very Kaizen). Albatross companies, he writes, expand their ability to find and fix problems, develop their people, improve processes and seek new opportunities to find and fix waste, broken processes and leakages. They get closer to their partners, and build long-lasting relationships with their own team members, customers, within the trade and with suppliers.

So what is the level of trust in your organisation? How do you make a virtue out of the necessity of our present predicament by challenging those around you to be more responsible and reliable, more collaborative and supportive, and of higher integrity?

Be sufficiently optimistic. Be bold. While of course keeping a tight grip on controls and on performance management. You may be pleasantly surprised.