The grip of decades-old texts has had a lasting and unfortunately sometimes blinding effect on Human Resources. The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People - widely regarded as a foundational classic - has had its anchor in HR since its release in 1989 despite its deceased author. So much so that you can still attend its training sessions in Pakistan, as well as in more than a 100 different countries. Another enduring strategic classic called Good to Great has also remained a constant reference in the field for about 24 years. “The Grip” also extends to relatively newer books including Crucial Conversations, Carol Dweck’s Mindset, Atomic Habits or The Let Them Theory to name a few. “What’s the last book you read?” asks the job interviewer, pretending this is not a trick question.
“You should definitely read XYZ—it will fix your xyz problem,” declares the HR professional, who clearly has a book for every issue. In an age when we are learning the hard way that your regular source of news is quite biased and can therefore be quite unreliable - maybe we should also be assessing corporate literature “Meanwhile, we’re designing a whole training based on the ABC method from the ABC book,” announces the training professional, who believes every book is secretly a training manual. “The Grip” cannot be avoided or in other words business books have cast a powerful shadow over HR, shaping everything from training to recruitment and culture. Shaky Grip One might question whether the Stephen Covey Institute is merely asserting that the 7 Habits, being based on enduring principles of effectiveness, remain relevant today. Although the book has some great ideas and buzzwords, some say there is an overlap between Covey’s Mormon book released seven years earlier called “The Divine Center” albeit in a secularized format. Others claim that it ignores the roles of systems and has inherent cultural bias. Which means that some principles are based on the Western views of success that include high power and low power distance. In hierarchical and formal cultures like in Pakistan, “Be Proactive” or “Think Win-Win” may be culturally incongruent and would not translate neatly. In addition, it is concerning that Good to Great has had such a hold despite many academics pointing out weaknesses in its research methods. Confirmation bias, inadequate sample size, confusion between correlation and causation, and the unavoidable fact that none of the 11 companies are “great” anymore. Newer popular business books have also drawn criticism. Atomic Habits demonstrates that accessibility does not equal innovation. It has been criticized because although it is more readable it has not really added anything new to Behavioral Science. It also oversimplifies concepts, ignoring that not all habits are equal and vary according to the individual and behaviors. Flossing your teeth versus breaking an addiction are not the same. Similarly, it takes a basic level of research to uncover limitations of other business books as well. Synergistic Learning Is this why HR still can’t shake its reputation for being a bit ‘fluffy’? Popular business books could be seen as the corporate version of TIkTok. Engaging but not always reliable. Maybe it’s time we stop treating business books like sacred texts (or basing them off sacred texts). Instead of nodding along when candidates rattle off popular titles, shouldn’t interviewers ask something like, ‘What’s one strength and one glaring flaw in Carol Dweck’s Mindset?’” Should we be examining research methods which the basic tenet of its reliability? Or also maybe expand our data sources to academic journals and experiential information as well? Are these books to be regarded as education or instead simply good insights and opinions? Will we be gaining more insight by our conversations with customer departments and showing them much-needed flexibility or should we be strictly adhering to the book’s famous frameworks? In an age when we are learning the hard way that your regular source of news is quite biased and can therefore be quite unreliable - maybe we should also be assessing corporate literature. Or perhaps commence synthesizing knowledge from different sources rather than the most readable and interesting one. At the end of the day, a book is a tool and should be used as one. As Philosopher John Locke observed, ‘Reading furnishes the mind only with materials of knowledge; it is thinking that makes what we read ours,’ reminding us that popular business books alone are not enough. The article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Business Recorder or its owners