Good Work: When Excellence and Ethics Meet

by Howard Gardner, William Damon, Mihály Csíkszentmihályi

What does it mean to carry out "good work"? What strategies allow people to maintain moral and ethical standards at a time when market forces have unprecedented power and work life is being radically altered by technological innovation? These questions lie at the heart of this eagerly awaited new book. Focusing on genetics and journalism-two fields that generate and manipulate information and thus affect our lives in myriad ways-the authors show how in their quest to build meaningful careers successful professionals exhibit "humane creativity," high-level performance coupled with social responsibility. Over the last five years the authors have interviewed over 100 people in each field who are engaged in cutting-edge work, probing their goals and visions, their obstacles and fears, and how they pass on their most cherished practices and values. They found sharp contrasts between the two fields. Until now, geneticists' values have not been seriously challenged by the demands of their work world, while journalists are deeply disillusioned by the conflict between commerce and ethics. The dilemmas these professionals face and the strategies they choose in their search for a moral compass offer valuable guidance on how all persons can transform their professions and their lives. Enlivened with stories of real people facing hard decisions, Good Work offers powerful insight into one of the most important issues of our time and, indeed, into the future course of science, technology, and communication.

Genres: Psychology, Business, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Leadership, Personal Development, Cultural

304 pages, Paperback

First published October 3, 2001

About the author

Howard Gardner is the John H. and Elisabeth A. Hobbs Professor of Cognition and Education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. He also holds positions as Adjunct Professor of Psychology at Harvard University and Senior Director of Harvard Project Zero. Among numerous honors, Gardner received a MacArthur Prize Fellowship in 1981. He has received honorary degrees from 26 colleges and universities, including institutions in Bulgaria, Chile, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, and South Korea. In 2005 and again in 2008, he was selected by Foreign Policy and Prospect magazines as one of the 100 most influential public intellectuals in the world. The author of 25 books translated into 28 languages, and several hundred articles, Gardner is best known in educational circles for his theory of multiple intelligences, a critique of the notion that there exists but a single human intelligence that can be adequately assessed by standard psychometric instruments.

During the past two decades, Gardner and colleagues at Project Zero have been involved in the design of performance-based assessments; education for understanding; the use of multiple intelligences to achieve more personalized curriculum, instruction, and pedagogy; and the quality of interdisciplinary efforts in education. Since the middle 1990s, in collaboration with psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and William Damon, Gardner has directed the GoodWork Project-- a study of work that is excellent, engaging, and ethical. More recently, with long time Project Zero colleagues Lynn Barendsen and Wendy Fischman, he has conducted reflection sessions designed to enhance the understanding and incidence of good work among young people. With Carrie James and other colleagues at Project Zero, he is also investigating the nature of trust in contemporary society and ethical dimensions entailed in the use of the new digital media. Among new research undertakings are a study of effective collaboration among non-profit institutions in education and a study of conceptions of quality, nationally and internationally, in the contemporary era. In 2008 he delivered a set of three lectures at New York's Museum of Modern Art on the topic "The True, The Beautiful, and The Good: econsiderations in a post-modern, digital era."

from http://www.howardgardner.com/bio/bio....

Reviews

[Graeme · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good Work is a Good Book. It got me thinking about professions and the dynamics, issues, and challenges within their domains, though it is slow and dry at times. As I get old, I try to read books with brains and decency, not prejudiced polemics and mindless entertainments.

By the way, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi won the Wotsat Award for epically unpronounceable names in 1990, when he published Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Flow is the complete, timeless absorption we feel when doing something we love. I learned from some book or article that his name is pronounced Me-Hi Chick-Sent-Me-Hi, or something like that. Now, I mention Flow frequently in conversation so as to state his name, and thus show off my extraordinary sophistication and erudition to hapless listeners.

[Kira · Rating 2 out of 5]

I couldn't quite bring myself to give this one star, but that's probably what it deserves. Read under duress for a seminar - entirely unenlightening.

[Ana-Maria Bujor · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am very, very interested in ethics at work. Being familiar with the work of two of the authors, I definitely wanted to see what it's all about. Unfortunately, what I found is not very illuminating to me. There are some interesting insights into journalism and biotechnology, some ethical problems both domain face, some interesting predictions for a future I can actually see. Some are good (predicting smartphones), some really off the mark (the internet will make people only look for quality news and quit tabloids).
Overall a few insights but nothing mindblowing

[Gijs Limonard · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty generic and dated; sensible advice alright but not many actionable insights; was drawn to the title and asdvertized co-author Mihály Csíkszentmihályi; on striving for the optimal working experience be sure to check out his excellent Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience.

