A Book Review of Seth Godin's Tribes: Good Message, Rotten Context

Thank you for your visit.

This page and site has been moved to TalkingStory.org

NEW LINK: A Book Review of Seth Godin's Tribes: Good Message, Rotten Context

Comments

[Ian McKenzie]

The book has been sitting on my night stand half read since before Christmas. I can generally bang through a Seth Godin book without any trouble, but I have found Tribes difficult to get through. I haven't tried to analyze why, but it doesn't seem to "flow" like his other books.

[Rosa Say]

Ian, that lack of flow you mention was a big factor in my own disappointment: I simply did not feel that Tribes was anywhere near the caliber of Seth Godin's other works, where I could indeed appreciate his *work* on it. Tribes was more like a collection of blog posts which seemed to capitalize on his ready-made SG Tribe's penchant for the "pithy" communication he is somewhat well-known for (...and perhaps that was part of the point?)

I got my half-baked idea impression immediately when listening to it on audio, and then when I picked up the book itself my disappointment deepened... no Table of Contents, no index... the only other "book matter" being an Acknowledgement which blatantly acknowledges he attempted to run with ideas which came from other thought leaders. Though that said, credit to Godin for being the one who did carry through - somewhat.

Quite an opportunity for the rest of us to keep building on the good ideas which *are* in the book though - and we don't get the chance to one-up Seth Godin too often!

[Dan]

Rosa

So I haven't read the book and I don't regularly read Seth Godin's blog. But I can certainly sense your frustration with a book that bashes managers in the name of better leadership. This distinction we make between managers and leaders is so fascinating to me, and it is surely one I feel myself fall prey to sometimes, too. I think we really want to find a way to make a distinction between the "something" that interferes with real connection and passion, and the "something" that facilitates them. Perhaps, making a distinction between manager and leader is an easier way to get at this.

This reminds me of insights by Marv Weisbord in his beautiful book, Productive Workplaces. There he examines the distinctions between Theory X leaders and Theory Y leaders articulated by Douglas McGregor -- a distinction that's driven much of modern theory about both leadership and management. McGregor sought to differentiate two different styles, Theory X, based on negative assumptions about human beings and motivations to work, and Theory Y, which took a more positive view of people. As McGregor's ideas were disseminated, it was common for people to think of these styles as belonging to two different kinds of people, essentially autocrats and humanitarians. But Weisbord points out the obvious: that these styles do not represent two different kinds of people so much as simply people in different circumstances. We are all capable of Theory X ways of operating, and just as capable of Theory Y, depending on many factors and many circumstances. I may think of myself as Theory Y, but you can bet I have a Theory X side, and vice versa.

So the same is really true, I believe, about this whole leadership/management quandary. We confuse circumstances and times for leadership and times for management. I have an effective manager in me; I have a rotten one, too. I have an effective leader and I have a despicable one, as well. These are different states of the same person -- and the question, always the question -- is whether these different states talk to each other. Can I know myself, my aspects, even the ones I am not so proud of? So I would ask, is Seth Grodin talking to himself, his whole self, in condemning management? Does he acknowledge the parts of himself that are bureaucratic, stagnant, petty, because if he is not, then the book you reviewed is one-sided at best. Frankly we can't condemn much if we can't find it in ourselves first. As they say, a shaman can't cure anything he or she hasn't previously found as a disease in his or her own being.

Well, like I say, I haven't read it and therefore have less right to evaluate, but maybe this will help anyway.

[Rosa Say]

Aloha Dan! I must confess I enjoy making the distinction between management and leadership, and teaching it as I do, simply because it does beg discussion, and gets people talking in a way that also tends to trigger self-reflection.

However I like to talk about them as verbs and not two different people: We all manage, and we all lead; we're born to both and learn within both, making us the complex and fascinating creatures we are, capable of living in profound abundance.

I do admit to having a very low tolerance for negativity about managers, especially when the comparison is so unnecessary: In my view, the book would have been better without it.

[Don Frederiksen]

Rosa,

The value that I get from Godin's "Tribes" is not the substance but the thought-provoking perspective he conveys. It is perspective that I find that I still need to reconcile for myself. For example, I didn't need to resolve the leadership versus management notion as much as other ideas. For example, a month later, I'm still trying to reconcile his ideas around faith versus religion. I also have a hard time with the label "heretic." I don't feel a need to argue but I appreciate his message because it causes me to think and question.

That's the value that I find with his book. I can't find the words to describe this. It's not the substance, it's the ___________. Any ideas?

Thanks for exploring with me. I always appreciate your insight.
Don

[Rosa Say]

I know what you mean Don, for that is part of Godin's attraction for me as well. There was an interesting bit in Tribes where he talked about the value of criticism, and admits he prefers it to people not paying attention to him at all. As a coach, I prefer authors who don't give us answers too easily, but trigger us enough so that we will doggedly continue to seek answers for ourselves, and make them part of our own consequential learning: Seth Godin does this very well. He loves to drop rarely-spoken words back into our consciousness (like heretic - a toughie for me in this book too) or failing that, he'll make them up (e.g. zoomers, sneezers in past publications).

"Leverage" was another word he used in Tribes that became a trigger for me when I thought about another tribe I consider myself a dormant follower of, though it became yet another annoyance for me in this book, for I don't think he used it well - or as well as he could have, but in my case, the trigger worked.

So I guess my word for your blank would be "triggers."

Mahalo for keeping this conversation going Don, for I truly appreciate your 'leading quietly' yet thoughtfully perspective too!

[Don Frederiksen]

Rosa,

I like it. "Triggers" labels the outcome perfectly.

Godin certainly has the ability to trigger our thoughts.

You are right about the words that he uses to label his concepts. Whether old words, new words or new combinations, he clearly is looking for unique labels and purple cows.

Don