Leaders Eat Last
Part 1: Our Need to Feel Safe
In part one, Simon Sinek touches on a few key points about leadership and their role in organizations as well as the individuals that follow this leader.
Trust is one of the main themes, it is the theme of this part. Leaders must earn the trust of their followers and first they must extend it. “To be trusted one must first learn to trust” - a quote from a cheesy movie, but it serves the same point.
A second theme that runs through Part 1 is the idea of people at the top being responsible for the people at the bottom, or lower than them in the hierarchy. CEOs especially and managers have a responsibility to keep all their employees safe. To create a safe environment where people do not compete, but rather work and help each other. This is a second take on trust because it is not just the person at the top that must make people safe, but each colleague as well. We must each cover for the other in order to make the environment feel safe. Because if you know you can rely on your co-worker to help you when you have a problem, even a personal one, you start to trust them. It takes time, it is done in small steps, but that is the direction.
Simon Sinek talks about the Circle of Safety that is the company itself and how the people at the top as well as their employees work to keep that space safe. The danger is outside, competitors, financial crisis, debt and so on. People inside the organization need to work together to face the danger outside and to not allow it to breed inside because that will make an organization unstable and soon everyone will be for themselves.
In the book, a comparison is made between the company and a family. Each employee is life an adopted child which means that they are free to wonder about in the company, use tools as they need and so on. You need to care about your employee like you would for your child, to see they are taken care of and when they have something to say they are heard, and someone tries to solve their problems with the company.
This creates a sense of belonging because employees are treated like human beings and not seen as “resources” that can be disposed of when the company does not meet its annual goals. The point is brought up over and over, people come before money. I agree, money you can make, and if the business idea is not working you can try something else. In every instance you need people to help you bring your idea to life. People work best when they are treated like people. When they feel they belong they start to add their own input because it no longer is a just a job.
In the last chapter, Simon Sinek points out the idealism in the book. Things such as “can you imagine enjoying work?” Afterwards he points out some interesting facts, people do not leave bad companies even if they know it is bad. This is interesting because they know they do not life their job, but they do not try to change it, for some reason they stay at a bad company. Afterwards he mentions a few studies, one indicates that having a bad job (a job that you do not like), is worse than having no job. And a second that indicates that the less control you have the more stressed you are in your work environment which leads to heart diseases.
The study shows there is little to no correlation of where you are on the corporate ladder and stress levels, in fact being responsible and being able to do that reduces stress meaning people higher up are less stressed even though they have more responsibilities. It shows that the lack of control is what produces stress and that is more common on the lower end of the ladder, where the work is less demanding, more monotone, but at the same time there are more restrictions on that part. When to take a break, when to drink a cup of coffee, where in the building you are allowed to go, what schedule you must follow. It really sucks the idea of freedom out of you. You have no control, or very little, over your schedule. Couple that with the fact that if you want to phone home, or you need to replace a faulty component you need to ask for permission which clearly indicates a lack of trust. These limitations are generally generating stress or amplify it when you have some personal issues at home. This builds to the point where you need to trust your employees and allow them freedom to do their job as they think it is right to do.
Part 2: Powerful Forces
In the first chapter of this part, Simon Sinek talks about our evolution and how nature has built us to run on different chemicals that make us “happy,” they signal to us that we are satisfying our needs. He splits the four “happy” chemicals into two categories. Selfish chemicals: endorphins and dopamine while the other two: serotonin and oxytocin are selfless chemicals. They regulate our behaviour.
When we do not have enough endorphins or dopamine in our system, we need to take care of ourselves. The lack of these chemicals in our body indicate that we are not taking care enough of our own needs.
The lack of the other two chemicals, serotonin, and oxytocin, indicate that we are not selfless enough, we need to think more and take care more of our community or loved ones.
When we take a selfish or selfless action, the brain releases some of these chemicals which make us feel good in different ways. This is a bit relative as we can to some extent, control what a “good” action is. In other words, we can tell our brains when to release these chemicals, when we eat, when we drink water, when we get a raise, when our boss says, “good job.” But if we step on others and our boss says “good job” we get a chemical release for selfish reasons, which can cover to some extent the lack of selfless chemicals in that moment.
