[sneak]

> to get one of these types on board with your idea you have to find a way to convince them the idea was originally theirs

I forget where I read it, but I recall reading several times that this was how people at Apple had to present stuff to Steve Jobs to get him onboard with it. He'd initially dismiss it, then come back with the exact same idea as if it were his own.

EDIT: According to this URL, it was from the Isaacson biography: https://www.nhbr.com/emulate-steve-jobs-with-your-eyes-open/

[unishark]

That's what set Steve Jobs apart. Your typical executive could take months between rejecting your idea and proposing it as their own. But Jobs could compress this down to a week.

[oblio]

I'm amazed how absolutely every character flaw Jobs had gets turned into a positive. If I had a nickel for how many times I've seen this happen on the internet, I'd be rich.

[avalys]

That's because "character flaws" on a personal level are often required to achieve exceptional results.

Not sufficient. But often required.

If Jobs were a quiet, contemplative, respectful person who was careful to keep track of where he heard what idea and assign credit where credit was due - it's unlikely we'd have Apple. That's just a different personality type.

[gavanwilhite]

I believe this is the wrong way to think about this.

Character flaws are often associated with certain effective traits, but are not chained to them.

In your example, one can be vocal, biased-twoards-action, and low-bullshit, while also giving credit where credit is due.

I think it’s far from obvious that Jobs would have been a less effective leader if he had addressed his character shortcomings.

I similarly feel the same way about current leaders like Musk. He could do some inner work, become far less of a jerk, and be equally or more effective.

[oblio]

The sad thing is, they don't need that personal growth. Their luck or other character traits made/make them successful, they're rich and quite powerful, attractive to women, etc.

So they'll never do what you're saying. For an extreme example, look at Trump. In Romanian we have a saying: "the only thing that will straighten a hunchback's back is the coffin".

[ArloL]

This has been on my mind a lot lately.

IMHO personal growth of the founders/leaders is correlated with long-term success. A healthy organization should be able to adapt to changes in the market. The same is true for a healthy individual. And more importantly as leader(s) of an organization - because you must lead by example. E.g. if you have a healthy way to keep your ego in check or be aware of your flaws you will be able to notice issues in organizational structures; if you're willing to change when presented with new information so will the organization; if you micromanage everything you've fixed the speed of adaptation to your own - can be good - can be bad; if you need validation you will surround yourself with people that validate you no matter what; if you twist your reality so that you're always on top those lies will seep into the culture.

It's kind of like Conway's law but more like organizations design structures (communication, hierarchies, etc.) which mirror their leaders identity/character/personality/soul...

[vagrantJin]

> "the only thing that will straighten a hunchback's back is the coffin".

Thats so cold.

Do Romanians generally call a spade, a spade?

[Razengan]

Or some corrective surgery.

Voluntary or otherwise

[sneak]

Yeah, for some reason we as a society really dig the whole "good with the bad", "beauty and the beast" style narrative. As if people can't be that good without also being that bad.

It's an extremely old meme, and it will take a long long time to die.

[zepto]

Luckily we have noble actors like yourself to prove that an unblemished character is possible!

[refurb]

No. That’s just coverage bias. The leaders who are successful but aren’t dicks don’t have a ton of stories about them in the media about being brilliant dicks.

[watwut]

Why putting character flaws into quotes? They are still character flaws, the same way as same behavior is if it is not coming from rich powergul person.

There is no reason to pretend it is something special. If they helped him to get more money and more credit and what not, that does not make them not flaws.

[fenderbluesjr]

Calling them flaws would seem to me to be a subjective position. Personality traits are perceived differently depending on what the observer is sensitive to. Somebody that is considered rude in a yoga clinic might not be perceived the same way on a construction site.

[paulryanrogers]

Is there any culture in which claiming credit for the ideas and innovations of others is considered positive?

And how many would agree it's healthy?

[kortilla]

They aren’t “flaws” to everyone. One person’s asshole is another person’s straight shooter.

[watwut]

Which part do you perceive as "straight shooter"?

[watwut]

I read it ironically. I mean, if there are months in between, it makes plausible deniality that you forgot you got idea from someone else. Week makes you more of asshole.

[olivermarks]

I also don't think clever monopolistic businessman Gates would ever be 'hoodwinked'

[dmitriid]

Winners get forgiven for a lot if stuff.

[refurb]

That’s the genius of Jobs. You get a woman pregnant then deny the child is yours. Afterwards you acknowledge your error and have a great relationship with the kid and name a product after them.

That’s true genius.

[thinkingemote]

I recently learnt that Jobs would ask people in the elevator what they were working on and fire people then and there if he didnt like it.

Now I hear that the next week he would take these ideas as his own.

Ruthless.

[visarga]

... /s ?