Meditations — In Defence of Philosophy Training through the lens of Building Teams
As a philosophy student, we often get asked what is the value of our training? Is this air fairy cotton candy? Why should an employer value a philosophy student? Why do some teams make it to greatness and others don’t?
In this meditation, I shall use the force of logic to explain how we use values as axioms to build complex models of coordination that enable teams to go beyond their initial smallness. A key secret, which I have also learnt is that most people never discover this and hence, their companies and by extension, their teams remain small. Smart people can make good leaders. But they do not necessarily make great leaders. Smart people with philosophy have better odds to make great leaders, for goodness or badness. We shall use Yvon Chouinard’s Patagonia as a case study to explain his work.
Social Coordination as Philosophy
Social coordination is the process by which people communicate and collaborate to make complex and bigger endeavours. It is what allowed us to become the dominant species on this planet by enabling us to systematically identify objectives, work towards them and build larger communities.
The perennial problem that enterprise builders have is — how do we get everyone to move in the same direction as the vision. It is very much like dragon boating. To win a race, a boat needs everyone to row not just in the same direction, but also at the same pace and technique at full force. Any less, would mean the boat does not move as fast. If a member rows in the wrong direction, the entire boat slows down tremendously.
Similarly, a singular leader cannot be monitoring everyone and they still need everyone in the enterprise to share the same decision making methods to ensure that execution of various operations with consistency that advances the cause. IF everyone understands the method, then can they coordinate.
In every culture and individual, we are all the champions of our story and as with any story, Will Storr suggests that there is goal directionality. We need to have a desired outcome and explain why we want to get there, because without that explanation, we cannot form a narrative to propel us forward. Philosophy is that starting point on that journey and it begins with asking the fundamental why, and find the principles for us to coordinate with each other towards the desired goal. One of the famous narratives we are familiar with, is the American Dream — The people of the United States of America overcame their obstacles to obtain their own freedom. This governing principle acts as the starting point to connect all their shared stories and move society forward.
When philosophy students think about social coordination, we tend to instinctively refer to political philosophy and ethics as the starting point. However, I would argue, this should not be the starting point. Political philosophy is messy subject. There are many of them — philosophy of Schmitt (Nazis — the need for Enemies and Friend), Confucius (Harmony and Hierarchy), Machiavelli (The end justifies the means). Each a product of their historical context and unique cultural features. What worked for one culture will not necessarily work for another. The result is that there is no one size fits all solution. To adapt something completely and apply it for one’s team would be an invitation for disaster. So political philosophy cannot be the first port of call for enterprise thought.
VERY VERY Quick Introduction to Logic
Logic is the use of mathematical proofs to verify propositions through a chain of logical deductions from a set of axioms. The propositions that we work through refer to statements that is either true or false.
E.g. 1: 2 +3 = 5 (True Proposition)
E.g. 2: If Pigs could fly then I’m King.
Pigs Fly
Therefore, I’m King. (True Proposition)
Axioms refer to a proposition that is assumed to be true. We assume that it is true because we think it is worthy enough to assume to be true. It is the initial block to compose complex statements and guide action. A key point to note is that Axioms are ASSUMED to be true. It does not mean it is an absolute truth.
There are two guiding principles to axioms:
- Consistency: A set is consistent if no proposition can be proved to be both true and false. If we can get both, then, the proof is useless.
- Complete: A set is complete if it can be used to prove every proposition to be either true or false.
These guiding principles allow us to find a set of propositions from which we can build decisions and complex philosophies.
The plurality of axioms is aligned with my thesis that values are the starting point of building teams and communities. Each team, community, enterprise, can have their own set of values. Our values spring from our aspirations and autonomy. Our passion and hopes. We achieve a balance between passion and logic through the blend of logic and our passionate humanity.
This means that works well for one does not have to work well for the others. Sets of axioms can be contradictory in different fields and still work well. So while IBM might have the values of client success, innovation that matters, and trust in relationships. It is no less worthy or more valuable than Patagonia’s set of values — Environmental Consciousness to strive to do no harm, Excellent Product Quality, Integral part of local communities. For them, Growth and expansion are not basic values to their organisation. Therefore, each enterprise is still able to preserve and advance their own autonomy in their morally incompatible paths. (See Raz for more).
Axiomatic proofs are great because when we build a proof or what we call a ‘train of thought’ to justify our positions, people can trace our propositions from start to end and they have to agree with the conclusion. So what we get is an indefensible decision. A framework to get everyone aligned. When someone examines a decision, they can only disagree with the axioms but they cannot disagree with a proof.
This is a superior way of building an enterprise and justifying decision making. Often the common method of making decisions is to weigh the pros and cons. A common list of comparing points does not get us any further to work out what is the optimal decision. The other problem is that people can invariably move in roundabout manners in debate and attempt to reframe the argument to their position and destabilise one. This reduces productivity and effectiveness. It makes it difficult to unite deeply individualistic talented people together as their energy is not harnessed. A method not grounded on logic is an inferior method.
In some meetings, I have observed people with a louder voice or aggression coming to dominate the group. I myself am guilty of that at times. They use this to fend off challenges. However, by reasoning through axiomatic proofs, we can find holes in the arguments put forth of these bullies quickly and dismantle them. Putting them back in their place and advance the conversation towards the desired outcome.