On the other hand, when we go home and tell our loved ones about our “good job” from our boss they may feel good about it. The boss is pleased with our progress and work which means more security which enables us to more safely support our loved ones which triggers the selfless chemical release. But the boss may overlook the fact that I stepped on others to get my job done.
You get the behaviour you promote. This is another statement that is made in the book and the reason is because our brains are wired to respond to this. Having both selfish and selfless chemicals help us survive as individuals and at the same time we have a natural inclination to work with each other. We are social animals; we tend to come together.
In the next chapter, Simon Sinek details a bit the function of every chemical.
Endorphins
Pain chemical, it masks pain and helps us push further than our bodies naturally allow us.
Dopamine
Reward chemical, it motivates us to keep achieving and completing tasks. Each time we complete a task we get a shot of dopamine. The effects do not last for long, that is why it is a motivator as well. To keep getting dopamine we need to keep completing tasks.
Oxytocin
Love chemical, it is the chemical we get when we embrace someone we care for, when we talk to them or when they are there for us or we are there for them. When we perform acts of care or sacrifice resources (time, attention, money) for our loved ones. It is more lasting than dopamine and is the chemical that keeps relationships going.
Serotonin
Leadership chemical, we get this chemical when we perform for others or ourselves, but we are acknowledged for our efforts. Like getting a diploma and walking up in everyone’s admiration or running at a marathon and passing by our loved ones that are there just to see us and congratulate our efforts when we reach the finish line.
This chemical is rewarded when performing actions for others as well, not just for our own individual gain.
In the following chapter, Simon Sinek talks about Cortisol, as expected. If the chemicals are brought up, then Cortisol must be elaborated as well.
Cortisol
The stress and anxiety chemical is released into our bodies when we feel threatened, regardless of whether we are or not. It heightens our senses and makes us more present so that we are more prepared to face our foe. It engages our fight or flight response, so we react to the danger our body thinks we are in. The side-effect of this is that all non-essential systems are shut off, systems like growth, digestion (why would anyone do that when they are in danger?) and among them, strangely enough, is the immune system. The good news is that once cortisol is eliminated from our bloodstream, our bodies go back to their normal state and the previously turned off functions are turned back on.
This is a good defensive mechanism, but the problem is when it is overly active, when you work in a stress inducing environment. Cortisol is almost always present in your bloodstream and the long-term effects of that is that it allows for chronic diseases to develop, things like cancer, diabetes, obesity and so on. Long-term exposure to cortisol is bad for the body, more so it disables the release of oxytocin, which would rather make us more relaxed, which has side-effects of its own. It is critical to work in an environment that we feel we belong to and can trust our colleagues and it is the job of the leader, official or not, to promote such an environment.
In the last chapter of this part, Simon Sinek explains a bit about the alpha status and fake alphas. People who want the benefits of a leader, but not the responsibility that comes with it. As a leader, or alpha, it is expected to look out for the tribe and not sacrifice members for self-gain. One of the attributed costs of leadership is self-interest, leaders may often end up having to choose between their own interest and the interest of their tribe (or employees). There is not enough time or money for both, thus one must be sacrificed for the other.
He continues to give an example from how Chapman went through the economic crisis where they could no longer keep all employees.
It was the first-time layoffs were being discussed as they could not afford to pay everyone. What Chapman did instead is to ask for 4 weeks of unpaid time off for the entire company.
Everyone had to pick 4 weeks of unpaid time off that year, it did not have to be 4 weeks in a row, it could have been any time of the year. The reaction from the company was unexpected. There were employees that traded unpaid time off with people that could take more unpaid time off to cover for those that needed the work. The whole company came together to help each other.
The way Chapman approached the problem was with solidarity. “All have to suffer a little bit so few will not have to suffer a lot.” Everyone gave up a little and the company thrived. Some gave up more than others. That is leadership!
