It's hard to comment on Lebedoff's book when it isn't in print yet. I wasn't even able to find reveiws with short quotes.
However, Gladwell's entire article is at: http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_07_22_a_talent.htm >From the article: "This "talent mind-set" is the new orthodoxy of American management. It is the intellectual justification for why such a high premium is placed on degrees from first-tier business schools, and why the compensation packages for top executives have become so lavish." To me the article reads as as a criticism of the star system currently in fashion in big companies. I don't think Gladwell means to indict smart or talented people per se. He's saying that rewards should be based on actual performance rather than some perception of innate ability. I'm not clear what _you_ are trying to say. Do you believe that the city government rewards and promotes employees according to a star system such as the one that Gladwell describes? If so, I'd like to hear some specific examples of people overpromoted or overcompensated because of their supposed star quality. Or are you really saying that smart people are less moral than other people, and that Minneapolis has problems because too many smart people live here or are involved in government? Rosalind Nelson Bancroft neighborhood Victoria Heller wrote: > > Mark V Anderson's brilliant comment: "Instead we get this elitist > prattle dressed up in populist language." > > Vicky adds: You, Mark, are in very good company. And that includes > departing listmember N.I. Krasnov. > > Here are a few excerpts on the "New Elite" from David Lebedoff's new > book "The Red and The Blue": > > "Writing in The New Yorker (July 22, 2002), Malcolm Gladwell, in an > article correctly titled 'The Talent Myth: Are Smart People > Overrated?' notes that 'of all [McKinsey's] clients, one firm took the > talent mind-set closest to heart. It was a company where McKinsey > conducted twenty separate projects, where McKinsey's billings topped > $10 million a year, where a McKinsey director regularly attended board > meetings, and where the CEO himself was a former McKinsey partner. The > company, of course, was Enron." > > "......Carol Dweck, a psychologist at Columbia University, > ......discovered something remarkable: 40 percent of those students > who were praised for their intelligence lied about how they had scored > on the test, adjusting their grade upward." > > "With very few exceptions, brilliant people, particularly the > consultants and watchdogs, failed to do their jobs. They failed not > because they lacked the technical skills for supervision. Their > failure was moral. The problem was not lack of regulation but rather > the moral vacuity of the regulators." > > "Put as simply as possible, they cared only about what technically was > legal or illegal, and never thought about what was right or wrong. > Because unless they were lucky in their parentage, no one had ever > taught them right from wrong. After all, it isn't something you can > quantify. It isn't something you can memorize." > > "Moral relativism permitted very smart people to overlook very bad > things." > > Vicky again: Lebedoff's comments describe what's wrong with > Minneapolis government. And why the poor remain trapped in poverty > while the "in crowd" happily trots off to the Guthrie. Moral > bankruptcy eventually becomes financial bankruptcy, as in Enron's > case, and Minneapolis is well along its way down that path. > > Enough said, enough written. > TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. 2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.) ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