The challenge is how do we make a compelling framework to weight the points and make trade-offs. Decisions are important. It is easy to say yes. Harder to say no. Saying NO is important because every enterprise is constrained by resources. If we allocate to everything, in the end, all actions will be suboptimal.
Applying Axiomatic Proof Framework on Patagonia’s Philosophy
Patagonia Works, is an umbrella company for clothing and provisions. It was started by Yvon Chouinard, and its goal is to use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis. The company name itself is inspired by the Patagonia, it “inspires romantic visions of glaciers tumbling into fjords, jagged windswept peaks, gauchos and corridors”. This name encapsulates their founding axiom: “The Earth is facing a critical time during which survivability will be the issue that increasingly dominates public concern.” There is a duty to preserve the environment and wild landscapes for future generation.
Their values are:
- Contextualisation: Decisions are made in the context of the environmental crisis. They must strive to do no harm.
- Product Quality: Maximum attention is given to product quality. Thus, it should be durable, reparable, so that there is minimal waste.
- Successful Communities: to be part of a sustainable environment, Patagonia considers its relationships with its employees suppliers and customers. To advance cultural and ethnic diversity.
- Openness: Management works with an open book policy that enables employees easy access to decisions, within normal boundaries of personal privacy and trade secrecy. There is open communication and a collaborative atmosphere.
- Spirit of Adventure: People at Patagonia are encouraged to go to the outdoors. The best products tend to be made by the most intense users. To lead balanced lives with their own external passions on their own and with their families.
In his book — Let My People Go Surfing: Chouinard explains how these values have influenced how different segments of his company’s philosophies are developed: Financial, Product Design, Production, Distribution, Human Resource, etc.
We shall use the values to observe the Human Resource Philosophy:
On Culture, the aspiration is to make employees treat work and play and regard themselves as the ultimate products that they produce. This proposition can be built using the value-axioms of product quality and spirit of adventure and successful communities.
How they translate this into action is that, they offer flexible hours so that as long as work gets done to built upon the axiom of spirit of adventure, a surfer can head out when the surfs are right and still fulfil business objectives. Other things include, building upon successful communities — offering health insurance and on-site child care because parents are more productive if they know their children are doing well.
In the context of bad decisions made by the company:
In 1974, Patagonia caught on that rugby shirts were a trend and they chased it. They imported three thousand from Hong Kong. It was a business failure. The shirts shrank, were not of specifications, and were causing the company to bleed money close to bankruptcy. This decision to chase money for money’s sake without consideration for the values made bad business. The energy of the company’s employees was not channelled effectively and the results showed for themselves. These early poor decisions were corrected and moving on, they were built in line with the value-axioms.
Down the line, the product design philosophy and production philosophy considers — how to design simple clothes that can withstand the requirements of the sports, how each material can be improved on to minimise environmental impact, and how they select suppliers.
So even though Chouinard might be off fishing or hiking, managing in absence, his team knows what to do. Everyone in every office can feel his presence and live with his values. Ensuring that the ‘dragon boat’ moves in the same direction in the same pace and using the same technique. This shift to an axiomatic approach accelerated their growth rate and made Patagonia a global leader.
It took them from 1966 to 1979 to struggle to find that the values were most important. Once the Chouinards acquired total control of their company and could apply their philosophies and values, they quickly moved from an average $20 million company to a great $100 million company from the mid 1980s to 1990, and kept growing from there. It does not stop. This is a demonstration of how an axiomatic philosophical approach is superior than adopting generic management practices.
Applying it to oneself
Not everyone will have deep philosophy training, and neither is this necessary. How one can start applying the philosophy of logic is to use Toyota’s Five Whys Framework. It is an iterative technique that looks for cause and effect relationships. An example would be:
The vehicle will not start. (the problem)
- Why? — The battery is dead. (First why)
- Why? — The alternator is not functioning. (Second why)
- Why? — The alternator belt has broken. (Third why)
- Why? — The alternator belt was well beyond its useful service life and not replaced. (Fourth why)
- Why? — The vehicle was not maintained according to the recommended service schedule. (Fifth why, a root cause)
When we use this approach, we can find our mission and from there the values that are essential for its success.
Also another takeaway is that when one evaluates an employer, employee, business partner or acquisition. We can ask that party- what are your values? What motivates the company? Or ask questions about their published values and how it links to their work. Asking these quick questions can invariably shorten the length of time taken to spot real talent and strong companies. For VCs and Acquirers, this reduces the need to jump into financial modelling at first instance. These resource intensive tasks should be delayed as much as possible to reduce wastage. It leads us to a shorter path to say NO, and recognise when to say YES.
Concluding remarks
Philosophy is an important component in life. It can create frameworks for us to live good lives of excellence. Apart from helping us find what is a life worth living, it can also be applied in constructing our society. I believe companies should look at philosophy students with different eyes and not just bias towards STEM. The key is really to develop multi-disciplinary people who can link ideas from different areas to create new things. I encourage you to look deeper into philosophy and reach out to me for debate.
Many thanks to: Charmanders Playground
Materials:
Yvon Chouinard, Let my people go surfing
Yvon Chouinard and Vincent Stanley, the responsible company
Will Storr, The Science of Story Telling
Tom Leighton, Mathematics for Computer Science, Lecture on MIT Open Courseware
James Collins and Jerry Porras, Building Your Company’s Vision, Harvard Business Review