Part 3: Reality
In the first chapter a small story is presented that illustrates the point of it. It is about trust and not only to trust in others that they do a good job, but that they do the right thing as well. This sometimes means breaking the rules for the right reasons (saving people, for instance). The “trust is a two-way street” gets referred as well, through a different form, in that it is not nearly good enough for trust to be one sided.
“What good is a company in which management trust labour, but labour doesn’t trust management?”
Or a marriage where the man trusts his wife, but the wife does not trust her husband. Obviously, trust goes both ways or almost none. If someone does not trust you, it begs the question whether you should trust them.
The second chapter of this short part is more of a critique of the current way things are going and that it is mostly the environment that makes us more dopamine dependent and stresses us which releases cortisol.
The metaphor used is of a snowmobile (us) in a desert (our current environment) which, obviously, will not perform well because the conditions for which we are built (through evolution) are not being met. One would agree that we are way more adaptable than that and while the environment we live in or work in does have a significant impact on our wellbeing, it is also up to us to make it better. We made this environment we are in, surely, we can change it. The followers and employees of a leader participate in creating the environment as well as the leader themselves, through cooperation only can this properly be achieved.
I do not like this chapter because it assumes everything is fine with us, we are just in the wrong place. This is false, there is a lot that is not fine with us. The environment may not be perfect, but neither are we.
Part 4: How We Got Here
The first chapter is a small history lesson about the Great Generation that was raised during the Great Depression and then went and fought in World War 2. It was a generation that had to make ends meet for most of their life, especially in their youth which is where people form their habits and embrace their values. It was a generation that was raised as servants to their country where everyone was contributing as they could to the wellbeing of the country.
When the war ended and the economy started to boom, they themselves got busy and have birth to a lot of children that would become the Baby Boomers.
The Boomer generation was raised in a quite different environment. They had more than they needed in their youth compared to their parents. They grew up becoming more narcissistic, more concerned with their wellbeing than the wellbeing of their friends or community. The “me” generation even though that is what they call millennials these days, but with more emphasis. The millennials are nicknamed the “me me me” generation.
Simon Sinek claims it is the sheer number of Boomers that made the drastic change in their culture and society. While numbers may have been a part of the change, it is not everything. It is how they were raised and a lot of other factors as well. It is a complex issue to be simplified in just one chapter. The fact that Boomers vastly outnumbered their parent’s generation may have contributed, but I do not believe that can be one of the core reasons it happened.
In the next chapter, a historical event is presented. The Air Traffic Controllers were protesting, through their union, to have better working conditions and better wages. The administration could not come to a deal and the traffic controllers threatened with a massive strike during peak hours. On 5th August 1981, as a result, Ronald Reagan laid off 11,000 air traffic controllers and banned them from ever working as one until 1993 when Clinton raised the ban. This gave a very solid precedence for corporation CEOs to fire big chunks of their employees to make more profit. While what the president did make an example out of the situation, it could have been that most CEOs would have refused to take this example and apply it, but they did not. It became clear that people were less important than money, and from that point CEOs had freedom to express this. It was the easy way out. The problem is older, it only revealed itself with that event.
The other issue that is raised is the abstraction. Though it helps to abstract to better associate data and solve problems. But when we abstract people, we distance ourselves from them and we may tend to think of them as objects and less of people. Following this pattern with the idea of disposable objects we may think that people, though abstractions, become disposable as well.
Abundance devalues things. If we have a lot of what we do not need, it becomes less valuable and thus easier to dispose of. It’s a complicated problem and with “leaders” that do not care for “their” people it only gets worse. It looks like human beings are devalued as if it was any other resource in abundance. Maybe it is how these “big” CEOs see things.
Part 5: The Abstract Challenge
In the first chapter of this part, Simon Sinek describes the Milgram experiment and how the less physical contact (including seeing, not just touching) the easier it was for the volunteer to continue the experiment. Including the fact that they blamed the scientist because “he was told to do so.” A small percentage, around 35%, were able to stop. What they had in common is that they held themselves accountable.