[Eva · Rating 2 out of 5]

Perhaps I should have read this book 15 years ago when it was fresh. It goes some way toward predicting the state of the world of journalism (and genetics) in what is now our present, but misses the depth of the internet's effects in opening "broadcasting" to everyone, and thereby creating content providers devoted to their clickthrough count and advertiser dollars and feeling no obligations to a tradition of journalistic ethics, and millions of users with poor discernment skills, used to relying on the truth of what they read or see. There are good effects, too, of course, but from 2017 it looks a lot bleaker than the book foresaw.

[Gabrielle · Rating 2 out of 5]

I've got a personalized copy thanks to Kay Johnson!

In sum: 10 Leahs to get 1 Rachel. The book is far longer than it needed to be, but the 11th chapter is worthwhile, interesting, informative, provocative and timely. Actually, the entire section on excellence in journalism is timely in light of the Rupert Murdoch situation, but that isn't what I wanted the book for.

[Melsene G · Rating 2 out of 5]

Outdated is how I'll begin. This book was written in 2001, and in almost 20 years technology has clearly changed the landscape of genetics and journalism. I picked this book up because I enjoyed the book on Flow by one of the authors. Let's start with the concept of good work. Folks need to be truthful and fair, avoid conflicts of interest, have a moral compass. This is in any field or domain of course.

The authors chose genetics and journalism and interviewed dozens of people. They spend time explaining the conditions of good work, ethics and excellence, alignment, and memes. You have domains and fields, gatekeepers, apprentices, students.

Part 2 covers genetics. Interesting science history, a shift from physics to biology, Francis Crick, James Watson and DNA, double helix, RNA, etc. There was a golden age in this area. Now money and wealth have creeped in and for profit companies are sexier to scientists than ethical research at a university.

Part 3 covers journalism and it's not pretty. The industry is run by money and a few big corporations now. Ratings rule the roost. Entertainment is where it's at. Fewer are entering the profession now due to all the negatives. Sadly this part is outdated and slanted. It covers the main stream liberal media outlets and fails to talk about how the liberal media shapes the narrative. If we're talking ethics and honesty, they get an F in my opinion. There's a little history from Ben Franklin to Thomas Jefferson, family owned papers, the 1947 Hutchins Commission. Nixon and Clinton are thrown in.

There seems to be no moral code today in journalism. Remember, this book was written before the internet, before Fox News and other right of center outfits. You can't really have a discussion about journalism without being current. My biggest issue with the info in this book is that it is too old, and one sided. Soros? really? I'm wondering if George funded the research here because he fails the ethics test. Do the authors not see that?

Anyway, I was disappointed with the second half of this book because it was so biased. How can you write a book about ethics and truth when you don't practice what you preach? I'll give them a plus for adding a new afterward post 911. Clearly, journalism's role changed and evolved since that fateful day.

[Mark Oppenlander · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book, written by three world-renowned psychologists, explores the question of how people navigate the tension of doing "good work" in a rapidly changing world. They define good work as work that is both excellent in quality and socially responsible. Or put another way, work defined by both competence and moral character. They use the fields of genetics and journalism as their laboratory, interviewing hundreds of practitioners in both areas to find out where there may be tension between the demands of the profession and external forces (e.g. market pressures, technological change, etc.)

This book wasn't quite what I expected it to be. By focusing on the domains of genetics and journalism, the authors narrow the scope of the inquiry more than I had anticipated (although to their credit, they attempt to extrapolate their findings to the broader world of work at the end). The book includes a lot of quotes from the interviews they conducted to illustrate their points and findings, but these conversations are somewhat dated now. The book was published around 2001 and the nature of both genetics and journalism have evolved quite a bit since then - although the seeds of those changes are evident even at the turn of the century.

What I found most helpful in the book was two things. First, it does a nice job of laying out some categories, giving language to the difference between a domain, a field, and a profession. We sometimes use these terms synonymously, so it's nice to have a clear typology. Second, the end of the book gives language to the idea that people must find ways to hold their center while moving into professional spaces, a process they describe as differentiation and integration. Given that I had just been working on teaching a class called Identity and Adaptability, I found this to be a synergistic and corollary concept.

