In a recent interaction with my lead physician, a superb internist at the University of Minnesota Medical school, I found myself questioning his conclusion about the role of luck in my life and health. Going over the conversation in my mind, I realized that I needed to clarify some issues with him. We had been talking about my lab results, which were absolutely flawless. I commented that my 87-year-old health was a result of good genetics, taking care of myself and the high-quality medical care that I had received at the med school. That was where he added that I needed to factor luck into my overall health success. To be specific, he noted that I would be in a far different situation, perhaps long gone from this world, if I hadn't walked into emergency 25 years ago and had a pacemaker installed immediately. I had a heart blockage, so, he said, I was really very lucky. A few more days without the pacemaker and that would have been it.
I decided just a few hours later that I wasn't in full agreement with his conclusion--at least as we left it.
Putting flesh on my decisioning
Let me explain: My decision to head to Emergency--a trip resulting in the pacemaker--was the result of several issues. First, by the time I was in my early fifties, I decided that I'd need to take charge of my healthcare, a decision based on extensive reading on health and aging as well as personal experience with a couple mediocre physicians. I was also strongly oriented to research-based medicine insights long before that trip to Emergency. My unusual background in communications, counseling and educational psychology, along with my experience teaching stress management, all added up to a great deal of mental and physical self-awareness. In spite of serious allergy problems, my wife maintained superb health by regular interaction with a couple physicians. As a result, I was quite used to being around physicians and not always enamored of their insights. In addition, one-of my sons-in-law is an MD/PhD, formerly a Harvard Med School physician, and his wife, my daughter, has been a VP in medical research for years. Furthermore, another daughter has been in medical research management for years, now a research manager at Harvard Med School. On top of this rich background, I long since rejected the typical male attitude toward health care--taking an aspirin and ignoring potential issues. I've maintained regular relations with several physician specialists at the UMN Med school for years. In addition, the fact that my brother never took care of himself, dying early with diabetes, obesity, lung problems, etc., etc. served as a warning for me for at least the past 35 years. So I've had tons of background emphasis in the role of personal health management--all adding up a rich, long life.
But the pacemaker incident was not the first time I took
These are just two incidents in which I took charge of my health, incidents which could have cost me my life. No question that luck played a role in both of these incidents, but not nearly as big a role as I suspect my internist thought. Because I don't think he knows all of my background, an issue I'll check out with him at my next appointment, three months from now. But I've got a lot of data supporting my insights, data which he may not be aware of. Besides, he's always fun to interact with--and not a defensive bone in his body. That's one of the reasons I trust him.
Research on luck
Here's the research supporting my conclusions about luck: Richard Wiseman, the British psychologist, has studied luck from a scientific perspective, learning that it is not strictly random. Wiseman finds that lucky people tend to be more skilled at creating and noticing chance opportunities, they listen (pay attention) to their intuitive ideas, use positive expectations and work hard to make lemonade out of lemons. (Intuitively, I knew the stomach-pain and the weakness climbing stairs were outside of my norms.) They take a resilient attitude toward life. If you know your psychology, you recognize that there are a lot of spin-offs from empirical research built into his “luck factor theory,” beginning with the extensive research on the personal impact of positive attitudes.
For example, Wiseman finds that unlucky people are generally much more tense and anxious than lucky people, and research has shown that anxiety disrupts people’s ability to notice. On top of that, those same unlucky people shy away from the very change and variety that would add to the potential for good fortune.
In sum, Wiseman concludes that the differences between the lucky and unlucky people are striking. Lucky people tend to imagine spontaneously how the bad luck they encounter could have been worse and, in doing so, they feel much better about themselves and their lives. This, in turn, helps keep their expectations about the future high, and, increases the likelihood of them continuing to live a lucky life.
The new role of luck
Luck—or even better, serendipity--that aptitude for making desirable discoveries by accident, assumes a far more important role in this new economy. In the fascinating new book, The Power of Pull, by John Hagel III, John Seely Brown, and Lang Davison, the authors emphasize the role and importance of serendipity. They define it as the ability to find people and the knowledge they carry with them. In today’s world, where you don’t even know what you’re looking for, finding and attracting knowledge people is key. In other words, being a "good noticer" is a high value. And BTW, good noticing is a learned process.