At the end of the chapter, Simon Sinek points to the fact that we have little to no contact with our customers and according to the Milgram experiment this can have some serious effects on their life. This goes to large organisations as well where people at the top do not see their employees. The same can happen and this explains how mass layoffs about can take place with CEOs not being concerned about their employees.
In the following chapter, a tragic event is described, the sinking of the Titanic where a lot of people died (1,500) because the shipping company did not put more lifeboats onboard. They excused themselves by saying that they were not compelled by the law to do so, a glitch in the system.
The same example is given by Apple that used legislative cracks to avoid paying taxes. There were not breaking any laws. This goes back to Milton Friedman, who won a Nobel prize in finance, who claims that anything is allowed as long as it does not go against the rules and the game is to make profit and keep company owners satisfied, says Simon Sinek.
This attitude allows for immoral actions to take place when they do not break any laws or there is no law to break. The absence of morality allows for behaviour that satisfies the law but goes against what is acceptable.
This reduces trust within a group and breaks the Circle of Trust. For a leader to be followed they need a strong moral code that they refuse to break.
In the next chapter, Simon Sinek addresses the abstraction and provides a few rules for mitigating it.
Rule 1: Keep it Real
With today’s technology we can reach out and talk to a lot of people using instant messaging apps. But they do not have that human touch, to be able to see one-another, read our gestures and have the certainty that we are receiving the full attention of the other person. While digitalisation helps us stay ‘in-touch’ with friends and loved ones, it does not provide a way to form bonds. It can help maintain them during tough times, but it is difficult to form deep trust over Internet.
Rule 2: Respect Dunbar’s Number
Robin Dunbar ran an experiment through which he found out that we can maintain about 150 ‘close’ relationships. By his definition, a ‘close’ relationship with someone is one where you can just sit with them at a bar without knowing they were there and not feeling embarrassed. This is something to keep in mind at the workplace and in our personal life. Going beyond this number can break down a work environment because there are too many people, and we cannot keep track of everyone.
Rule 3: Meet the People You Help
Meeting the people you help through charity or the people you help or benefit from the products your team develops has a high impact on morale because you get direct feedback from the end user or customers, and you can see how the thing that you are building or donating to helps them. It gives meaning to what you are doing and shows that what you are doing has a positive effect, it shows that you are not wasting your time.
Rule 4: Give Them Time
This is mentioned in multiple books and articles. If we want to build relationships and strengthen our Circle of Trust, we need to give people a portion of our time. To help them with something like packing boxes, going out for a walk, just talking with them or listen to them.
Time is a finite resource that we have no idea how to get more of. The time we spend is done, it cannot be taken back. There is no refund for time. Therefore, we put a premium on anyone who sacrifices from their time for us. Because we know that they are not going to get it back and that from all the things they could have done with it, the choose to spend it with us.
Rule 5: Have Patience
This is a critical one. Meaningful relationships develop over time. You cannot form a strong relationship in minutes, hours, or days. At best it takes weeks and at worst it takes months or even a few years. Strong bonds are formed over time with investments made in time. You need to give it time from both aspects. Both sacrificing it for the other person and waiting patiently for the relationship to develop. It is like a flower; you need to allow it to grow so that one day it may blossom, and you need to be available to water it and to tend to it.
In the last chapter of this part, which is a short one, the idea of Destructive Abundance is introduced and is defined as when the abundance of resources is used to follow selfish pursuits rather than selfless ones. The two will always coexist, but when the former is greater than the latter then an imbalance is produced which typically leads to Destructive Abundance.
Part 6: Destructive Abundance
In the first chapter of this part, “so goes the culture, so goes the company,” Simon Sinek places great emphasis, and for good reason, on the company culture. That once a company’s culture starts to rot, the company itself start to rot and go down. Communication between team members starts to falter, even keeping secrets from one another. This leads to information not being shared which leads to everyone working for themselves. At that point, can you continue calling a company ‘a company’? It is only a collection of individuals, little different than a group of freelancers renting an office room and each working on their own projects, sometimes even competing for them or for clients.