This book may be too specific and dated to be essential reading anymore, but for those interested in the topic, it's not a waste of time. It would be especially interesting to anyone who works in either genetics or journalism, I presume.

[Dawson Templin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an extremely solid book and very worthy read. I really think the concept of “good work” is fascinating and what it takes to do something meaningful without wasting individual potential and keeping engagement.

I think this book adequately reflects a growing idea of good work. As this was written a few decades ago (although still relevant), the information on journalism and bio is outdated (ONLY REASON it’s 4*). I would love a sequel that addresses how various domains have changed.

I also think it was great to study journalism and genetics but I would have loved to see like policy or cs etc mentioned. I do think the academic quality was top notch. Genuinely would recommend this. Is very skimmable but the content and overview ideas is great

[Reid Mccormick · Rating 2 out of 5]

I have no idea why I bought this book. My guess is I read a book by Csikszentmihalyi, liked it, and then I saw the title on Amazon for cheap so I decided to get it. Given Csikszentmihalyi’s background in psychology, I was expecting some interesting research on working hard despite troubling circumstances. Instead I got a boring review of geneticists and journalists. Now, don’t get me wrong, I think the geneticists and journalists having really interesting occupations, but this book just bored me.

I don’t want to rip the book because I think my distaste originates from my misplaced expectations.

[Daria Williamson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Deeply thought-provoking, even 20-plus years after it was written. A meditation on how to create work that is both good (ethically, intellectually, financially, etc) for those who engage in it, and for those who receive its outputs.

[Armina · Rating 2 out of 5]

extremely boring. what a pity that it took this great team of great names, so many years to produce such a dull book. they could have put all this in a couple of articles

[Eric · Rating 2 out of 5]

Starts put with great insights but little fact or depth as you go.

[Russell · Rating 1 out of 5]

Long, extremely biased, and repetitive, I am unsure of why this book is so highly regarded. This book could have spent a lot more time examining its many assumptions: about the extant systems that create the problems the book outlines and about what work actually is, for example. Good Work refuses to go beyond the surface level of what work is, and works hard to present capitalism and US exceptionalism as the one true way of operating in this world. While I respect the research methodology of the three social scientists involved in creating this work, the synthesis of their findings leaves much to be desired.

[Matt Swaffer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good Work: When Excellence and Ethics Meet is the product of three psychologists from different fields. Howard Gardner is a cognitive psychologist best known for his theory of multiple intelligences. Csikszentmihalyi is a social psychologist best known for his concept of "flow", a state in which an individuals skills and challenges mesh and completely absorb the mind. (See his book Flow) William Damon is the author with which I am least familiar but he is a developmental psychologist who focuses on social and moral issues. The book itself is the culimnation of several years of intense research into two major fields: genetics and journalism. The focus of their study was searching for the factors that lead to both highly effective and highly ethical behavior in a given field.

read more at....
http://books.mydevnotes.com/archive/2...

[Tim · Rating 3 out of 5]

An in-depth academic exploration about promoting good work in a profession, in this case genetics and journalism. Well written, but a little dense, the authors interview several members of these areas and explore their similarities and differences. As a manager, I was expecting more ideas on how to influencing the workplace, but I still enjoyed the read. It had many challenging ideas and interesting perspectives on issues such as ethics.

[Uma · Rating 3 out of 5]

read about half before i finally decided to move on. the book was interesting and had some good ideas. i definitely now know more about the history of genetics than i'd ever expected. i was just never compelled to actually pick up the book and read, so i decided it was time to let this one go.

[Shavawn M. · Rating 5 out of 5]

I use this book to teach ethics in my business writing courses. The students always enjoy the materials and we have far reaching, thoughtful discussions of the concept of 'good work' and what it means. An excellent primer on the subject.

[Janie]

authors' definition of "good work:" work that is both excellent in quality and socially responsible," and for this book's focus, "carried out at a time of constant change." (p. xi, Reface.) "in difficult times" (p. 5)

[Dave Intlekofer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good thoughts, but the book is already a little dated. You could read the first and last couple chapters and get the gist of the book.

[Will Carey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Inspiring basic read, great learnings about the basic human motivation for work as it was 5 years ago

[Don · Rating 4 out of 5]

professional ethics, social responsibility

[Glenn Younger · Rating 5 out of 5]

When you are ready to deal with the existential role of work in a person life, here is your book.