Why is this so important?
As "Pull" puts it, when we dive below the surface of events that get so much attention—from both journalists and bloggers—we find that our foundations are constantly shifting. For most of us there is an enormous distance between where we are today and where we’ll need to be in order to fully take advantage of changing opportunities. Not only do we have to keep our eye on the ball—that long-term directional focus—but we all have to amplify our own efforts with the resources of others.
Think about it: if you’re exploring new sets of problems, new territories—what Hagel and buddies call an “edge,” it’s always very, very helpful to learn from the experiences of others. Luck, what I like to think of as “serendipitous encounters,” is not only the best way to gain insight and resolutions, but often the only way to gain those insights. Indeed, as I reflect on those “lucky encounters,” I celebrate my good fortune in the richness, insight and even the blessing they’ve brought to my life and profession.
Creating your own serendipity
In “Pull” the authors argue strongly and wisely for the “shaping” of serendipity rather than treating it as merely a matter of chance. They talk about our all-too-common experiences of needing to know, but not needing to know what you need, and what really exists, much less how to find it or whom. MIT’s Sherry Turkle adds that as a result of internet search engines, fewer and fewer of us really know how to engage in search outside of Googling the internet and using its other search engines. Because the internet completely manages search processes for us, knowledge of those processes has gone the way of the Dodo bird, profoundly limiting resources beyond the internet. Indeed, there seems to be little understanding, for example, that ideational and personal search tends to flow in significantly evolutionary and haphazard formats and that those processes can be manipulated for both ideas and people. Those who grew up, trained in library skills, would understand the processes. But what Hagel and colleagues do for us is a huge updating and revision of the 20th century environments, knowledge and skills for the 21st century.
Serendipitous environments
Pull suggests five environments for enhancing serendipity:
Geographic spikes—more people live in large urban centers than in any other part of the globe. Different cities offer a wealth of options, providing gathering places for increasing the probability of serendipitous encounters. Most of us think automatically of Silicon Valley for software or Los Angeles for producers and directors. One of my friends is interested in the future applications of technology to food resources and has located in the Twin Cities precisely because of UMN and the many food industries and resources in that area.
Conferences—These “moving circuses” are especially useful because participants have self-filtered. They provide opportunities for meeting people with information, making possible likely serendipity. The pandemic has limited conferences, but there'll be coming back. In addition, more and more conferences are already coming online.
Online social networks—Virtual environments provide plenty of potential for shaping serendipity. Admittedly, as these environments grow there is potential for low-productivity encounters. Still, choosing the social platforms of interest can provide insight into which initial contacts to pursue.
Connection platforms—these platforms help people connect around needs. Open-source software sites such as SAP’s Developer Network are one kind. But eBay and Amazon provide another kind of network. For example, I’ve picked up a couple exceptional contacts simply by reading Amazon’s reviews on a niche book.
Institutions—Many institutions develop conference strategies, providing options for contacts with people of similar interests. Universities, major industries and large corporations, as well as national conference planners all fit into this category.
Serendipity (luck) comes to those who know where and how to shape it. There are two major pieces of luck that have been profoundly significant in my life: I really, really married the right woman--a brilliant professional, attractive, with shared values and downright sexy, and second, I was in the right place at the right time with the right network that provided me with a unbelievable fun and highly lucrative consultancy. So, in sum, to get better faster at whatever it is you do, you’ve got to be supported by a broad array of complementary people and resources from which you can pull what you need to raise your rate of performance improvement. And what are the competencies you’ll need to achieve that? Well, that’s for another blog.
Hagel, John III, John Seely Brown and Lang Davison, The Power of Pull: How small moves, smartly made can set big things in motion. (New York: Basic Books), 2010.
See especially: John Hagel's blog, The Edge
Turkle, Sherry, Alone Together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. (New York: Basic Books), 2011.
Wiseman, Richard, The Luck Factor. The skeptical inquirer, May/June 2003.