This comes from hiring the wrong people. While competency is important, culture fit is important as well. Neglecting cultural fit will unavoidably change it. This change can be for the benefit of the company, or it can have a negative effect. Hiring the right people is important. They may not be the best, but they are a good fit which will keep the company healthy in the long run even if profits are not what they could be.
In the following chapter, “so goes the leader, so goes the culture,” Simon Sinek describes two stories of two different leaders. One is Stanley O’Neal who took over Merrill Lynch and fundamentally changed its culture. O’Neal was very ego centric, he did not trust the people he led, promoted competition among employees which reflected unto client transactions and relationships.
The company did not fare well under his leadership. In the second part of the chapter, the story of Captain Marquet is summarized from how he was meant to command the Olympia, with a top of the class crew, but instead he received command of the Santa Fe. A newer generation submarine, but the crew did not score as good. In fact, it was considered one of the worst crews as they were at the bottom of the rankings. During an exercise, Captain Marquet ordered the submarine to go at two thirds of the speed, his officer responsible with navigation gave the order to the helmsman which did not complete the order. Noticing this, Captain Marquet addressed the helmsman directly asking him why the submarine is not at two thirds speed. The helmsman replied that there is no such command. Afterwards, Captain Marquet turned back to the officer who passed the order and asked him if he knew that there was no such command. The officer responded with yes and then he was asked why he gave the order if he knew there was no such command. The answer was simple: “because you gave it, sit.”
At that point, Captain Marquet realized that his style of leadership was not good and that he had to change it.
He made each officer more responsible for what they were doing, each helmsman. This in turn made the entire crew more responsible, competent and more trusting of each other. He basically gave authority to the people closer to the information, not the entire authority, but enough to make a difference.
He replaced “permission to…” with “I intend to…” for each member to express their intention of performing an action. A small psychological trick that made the person intending to perform an action more aware that the result of that action is his responsibility as well. Captain Marquet changed the culture inside the submarine so much that the crew of the Santa Fe scored at the top on the future evaluations. Later, the Santa Fe became a “factory” of leaders as multiple officers went on to receive their own command.
In the following chapter, “Leadership Lesson 2”, Simon Sinek writes about the importance of integrity and how this is critical to building trust. Indeed, it is important to act out what we say and how we say it. To be truthful with ourselves and others in what we say and do. To be in alignment to what we say we believe and how this is observed in our behaviour.
The chapter describes a few examples where some people were honest, and others were not. The core message was to be truthful even when it hurts us because that is when it matters the most, instead of covering it up. We take responsibility for our actions even when we are not presented with proof against us. That means integrity, we own our mistakes just as we own our good deeds. The point is not about being perfect, but to admin when we are wrong or made a mistake.
The following chapter felt more like filler material with substance that could have been summarized in less than a page. The chapter is title “Leadership Lesson 4: Friends Matter” and it mostly describes the situation in the Congress of the United States, briefly describes an interaction between a republican and a democrat that presumably became friends. There is little about leadership, there is some reference to the chemicals (again), as if Simon Sinek became an expert at them. I do not think he has any knowledge of the chemicals that run through congresspeople. The entire chapter can be reduced to “cooperation is important, this does not automatically mean agreement” as there is nothing else really detailed. There is a lot more you can say about friendship and cooperation, yet so little is presented in the chapter. It makes the book thicker without more substance.
In the last chapter of this part, Simon Sinek kind of repeats himself about putting people before numbers as well as using the chemicals metaphor again. The overall theme of the book is about putting people first and was already explained in a previous chapter. What this one does is more is talk about chemicals and their presumed presence in different cultures (again, it looks as if Simon Sinek is somewhat of an expert in the field and can simply point this out, I do not believe so until I see some evidence about it, until then it is just a metaphor).
The other thing is about the nurturing leader vs the directive leader where the former has better performance with their team in time and the latter has better performance in the short-term. The problem with directive leaders is that the team performs while the leader is in charge. You need a good enough succession. I do like the nurturing leadership style, but Simon Sinek seems to take it a bit more on a religious path. Why should we care about this? Why should leaders bother? What happens If they do not?
The book does indicate that companies that are nurturing fare better. But what other impacts do they have? On a societal level, for instance? Non-nurturing companies still exist, and people still seem to be working there, they do not simply implode and go broke. Why should a leader be nurturing? Why not do it the other way?
Part 7: Society of Addicts
In the first chapter, Simon Sinek points to the fact that more often than not, at the centre of our problem is us. He does so by offering a summary of the Black Death of Childbed where doctors themselves were responsible for spreading the disease. When it was first pointed out, doctors did not take it well, but after a period of about 12 years they finally took adequate actions (proper cleaning protocols) and the disease all but disappeared on its own. Later, he does little to details based on this story.
It is difficult to look at ourselves and ask how are we contributing to the state that we are in? We like to think highly of ourselves and less about others. However, more often than not we are the main reason for the situation we are in, and if not addressed, it evolves (or degenerates). Unresolved issues tend to clump together.
The following chapter is a quick run through history about radio, TV and how the news got from being something of value to being a business. How previous regulations, including banking regulations, were gradually taken out in favour of allowing businesses to make more money from their clients without offering the same level of protection they previously did. And another mention of dopamine, it starts to get annoying. Everything is dopamine, all the bad things? This is very low resolution. It’s starting to feel like these last parts of the book are just fillers.
In the last chapter, Simon Sinek addresses the “Millennial Problem” and details his view on the matter and points out that the truth is somewhat in the middle. The older generation has come good remarks about Millennials, while Millennials do make some valid points about their case. Simon Sinek brings over-parenting as one of the sources for the “Millennial Problem” with good arguments. Millennials were raised in a certain way and this created certain expectations that they have from their boss, workplace, and the world in general.
Simon Sinek goes on to blame social media for aggravating the state of Millennials, while this can be true because it can work like an addiction, but I like to think otherwise.
Social Media does provide a challenge but removing access to it does not really solve the problem. It’s like getting rid of alcohol to cure alcoholism. Like alcohol consumption, I see social media consumption as an effect to a different cause. If they did not have social media, Millennials would have retreated to a different refuge. I do not think limiting access to smartphones will solve the problem, but rather building resiliency for them will.
Being able to resist the urge of consuming social media, to work for 2 hours uninterrupted with your smartphone next to you would prove a more lasting solution than limiting access to it, in my opinion.
There is a lot more on this topic to cover in one book and it most likely has to do with psychology and philosophy. It’s a hard problem to solve, not to mention understand.
Part 8: Becoming a Leader
In the first chapter, Simon Sinek makes a parallel with the 12th step that AA has in order to stop people from having a relapse. Thile this is true, helping others that are struggling with alcoholism is important and not only helps beating the addiction, but it also helps others keeping away from falling into it again. This, again, is used as another case for why human contact is important and why face-to-face interactions are important to form bonds and how the chemicals (yet again, to no surprise) realize this. It is getting repetitive. The same old “we need more human interaction for this to work” and how the selfless chemicals, serotonin and oxytocin, help us live longer and happier. I am not against all that, I am pointing out that the exact same message is written in yet another chapter which in turns tells us almost nothing new. It fills the pages and wastes the time.
In the next chapter, Simon Sinek makes the point, and again with the chemicals, that our most fond memories are of those where we face hardships together. This is true. We feel most close to people when they stick with us, and we with them, through hardship. When we face challenges and we come together. When we give from our time for others when we could be doing something else. When we think and do for others is when relationship, of any kind, are formed.
In the last chapter, Simon Sinek makes a call to leadership. Briefly describes that leadership means responsibility for others, that getting at the top means more responsibility which implicitly means doing less of what we want as we do more for others. It is a call to putting people before anything.